Aethiests and the ACLU would have a fit over this

[DurocShark]

Originally posted by: ElFenix

Originally posted by: DurocShark
hah! Love all the DurocShark bashing about my comment. :laugh:

Nobody says what they've done is illegal. But it's INSULTING that they use a symbol of our nation to support their particular religion.

Sometimes I forget just who the audience is when posting here...

you didn't bother reading the thread prior to shooting off your mouth and now you're doing a bad job of trying to cover up your mistake. just man up, accept the ridicule, and move on.

Eh?

First amendment prohibits the government from influencing religion. Yet religions are allowed to use symbols of our nation to support their particular religion? Insulting. And if the members of that church read the First Amendment, then they're INTENTIONALLY insulting everybody who isn't a part of their religion.

EDIT: Dayum, I have to 'splain everything. I ran my post past a friend, and he knew exactly what I was talking about. Like I said, I forgot my audience. I need to be a lot less subtle.

 

[Mean MrMustard]

Is something being 'insulting' unconstitutional?

 

[homercles337]

Im an atheist and didnt have a fit. Xians are ignorant idiots. This is just another example.

 

[nutxo]

Originally posted by: DurocShark

Originally posted by: ElFenix

Originally posted by: DurocShark
hah! Love all the DurocShark bashing about my comment. :laugh:

Nobody says what they've done is illegal. But it's INSULTING that they use a symbol of our nation to support their particular religion.

Sometimes I forget just who the audience is when posting here...

you didn't bother reading the thread prior to shooting off your mouth and now you're doing a bad job of trying to cover up your mistake. just man up, accept the ridicule, and move on.

Eh?

First amendment prohibits the government from influencing religion. Yet religions are allowed to use symbols of our nation to support their particular religion? Insulting. And if the members of that church read the First Amendment, then they're INTENTIONALLY insulting everybody who isn't a part of their religion.

EDIT: Dayum, I have to 'splain everything. I ran my post past a friend, and he knew exactly what I was talking about. Like I said, I forgot my audience. I need to be a lot less subtle.

I watched a documentary on the influence of religion on the constitution and laws in the US.

If you're offended then the whole constitution should offend you.

 

[DurocShark]

Originally posted by: nutxo

Originally posted by: DurocShark

Originally posted by: ElFenix

Originally posted by: DurocShark
hah! Love all the DurocShark bashing about my comment. :laugh:

Nobody says what they've done is illegal. But it's INSULTING that they use a symbol of our nation to support their particular religion.

Sometimes I forget just who the audience is when posting here...

you didn't bother reading the thread prior to shooting off your mouth and now you're doing a bad job of trying to cover up your mistake. just man up, accept the ridicule, and move on.

Eh?

First amendment prohibits the government from influencing religion. Yet religions are allowed to use symbols of our nation to support their particular religion? Insulting. And if the members of that church read the First Amendment, then they're INTENTIONALLY insulting everybody who isn't a part of their religion.

EDIT: Dayum, I have to 'splain everything. I ran my post past a friend, and he knew exactly what I was talking about. Like I said, I forgot my audience. I need to be a lot less subtle.

I watched a documentary on the influence of religion on the constitution and laws in the US.

If you're offended then the whole constitution should offend you.

Show me where the cross is in the constitution? I must have missed that part.

:roll:

 

[oogabooga]

DurocShark - You were wrong. If your friend agreed with you I advice you two pick up a copy of the constitution.

Freedom of religion doesn't mean freedom from religion if you don't want to see it in any way, shape or form. The government doesn't endorse a religion but you're encouraged, nay welcome to participate in whichever form of it you wish.

Speaking of documents people haven't read - have you ever read the ten commandments? If you are going to deny that religion had any influence on constitution and law you're crazy.


Case and point - You spouted off your hate before you even thought hard enough to form a good point. You said something stupid, people called you out on it.

 

[drinkmorejava]

rofl, I want to put that in my yard just to piss some of the BS neighbors off. Better yet, I should just buy a 10'x10' plot next to Duroc's house.

 

[cKGunslinger]

pwnage.

It doesn't take many balls to admit you were wrong, but Dura seems to be lacking the required amount.



Is this stupid? Yes. Sensationalist? Yes. Tacky? Yes. Unconstitutional in any way? No.

 

[yowolabi]

Originally posted by: michaels
I spotted this in Memphis yesterday.
http://i59.photobucket.com/albums/g291/three_60/IMG_2356.jpg

Your title shows how little you know about aethiests... and probably the ACLU.

If that statue was in a schoolyard and the kids had to pray to it every day it would be a different story, but the mere sight of the cross doesn't send aethiests into a frenzy.

 

[sygyzy]

Originally posted by: moshquerade

Originally posted by: michaels
I don't know, I just was at a light and spotted it and snapped a pic, I wasn't pay attention to the surroundings.

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/07/05/us/05...1309752000&en=633335bb68bac96a&ei=5088

i would say it is on church property so the ACLU has no claims against it.

I find it sort of funny that you took michaels claim seriously. I assure he meant it in jest. He doesn't know what the ACLU is or does exactly. It's like posting a picture of a hamburger and saying "I bet vegetarians would hate this picture!"

 

[thoro86]

nice pic...

doesn't bother me at all though, even if i'm an atheist

 

[PottedMeat]

Yeah thats pretty tacky - for some reason it reminds me of those calvin pissing on ford/chevy/dodge whatever.

 

[chambersc]

Originally posted by: michaels
I spotted this in Memphis yesterday.
http://i59.photobucket.com/albums/g291/three_60/IMG_2356.jpg

Why would I? I'm not pushy with my beliefs and respect ones display of their religion. Nothing wrong with the statue of liberty holding a cross, tbh.

 

[wazzledoozle]

Originally posted by: JackBurton
A moronic display fit for the morons it represents.

Sums it up nicely.

 

[kranky]

Clearly, a lot of people seem upset that something with a religious connotation is visible to the public.

Why this would be, I have no idea. It comes across as a pathological hatred.

 

[Thraxen]

Why does anyone here give a sh*t?

 

[amicold]

Originally posted by: moshquerade

Originally posted by: michaels
I don't know, I just was at a light and spotted it and snapped a pic, I wasn't pay attention to the surroundings.

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/07/05/us/05...1309752000&en=633335bb68bac96a&ei=5088

i would say it is on church property so the ACLU has no claims against it.

I guess. If an upside down crucifix appeared on an athiest's property near the church I'm sure opposition would be justified.

 

[cKGunslinger]

Originally posted by: amicold

Originally posted by: moshquerade

Originally posted by: michaels
I don't know, I just was at a light and spotted it and snapped a pic, I wasn't pay attention to the surroundings.

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/07/05/us/05...1309752000&en=633335bb68bac96a&ei=5088

i would say it is on church property so the ACLU has no claims against it.

I guess. If an upside down crucifix appeared on an athiest's property near the church I'm sure opposition would be justified.

No, it wouldn't be justified. Why do you make that rather assinine assumption?

 

[BigJ]

Originally posted by: amicold

Originally posted by: moshquerade

Originally posted by: michaels
I don't know, I just was at a light and spotted it and snapped a pic, I wasn't pay attention to the surroundings.

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/07/05/us/05...1309752000&en=633335bb68bac96a&ei=5088

i would say it is on church property so the ACLU has no claims against it.

I guess. If an upside down crucifix appeared on an athiest's property near the church I'm sure opposition would be justified.

The two scenarios aren't even comparable.

That being said, they would still have a right to put the crucifix up.

 

[theeedude]

ACLU would be the first one to defend this as free speech, if it's not on government property.
Or course it's only befitting that Christian bigots saddle Liberty with a cross and take away it's light. Very symbolic.

 

[yowolabi]

Originally posted by: sygyzy

Originally posted by: moshquerade

Originally posted by: michaels
I don't know, I just was at a light and spotted it and snapped a pic, I wasn't pay attention to the surroundings.

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/07/05/us/05...1309752000&en=633335bb68bac96a&ei=5088

i would say it is on church property so the ACLU has no claims against it.

I find it sort of funny that you took michaels claim seriously. I assure he meant it in jest. He doesn't know what the ACLU is or does exactly. It's like posting a picture of a hamburger and saying "I bet vegetarians would hate this picture!"

Perfect analogy.

 

[rikadik]

Originally posted by: senseamp
ACLU would be the first one to defend this as free speech, if it's not on government property.
Or course it's only befitting that Christian bigots saddle Liberty with a cross and take away it's light. Very symbolic.

QFT

 

[PELarson]

Originally posted by: michaels
But still..I bet it drives every Volvo driving person in Memphis apeshit when they see it.

If I understand you correctly you believe that only Volvo drivers are Christians and Patriotic Americans who believe in the symbolism behind the Statue of Liberty. I drive a Mazda 626 and think that the object photographed is an unAmerican and unChristian piece of garbage.

 

[PELarson]

Originally posted by: DurocShark
<---driven apeshit and not even in Memphis

Did those people READ the Constitution?

Likely not. The obviously don't even read the Bible.

 

[TheVrolok]

I'm rather conservative when it comes to the constitution and rather liberal as far as social/fiscal policy. Having said that, I don't see a problem whatsoever with this thing. I don't quite understand what the OP means .. are you saying because of the implied cohesion of church and state? If so, it's not like this thing was put up by the Memphis county courthouse, so who cares?