The complaint can be read here. The allegations are not that the Museum and Memorial, a nonprofit corporation, is an agent of the government, but rather that the fact that it is on land leased from the Ports Authority and the fact that it is funded (partly) with government grants makes the Memorial and Museum "government action."

Establishment cases can be awfully hard to predict; even when the courts say they're applying a standard test, the test is often applied differently in different cases, so that the decisions are often very fact-specific.

That said, I don't think I'd be putting any money on the plaintiffs winning this one.

Apples/oranges. The Muslim center issue is not one of government speech (fwiw, I think the arguments against it are not logical or rational - the 9/11 terriorists are no more representative of Muslims than Anders Breivik is of Christians)- and I will go out on a limb and say you probably don't want military chaplains - agents of the government - to be restricted from practicing their religion.

As to those hypothetical attendees raising hell at a Muslim prayer - they would be as wrong as the atheists objecting to prayers at the VA cemetery. Just because you find something objectionable does not mean it is an example of government imposition of religion.

Didn't we have this discussion before? The titty bar is closer than the Muslim center.

Actually, I do want them restricted from preaching about the evils of homosexuality (which has consistently occurred) and if that's a problem they can resign. There are, I'm sure, many wonderful chaplains who provide counseling and support to the military men and women that they serve without discrimination for sexual orientation or religion, however there are some that do not.

When one is working for the government there is going to be some restriction. Would one support a military chaplain who was a pure pacifist?

So the American Atheists are only upset because there's only a cross and if they added a Star of David and a Crescent or two they'd be cool with the religious symbols on display? Suuuuurrrreeee. This group has always been a rabble rousing, Christmas tree suing bunch.

Atheism is such a waste of time anyway. Hey guys, lets create a religion (Dogma included) where we don't believe in religion!!!

You mean like a Quaker? I wonder if there ARE Quaker chaplains?

This may surprise you, but just like religious people, a-religious people are mostly quiet and keep to themselves. Nevertheless it is annoying to watch one's supposedly a-religious government supporting Christianity on a regular basis. Unsurprisingly most Christians don't notice/are OK with it.
Probably have been. Odds are they're not allowed to tell our soldiers to lay down their weapons and walk away (not that any particular Quaker would, I'm speaking in the hypotheticals.) Government employees and military personnel in particular have restrictions to their freedoms of speech. Ask state employees here who are restricted in the number of bumper stickers allowed on their cars, or political buttons they can wear.

Reality of anti LGBT sentiment among the chaplains who are supposed to be counseling

Why do people love to claim this? Atheists make up a small percent of society and for the most part are not an organized group of people. It's not a religion. Their is no "dogma" and no great leader determining what all atheists must believe. A very few are vocal and politically active, and this seems to stick in the craw of some Christians. I think that these critics really think that accusing atheists of having their own religion is some sort of insult...but isn't that insulting yourself?

I tend to think of those people as fundamentalist atheists, and some of them annoy almost as much as do some fundamentalist Christians.

Atheism certainly can be a religion, depending on how one defines religion. (And of course, to the degree it is, it is a very disorganized and individualized religion.) And I have known atheists who can be just as dogmatic about their belief system as the most dogmatic Christian.

But that's no reason to use such a broad brush in painting all atheists, anymore than it would be reason to use a broad brush in painting all Christians. Life is much more nuanced than that.

True.

I'm somewhere between an Atheist and an Agnostic (depends on the day, I guess) and it's not like I'm a card-carrying member or something. I don't go to meetings a few times a month and do "whatever-it-is-those-Atheists-do". While I'm sure that specific beliefs are different within those in any sort of religious community, so they are with myself and others.

That being said, someone wrote in to a paper I read online (@IL, if you check out SR.com, you'll see it) where a guy is all upset and wants to call the ACLU because he saw a group from a church sponsoring a 3-on-3 basketball event one afternoon at a local park. I don't understand how someone can get so offended by this! I may be a little more laid-back than others, but I just say to each their own.

I did read that yesterday AKD, and thought of this thread. Did you see the one the day before about someone complaining about the church signs and wondering if they had the proper permits?

That being said... I'm Catholic (yes, we are Christian), and I have no problem with atheist or agnostic views. Exactly, to each their own. If someone someday comes to the conclusion that they don't want to be atheist, evangelical, wiccan, or whatever anymore, then it is up to them to decide what to do with their spiritual lives next. I will never push my thoughts on religion on others. I will never degrade someone because of their religious or spiritual views. Now the yin to my yang is I expect others to do the same concerning me. Don't push your religious beliefs on me. Don't preach to me. Don't tell me how wrong I am, or how Catholics aren't "real" christians. I have no problem with a church group doing something at a local park, or a cross being displayed on municipal property. I would also have no problem with a Star of David, or any other religious display that is just quietly sitting there.

There is a new girl at work, been here less than 2 weeks, and 2 days ago she initiated a huge religious discussion and was extremely insulting. She is a very conservative christian, and would not shut up about how wrong other people were to not be like her. I wasn't really paying attention to their conversation, otherwise I would have gotten nasty. (It was really rediculous, it was the old "Taking the Bible literally, word for word" versus - not taking it literally.)

One of my project managers is also uber christian, and never once has he ever done something like this. He respects the right of others to form their own opinions, even if he doesn't see thigns in the same light. We can sit and have a civil religious based conversation (me Catholic, him super Christian, another girl we work with a former JW), without insulting or degrading. It's wonderful, and exposes my mind to different ways of thinking.

One of my favorite sites for religion-related news is GetReligion, which is essentially devoted to considering how the press covers stories of a religious nature or with religious connections or over/undertones. The general gist is that "the press doesn't get religion."

This article posted today is, I think, pertinent to some of what we've talked about: "Not all atheists are alike."

An excerpt:

The [ABC News] article ends with competing quotes. One is from the rescue worker who found the cross after digging three bodies out from the rubble of the collapsed Twin Towers. He says he was overwhelmed upon its discovery and believes it’s a beautiful symbol of faith and freedom. He argues that it’s a “natural artifact” from Ground Zero. The other quote comes from the communications director for the American Atheists who says she can’t visit the memorial so long as there’s a cross there.

The article is fine but I wonder if it wouldn’t have been improved by including the voices of atheists who are not fans of this lawsuit. Otherwise it gives the impression that all atheists think lawsuits against featuring the remnant beam from the World Trade Center are a good idea.

Oh man, I really do hope that you tell her that, as a Catholic, you're glad to know that she takes it literally where Jesus said "This is my body; this is my blood." http://www.smilieshq.com/smilies/evilgrin0007.gif

I never said I was a GOOD Catholic, lol.... :p I'm not a huge fan of religious dogma. Well, unless it's the movie Dogma, because that one is one of my favorites!!!

http://consciencebound.com/wp-conten...9/04/dogma.jpg

iApprove

So? Why should/does this matter to you? Does a belief system need at least a 100 million followers for AOII Angel to consider it valid?

I take it you're not familiar with the writings Dawkins or Hitchens but either way there are many religions without the Pope-like supreme leader. Don't even try to tell me that atheists don't proselytize either.

I'm not calling atheism a religion to necessarily insult, but to call them out. They claim the desire to live free from having others religion thrown in their face yet they throw their religion around. As a non religious man myself, I find these atheism groups very ironic, as do many others.

Actually it doesn't. I know non-religious mostly keep to themselves but I was speaking of organized atheism (specifically AA) in my original post. Maybe I should have added a disclaimer :)

Also, can you point to some examples of how the government regularly supports Christianity?


Two words for you- conscientious objector.