Thread: Atheist group demands Rhode Island city remove cross from atop war memorial

Originally Posted by aboutenough

I didn't think you cared why the Wall of Seperation was written that is why Liberal justices have changed the intent and your group has followed the new path like a bunch of Marxist. The intent is not to remove people religious freedoms as your group sees it. Its meant to limit the power of government over people lives and keep their religious freedoms in tact. Your group is using faulty interpretted law to remove religious freedoms from people. I would be willing to donate a large portion of money to fight groups like yours that try to alter society to fit your philosophies that is based on an altered constitution

Religious freedoms are not absolute. They never have been; they never will be. You have the freedom to worship the god or gods of your choice. However, that freedom does NOT extend to the use of public funds or resources - including public land. What you do privately, however, is your freedom, and I would never - ever - encroach on that freedom, nor support those that do.

Having read up on the background to this storm in a teacup, I discovered that the structure was originally erected to the memory of one individual almost 100 years ago. This was later co-opted as a "town" memorial, though it's a rather ugly confection comprising a four foot square pyramid with a five foot cross on top. The current location in the middle of the fire station car park isn't exactly conducive to prayer and contemplation either. On the basis of the historic nature of the erection let it stand.

Originally Posted by LokiGragg

If you want to dispute that, you can try, I'll just go to Jefferson himself. By the way, if Jefferson was a Christian, then why did he himself re-edit the Bible and take out the majority of it? What he took out was the miracles and the fantastic. You can find his edit of the Bible anywhere. As well we have Franklin, a Deist as well. So yes, saying the god referred to in the Declaration and the money (which is also fairly modern) was the Deist one, not the Christian one.

So the Jefferson Bible was made for the Indians so they could learn Jesus teachings.
Dr. Kennedy: So what about the Jefferson Bible, that miracles-free version of the Scriptures? That, too, is a myth. It is not a Bible, but an abridgement of the Gospels created by Jefferson in 1804 for the benefit of the Indians. Jefferson's "Philosophy of Jesus of Nazareth Extracted From the New Testament for the Use of the Indians" was a tool to evangelize and educate American Indians. There is no evidence that it was an expression of his skepticism. Jefferson, who gave his money to assist missionary work among the Indians, believed his "abridgement of the New Testament for the use of the Indians" would help civilize and educate America's aboriginal inhabitants. Nor did Jefferson cut all miracles from his work, as Beliles points out. While the original manuscript no longer exists, the Table of Texts that survives includes several accounts of Christ's healings.

Another myth propagated by the Left. Jefferson was a religous man and wrote the letter to the Danbury Church with the intentions of Creating a Seperation of Church and State to Protect relgious freedoms, not to remove freedoms.
Dr. Kennedy: But didn't Jefferson believe in the complete separation of church and state? After all, Jefferson's 1802 letter to the Baptists in Danbury, Conn., in which he cited the First Amendment's creation of a "wall of separation" between church and state, is an ACLU proof-text for its claim that the First Amendment makes the public square a religion-free zone. But if the ACLU is right, why, just two days after he sent his letter to the Danbury Baptists did President Jefferson attend public worship services in the U.S. Capitol building, something he did throughout his two terms in office? And why did he authorize the use of the War Office and the Treasury building for church services in Washington, D.C.?
Thomas Jefferson: Deist or Christian? Debunking Dr James Kennedy

Originally Posted by Djinn

Religious freedoms are not absolute. They never have been; they never will be. You have the freedom to worship the god or gods of your choice. However, that freedom does NOT extend to the use of public funds or resources - including public land. What you do privately, however, is your freedom, and I would never - ever - encroach on that freedom, nor support those that do.

So that cross put on that soldiers grave over one hundred years ago is the start of a state religion? Just trying to see where your going with this

Originally Posted by aboutenough

So the Jefferson Bible was made for the Indians so they could learn Jesus teachings.
Dr. Kennedy: So what about the Jefferson Bible, that miracles-free version of the Scriptures? That, too, is a myth. It is not a Bible, but an abridgement of the Gospels created by Jefferson in 1804 for the benefit of the Indians. Jefferson's "Philosophy of Jesus of Nazareth Extracted From the New Testament for the Use of the Indians" was a tool to evangelize and educate American Indians. There is no evidence that it was an expression of his skepticism. Jefferson, who gave his money to assist missionary work among the Indians, believed his "abridgement of the New Testament for the use of the Indians" would help civilize and educate America's aboriginal inhabitants. Nor did Jefferson cut all miracles from his work, as Beliles points out. While the original manuscript no longer exists, the Table of Texts that survives includes several accounts of Christ's healings.

Another myth propagated by the Left. Jefferson was a religous man and wrote the letter to the Danbury Church with the intentions of Creating a Seperation of Church and State to Protect relgious freedoms, not to remove freedoms.
Dr. Kennedy: But didn't Jefferson believe in the complete separation of church and state? After all, Jefferson's 1802 letter to the Baptists in Danbury, Conn., in which he cited the First Amendment's creation of a "wall of separation" between church and state, is an ACLU proof-text for its claim that the First Amendment makes the public square a religion-free zone. But if the ACLU is right, why, just two days after he sent his letter to the Danbury Baptists did President Jefferson attend public worship services in the U.S. Capitol building, something he did throughout his two terms in office? And why did he authorize the use of the War Office and the Treasury building for church services in Washington, D.C.?
Thomas Jefferson: Deist or Christian? Debunking Dr James Kennedy

And what freedoms to someone's private expression of their beliefs have been impeded?

Originally Posted by Babylon

The cross is not hurting anybody, it's a very juvenile argument.. While I understand what you guys are saying, common sense told you both this was a stupid argument, so let's just call it that; Stupid..

Wouldn't that also apply to things like 'Happy Holidays' instead of 'Merry Christmas'?? I think that crap is stupid.. The cross isn't hurting anyone and neither is Happy Holidays..

Originally Posted by aboutenough

Don't forget the Pledge of Allegence

Originally Posted by justoneman

The pledge of allegence is a fairly recent addition.

It must be JOM, I never heard of that one.
Did the Republicans recently draw that one up?

1954, allegedly! (the current wording of the actual Pledge)

Originally Posted by aboutenough

So that cross put on that soldiers grave over one hundred years ago is the start of a state religion? Just trying to see where your going with this

Assuming you're talking about the Rhode Island memorial, there is no one buried beneath it.

Originally Posted by LokiGragg

And what freedoms to someone's private expression of their beliefs have been impeded?

The families that go to the memorial. The cross was originally put on one mans grave, so that families religious freedom will be taken