Does Jesus or the Cross offend you?
Posted on: December 28, 2007 - 1:55pm
Offline
Does Jesus or the Cross offend you?
Many people when talking to Christians or confronting Christian topics try to pull the "offended" card in hopes to make everything all better. I don't believe there are many of those people on here, but I came across an article that I feel makes good points on the topic just the same;
http://www.crosswalk.com/spirituallife/1414727/
Bookmark/Search this post with:
False. That is not the reasoning behind it. We want symbols removed from schools, court rooms, etc, because we are NOT A CHRISTIAN COUNTRY. We are not supposed to be religious at all. We are simply supposed to allow people to practice their own religions without undue government intervention.
When I attend a function at a state university, and there is a prayer to Jesus that I'm expected to participate in, I am left with a choice: Ostracize myself or pretend to agree. If you invite me to a prayer meeting at your house, I can just decline the invitation, but if I want an education, I have to go to school. If the schools are allowed to promote a religion, that's not offensive to me -- it's discriminatory.
Consider this: I've been called for jury duty three times in my life. I've been struck all three times after expressing my atheism. Granted, I didn't particularly want to do jury duty, but that's not the point. I am not allowed to participate because of my lack of Christianity. Posting the ten commandments is not offensive to me -- it promotes and encourages discrimination against me.
Consider the recent congressional resolution elevating Christian holidays. They could have simply said, "We support all holidays, all religions, and non-believers alike." Instead, they chose to go with the majority. That is not offensive -- it's discrimination.
I'll shut up about the large cross if we include an equally large and prominent symbol of every other world religion -- and an equally large and prominent atheist "A." You see how it works? It's not about promoting religion. It's about preferential treatment for any religion and discrimination against the non-religious.
And it's also a strawman. This isn't about being offended. I'm not offended when people pray before meals. I'm discriminated against when the government forces me to either act Christian or be part of the disenfranchised minority.
Again. Horseshit.
We don't claim to be offended. We claim to be discriminated against.
Real Harm:
Transformation from Secular to Religious Government
Under the Bush administration, our country is experiencing a major transformation from a secular to a religious government. The President's faith-based initiative is central to this transformation and raises serious questions about church-state separation. "Slouching toward theocracy. President Bush's faith-based initiative is doing better than you think," by Bill Berkowitz, 2/6/04 provides an overview of this transformation.
On February 4, 2004, the U.S. House of Representatives voted for provisions in a social services bill that allow religiously based job discrimination in publicly funded programs run by churches.
Remember -- churches pay no taxes. Isn't that what you call an unfair business advantage??? Real harm
Americans United for Separation of Church and State has been following Bush's Faith-Based Initiative since he assumed the office of President. They have filed lawsuits, and their magazine, Church and State, has many important, in-depth articles.
From Americans United, August 17, 2004:
Philadelphia Church That Endorsed Bush Gets $1 Million 'Faith-Based' Grant
Wednesday June 23, 2004
Moral indignation is jealousy with a halo. -- H. G. Wells
I got as far as the giant flaming strawman in the middle of the first page of that article and stopped reading. Atheists don't protest the use of religious symbols in public places because we are offended by them. We protest because their presence implies our participation and support for the religion so represented, which is not why we pay our taxes. Would you consider it real harm if the government announced it was funding a task force to promote atheism across the country? Would you feel this was a fair and legitimate use of your tax dollars? If no, would that be because you are "offended" by atheism?
Lazy is a word we use when someone isn't doing what we want them to do.
- Dr. Joy Brown
I agree with your post 100%. It comes down to a matter of the supremacy of a single viewpoint as opposed to fairness based upon impartiality. I like your "shoe on the other foot" example as it illustrates this point perfectly.
"But those enemies of mine who did not want me to be king over them, bring them here and kill them in front of me." Jesus, (Luke 19:27)
http://www.dailymotion.com/video/x8uln_drowning-pool-tear-away_music
The new scapegoat for Christians failure to maintain their religious monopoly on what it means to be an American is secularism.
HERE IS WHAT THEY WONT TELL YOU!
A Christian can be a secularist. A Jew or Muslim or atheist can be a secularist. A secularist is merely a person who recoginizes that religion and politics DONT MIX!
Any moron with half a brian can look at the division in the middle east between Sunnis and Shiites to know that when you bring up labels and discard common law, someone will get fucked.
The same sectarin violence existed between the Catholics and Protestants in Irland.
A human is a human is a human. We are all going to beleive what we beleive dispite what others tell us. We CAN use the the common goal of appeal without force and include bitching about the other without killing each other.
Utopias dont exist, and only a fool will set themselves up to be king of the hill with force, rather than the voluntary appeal of fact.
Contact all the 08 Presidental candidates and remind them of their Constitutional duty to uphold "no religious test" www.rationalresponders.com/forum/sapient/news_activism/8955
Right. My objection is using public monies to put religious symbols on public property. What you do with your own property is your business.
I do, however, find the symbolism of the cross offensive. When I was a kid in fundy school, I went through a phase where I drew pictures of Christ and the two thieves being crucified on the cross. It was a really violent picture with blood and everything. At school I was encouraged. My parents encouraged me, too.
My brother, in a rare moment of lucidity, called it disgusting. I figured he must be wrong because everyone else liked it.
Logical fallacy: argument from popularity.
When my nephew was about 7 or 8, he used to go around saying his favorite color was red because it reminded him of Jesus' blood. That was SO not okay with me. It was all I could do to keep my mouth shut. Most of the time I had to go into another room.
I hope he outgrows his fundy upbringing. He isn't planning on college and that concerns me because I don't think he ever learned how to think for himself.
College would at least force him to see how other people live and think.
So yeah, I do find the cross offensive. It's the most popular necklace symbol, isn't it? People might as well wear little guillotines around their necks. It's the same damn thing. On the other hand, I respect the right of others to wear a cross or a guillotine or whatever the hell they want. As long as it's private, I won't get in your face. I am teaching myself to keep arguments about religion in the public sphere. It's been hard to bite my tongue at times.
__| ]2 U ]{ /\__]\[ /\ ]\/[ | ]\[ () ]2 |__
Yeah , hey lets put an electric chair symbol in the public square.
Xians are sick sick sick ..... and f ing sick
Seperate religion from the market place .... Stop being tolerant of witchcraft tax free peddlers ....
Holy Water ?
i really do think they need to keep out of the school system and any goverment arena
I am offended by the cross,, the funny little jewish hat and the headscarf. These are symbols of mental slavery. To display your intellectual limitations with pride sickens me.
When I see a woman in a burqa I am even more offended. They are allowing themselves to be defined completely by their primitive faith. All you can see about them is that they are Muslim. I have the same reaction to Jesus fish displayed on the back of someone's car. The first and only thing the driver wants those behind him to know is his delusions.
I'm offended when businesses display their religion prominently. Here in Perth we have a chain of bed stores that displays the Jesus fish on their logo. The implication is that being a christian makes them more worthy of people's business.
I'm also offended by churches, temples and mosques. These are places where ignorance is worshiped and children are brainwashed.
I do not demand that people remove their crosses, yarmulka or headscarf. I do not go around tearing Jesus fish off cars or lobbying for a ban on burqas. I do not call for all places of worship to be demolished. Why? because no matter how offended I am I have no right to stop other people from offending me. I bleieve in free expression no matter how stupid the idea being expressed is. I will however do my best to boycott businesses that make a point of their faith. That is my right as a consumer.
When it comes to religious symbols on public property or paid for with public funds, then I do have a right to demand their removal. It is no longer individuals expressing personal faith. It's the country claiming a national faith. I will not be labelled with the primitive dogma of others.
Oh, a lesson in not changing history from Mr. I'm-My-Own-Grandpa!
[/quote=caposkia]
As I had guessed, most people on this site don't find it an offense, however, I have learned a lot from the responses given. Very interesting.
Woah! huh???? Who told you we're NOT a Christian country? Have you ever read the Declaration of Independence? Did you know that "Laus Deo" (Praise be to God) is written at the very top of the Washington monument? Did you know you are required to be a Christian to even run for president??? Try telling the founders of this country we're not a Christian nation.
Now you may want to believe it, but I'm sorry, it's just not the case. We are a Christian Nation. Our laws and statutes were based on Christian teachings. For a refresher on the DOI, please check out; http://www.ushistory.org/declaration/document/index.htm
Imediately, right at the beginning you'll notice such phrases as; "...God entitled them" and "...endowed by their Creator" and yes God and Creator are capitalized siginifying they are in fact referencing to the Christian God. No other religion would capitalize God be it that they all have a name they use for their higher power, and creator may be a description others may use, but they wouldn't consider it a significance to capitolize.
uh... expected to participate in??? who told you you were expected to pray? or even believe for that matter??? Anyone who tells you that does not understand what it means to be a Christian.
I have no problem with anyone expressing any religious beliefs in public places. I have a problem when people say certain beliefs do not belong. Yes, this would include an athiestic point of view. Everyone has a right to believe what they want in this country. However, they need to respect the foundations of this country and respect anyone with opposing beliefs.
People also need an open mind. Someone mentioned in this blog that people will believe what they want and no one can change their mind.. not an exact quote, but it was along those lines. Unfortunately, that's very true. I see it as stubborness. You really have to question what you believe if you aren't even willing to listen to an opposing factor. I'm here because I'm willing to accept any opposition with open ears and an open mind. I'm still a believer because no oppositional views have in my understanding, successfully refuted my views.
...and you said this is NOT a Christian nation???
Part of the basis of laws and statutes dating back to the founding years of this country put into place a requirement of Christianity to ensure no descrimination against the accused. It was understood at the time that if you were a Christian, you were absolutely going to look at any issue with an open mind and a clear conscience. These would be the requirements of being a Christian. Judge Not, ya know?
as we all know, unfortunately, through the history of this country, people claiming to be Christian did not view issues with open minds or clear consciences... just look at the Salem Witch Trials.
I know the response to this too. A perfect example of why religion should not be invovled... etc.... well, if these people convicting people of being witches were true Christians, none would have been killed. It's just not the teaching of the New Testiment! Whether you believe it or not, you can't deny that.
are you saying we should start putting A's on top of churches and Islamic symbols on jewish synagogs??? uh... just fyi. If Athiests had a church or any property for that matter in a public place, they'd have every right to not only display an A, but to not display anything they didn't want displayed.
of course they'd get friction from some morons out there, but they're just dispensationalists. They have no concept of tolerance.
well, churches pay no "property tax". Because they are a non-profit organization. Just like any other non-profit organization, they get tax breaks. br..hem... and uh... any church that is profiting I must say is NOT Christian.
As far as sparation of Church and state, that is quite a topic and a misunderstanding by both sides if I do say so myself. I'd have to do some research before I comment on that more, but to sum it up, the declaration of seperation was never meant to keep God out of the Government.
Noone had to. It's obvious to anyone with accurate knowledge of our country's founding.
Yes. There's no jesus in there. Anywhere.
Did you know "Qui curat" (Who gives a fuck) is written on my brain right now?
I didn't. Could you show me in the rule book?
No need. They would tell you themselves.
We are not. The original settlers came here to get away from a christian nation.
Some of the founders were christian, some were deists. Read Benjamin Franklin's autobiography for an explicit disavowal of christianity. The separation of church & state was made very clear.
That's nonsense. You need to get out more.
Look at an original draft of the Declaration. Every damn noun is capitalized. People wrote like that back then. Or will you contend it was just the christians?
The Blasphemy Challenge doesn't work because christianity doesn't work.
I could respond in detail, but I already wasted ten minutes of my life reading that last bit of tripe. I'll sum it up with your own words.
Wow. Just... wow.
Moral indignation is jealousy with a halo. -- H. G. Wells
Your argument is easily defeated, as the United States was founded via the creation of the Constituion, not the Declaration of Independence.
The United States is in no way a Christian nation. Our laws are clearly not based on Christian laws (how many of the ten commandments are laws? maybe three, depending on how strictly you adhere to them). Your statement that the President has to be a Christian is completely inaccurate. The requirements are laid out in the Constitution, a document you might be interested in reading before making claims about the nature and functioning of the U.S. government.
Really? I thought the only requirements were to be
I must've missed the part that says you gotta be Christian to be the president. Maybe they changed the part that says no religious test shall be required to hold any office of public trust under the United States.
18*-1
While the founding fathers likely had to placate a significant christian population just as we do today, this doesn't mean they embraced christianity themselves or thought it was best for our nation.
caposkia wrote:
Tell them yourself: (A small sample)
"During almost fifteen centuries has the legal establishment of Christianity been on trial. What has been its fruits? More or less, in all places, pride and indolence in the clergy; ignorance and servility in the laity; in both, bigotry, and persecution".
" In no instance have . . . the churches been guardians of the liberties of the people. "
"Religious bondage shackles and debilitates the mind and unfits it for every noble enterprise."
All of these from President James Madison... and:
"History I believe furnishes no example of a priest-ridden people maintaining a free civil government. This marks the lowest grade of ignorance, of which their political as well as religious leaders will always avail themselves for their own purpose. " – Thomas Jefferson to Baron von Humboldt, 1813
"The Christian god can easily be pictured as virtually the same god as the many ancient gods of past civilizations. The Christian god is a three headed monster; cruel, vengeful and capricious. If one wishes to know more of this raging, three headed beast-like god, one only needs to look at the caliber of people who say they serve him. They are always of two classes: fools and hypocrites."
"Question with boldness even the existance of God, for if there be one, surely he would pay more homage to reason than to that of blindfolded fear"
Thomas Jefferson.
"As the government of the United States is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion....." Treaty of Tripoly(Barbary Treaty) Artical 11. Signed without dissent by both houses of congress and signed into LAW by President John Adams, June 10th 1797.
"The divinity of Jesus is made a convenient cover for absurdity."
"This would be the best of all possible worlds, if there were no religion in it."
John Adams
"Whenever we read the obscene stories, the voluptuous debaucheries, the cruel and tortuous executions, the unrelenting vindictiveness with which more than half the Bible is filled, it would be more consistent that we call it the word of a demon than the word of God. It is a history of wickedness that has served to corrupt and brutalize mankind." Thomas Paine From - The Age of Reason
All No True Scotsman fallacies aside...
"All national institutions of churches, whether Jewish, Christian or Turkish, appear to me no other than human inventions, set up to terrify and enslave mankind, and monopolize power and profit. " Thomas Paine
Some things never change.
"In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act."
George Orwell
YEAH , bump
Jefferson , Paine , even Jesus/Buddha too !
Read it ALL again,
the bibles too
Go Jesus ! and thanks, good lesson, sorry you were misquoted , as was prophisized,
The most Amazing story of all time, YET
I like the part , I am one with the father
ME TOO , we are one
The Constitution allows all good standing citizens to run for or to be appointed to hold offices regardless of their religion "no religious test". But what this guy doesnt understand is that common law, according to the Constitution was never ment to be monopolized by on religion nor were our common law was intended to be ripped out of any holy book.
It was never the founders intent for Christianity to be sole interperter or owner of the Constitution. Freedom of religion is garunteed by the Constitution but how Christians get to "Jesus owned government" out of that is absurd.
"As the government of the United States is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion" Artical 11, Barbary Treaty signed without dissent by both houses of Congress and signed into law June 10th 1797 by President John Adams.
Contact all the 08 Presidental candidates and remind them of their Constitutional duty to uphold "no religious test" www.rationalresponders.com/forum/sapient/news_activism/8955
Personally, I'm bothered by crosses since they are torture devices. The Romans used them for incredibly painful executions. I think that any group that uses a torture device as their symbol while claiming to be about peace and love is up to something.
-Triften
really... have you read the Bible?
who said anything about Jesus being in there?
If you really don't, then why are we talking??? If you didn't care, then you wouln't talk to me, and you have every right not to.
ya know, I could be wrong on that... I guess I should say that there is yet to be a president elected for these United States that did not have a Christian background...
ok... like who? the signers of the Constitution for example maybe... let's see.
Abraham Baldwin... uh... nope, he was a Christian
John Dickinson - From his will: "To my Creator I resign myself, humbly confiding in His goodness and in His mercy through Jesus Christ for the events of eternity." hmmm... he could be an athiest..er... nah
Gunning Bedford - Funeral oration on the death of Washington: "Now to the triune God, The Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost, be ascribed all honor and dominion, forevermore." nope... also known as a Christian
James Wilson - "Human law must rest its authority ultimately upon the authority for that law which is divine...far from being rivals or enemies, religion and law are twin sisters, friends, and mutual assistants. Indeed, these two sciences run into each other." - from The Works of the Honorable James Wilson, Bird Wilson, editor (Philadelphia: Lorenzo Press, 1804) hmm. starting to see a pattern...
I will remind everyone that these are the actual signers of the Constitution... the document that has no reference or indication of God or Jesus Christ in it...
Jacob Broom - Writing to his son: "Don't forget to be a Christian. I have said much to you on this head and I hope an indelible impression is made. "
Roger Sherman (signer of all 4 of our founding documents). When asked by his church, White Haven Congregational, to help revise the wording of their creed: "I believe that there is one only living and true God, existing in three persons, the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost, the same in substance, equal in power and glory. That the Scriptures of the old and new testaments are a revelation from God and a complete rule to direct us how we may glorify and enjoy Him."
Alexander Hamilton - Proposed formation of the Christian Constitutional Society to spread Christian government around the world. After the Constitutional Convention of 1787, he stated: "For my own part, I sincerely esteem it a system which without the finger of God, never could have been suggested and agreed upon by such a diversity of interests." - from Diffine, D.P., One Nation Under God - How Close a Separation?
Rufus King - Selected as manager of the American Bible Society. In a speech made before the Senate at the time Missouri was petitioning for statehood, he said: "I hold that all laws or compacts imposing any such condition [as involuntary servitude] upon any human being are absolutely void because contrary to the law of nature, which is the law of God."
John Langdon - Vice President of the American Bible Societythose crosses were the worst kind of punishment of it's time. They were in fact incredibly painful and a very terrible and embarrassing way to die.
Think of it this way. How would you feel if you were destined to hang on one of those torture devices... but then someone came along and took your place on it. Would you not be forever greatful? Would you not use that as a symbol of Love that someone had for you????
and before anyone can cynically respond, this is what Christians believe. Believe it or not, if that's how you view it, it is quite the sacrifice.
so are you saying our tax dollars pay for the sale of Chrisitianity? if so, sorry to burst your bubble, but that's simply not true... even if there was some of it going towards promoting Christianity (which I truely believe it's not), there are far worse things this government is secretly spending our money on than a following. Ask them why our debt is so large.. I'm sure the answer won't be Christians take it all...