Fragile or Dishonest?

This is an old news story, but something I just read today thanks to RegualLegna’s link:

there’s one showdown brewing that distinguishes itself from the rest — atheists’ demands that a cross found in the rubble following the September 11, 2001 attacks not be included in a museum that is being planned to commemorate the lives lost during the tragedy…. American Atheists (AA), a group working to advance the secular cause, has been leading the charge against the Ground Zero cross since July 2011, when the organization first filed suit against it.

The organization’s complaint reads, in part:

The plaintiffs, and each of them, have suffered, are suffering, and will continue to suffer damages, both physical and emotional, from the existence of the challenged cross. Named plaintiffs have suffered, inter alia, dyspepsia, symptoms of depression, headaches, anxiety, and mental pain and anguish from the knowledge that they are made to feel officially excluded from the ranks of citizens who were directly injured by the 9/11 attack and the lack of acknowledgement of the more than 1,000 non- Christian individuals who were killed at the World Trade Center.

So the thought of including the 911 cross in the 911 Memorial caused these atheist activists to suffer dyspepsia, symptoms of depression, headaches, anxiety, and mental pain and anguish.

Okay, this is not a one time thing, as atheist activists seem to have a track record of suffering psychologically from viewing religious symbols.  It would seem to me there are only two possible explanations for this.

  1. Atheist activists are psychologically fragile and delicate. Extremely so.
  2. Someone is not telling the truth about all that psychological damage.

I can’t think of a third explanation.

Advertisements
This entry was posted in atheist activism, Delicate atheists, Uncategorized and tagged , . Bookmark the permalink.

20 Responses to Fragile or Dishonest?

  1. TFBW says:

    The only third explanation which springs to my mind is “a little of both.” More precisely, I would suggest that viewing the cross causes these atheists genuine feelings of anger, hate, and indignation, but they describe it differently because those other terms garner more sympathy, presenting them as helpless victims rather than fuming anti-Christian ideologues.

    Maybe they should compromise and have a trigger warning outside the display.

  2. RegualLlegna says:

    I say both, the new atheist are, in their own view, rights activists most of they are SWJs (Social Justice Warriors), the recent presidential election prove, to most denialists, that SWJs are fragile and delicate, they mostly exist online and they, with enough time and confirmation bias, suffer the problem of appropriate yhe victimhood of true victims, SWJs can’t exist in community outside internet. The common double standar of new atheist prove that many of then lie, necesity (whatever they want) is the Achilles heel of the the moral relativists when they want to bypass something that other people see as law.

    But, this specific complaint have:
    “… and will continue to suffer damages, both physical and emotional, from the existence of the challenged cross.”

    If they remove the 911 Cross they will still suffer, both physical and emotional, trauma after? i mean: “… will continue to suffer… … from the existence…”
    Are they classic movie vampires or something?
    …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..
    TFBW says:
    “The only third explanation which springs to my mind is “a little of both.” More precisely, I would suggest that viewing the cross causes these atheists genuine feelings of anger, hate, and indignation, but they describe it differently because those other terms garner more sympathy, presenting them as helpless victims rather than fuming anti-Christian ideologues.

    Maybe they should compromise and have a trigger warning outside the display.”

    The indignation part seen to be that they, as atheist, don’t feel included (as part of the history of a terrorist attack). Atheist have not reason, in their logic, to feel remorse for the dead people, specially after all this time. Or maybe they associated christianity-Islam with terrorism that they feel that by removing religion they will remove terrorism form existence, of course the great mayority, above 95% of new atheist maybe, never really critique judaism in the same way they critique cristianity or islam, judaism is dismissed without thinking why, islam is equated as synonymous of terrorism and christianity is equated with bygotry, patriarchy, sexism, lies, not good/perfect enough, anti-goverment, anti-homosexuality, joke, anti-human rights, etc… but then if you talk about the very verifiable connection between atheism-marxism-comunism they go triggered (REEEEEEEE…!).

    Why they never talk as bad of the Xi Jinping:
    http://time.com/4306179/china-religion-freedom-xi-jinping-muslim-christian-xinjiang-buddhist-tibet/
    Xi Jinping wnat to control christian churches in China to “avoid goverment infiltration” and want to impose a democracy of the Tibetan Buddhism, to make the “people of china” (unyielding atheists) vote to choice the next Dalai Lama.

    At the end, the marxists want to end organizated religon of any kind and the communist want to control anything that is “religious”. And new atheist goals are?

  3. TFBW says:

    RegualLlegna said:

    The indignation part seen to be that they, as atheist, don’t feel included (as part of the history of a terrorist attack).

    I was thinking that the indignation stems more from the fact that a “cross” like this is symbolic — symbolic, that is, of their continued failure to eradicate all religious symbols (or things which can be construed as such) from the public space.

  4. FZM says:

    there’s one showdown brewing that distinguishes itself from the rest — atheists’ demands that a cross found in the rubble following the September 11, 2001 attacks not be included in a museum that is being planned to commemorate the lives lost during the tragedy…. American Atheists (AA), a group working to advance the secular cause, has been leading the charge against the Ground Zero cross since July 2011, when the organization first filed suit against it.

    Wanting to exclude the Ground zero cross from the museum sounds extreme.

    Besides, if American Atheists were successful about having this cross excluded from the museum Christians could probably complain that the fact that the cross was excluded from the museum and had no place there as a result of the activity of atheists caused then mental distress and anguish.

  5. Kevin says:

    They should find a pile of bricks from the WTC and call it the atheist display to shut them up.

  6. Michael says:

    Luckily, the Judge who heard the case saw through this whole stunt. From Wiki:

    In the court decision in March 2013, Judge Deborah Batts opined that “the First Amendment separates church from state, but not religion from public life” and that “American Atheists advocates an “absolute separation of church and state,” which would appear to call for a society in which public spaces are entirely religion-free zones. But “separation” taken this far is no friend of religious liberty.”

  7. John says:

    I think it’s time to start using a phrase describing such behaviour and reactions.

    I think the best phrase would be Christophobia, especially considering how Christophobia has much more merit of being an actual medical phobia compared to other politically-charged phobias.

    Because when people criticise Islam, they don’t report mental pain or distress caused by Islam.

    When people criticise same-sex marriage, they don’t report getting anguish or depression from looking at a rainbow flag or whatever.

    This type of phobia might actually be the first REAL case of a phobia of something that has to do with politics and religion intertwining.

  8. jbsptfn says:

    I think it’s time to start using a phrase describing such behaviour and reactions.

    I think the best phrase would be Christophobia, especially considering how Christophobia has much more merit of being an actual medical phobia compared to other politically-charged phobias.

    That’s a great idea.

    The babies on the left in their safe spaces would be crying, and saying that we aren’t allowed to assign phobias to the other side, which is all the more reason to do it.

  9. Michael says:

    John:

    I think it’s time to start using a phrase describing such behaviour and reactions.

    I think the best phrase would be Christophobia, especially considering how Christophobia has much more merit of being an actual medical phobia compared to other politically-charged phobias.

    Because when people criticise Islam, they don’t report mental pain or distress caused by Islam.

    When people criticise same-sex marriage, they don’t report getting anguish or depression from looking at a rainbow flag or whatever.

    This type of phobia might actually be the first REAL case of a phobia of something that has to do with politics and religion intertwining.

    Excellent point.

  10. mechanar says:

    I will use an exampel from my homecountry in germany here, we have tons of crosses dedicated to ALL victicms of the holocaust even though everybody knows most of the victims were jews. Now Jews COULD complain but they dont because they understand the Gesture. Maybe its not the cross that is the Problem but the Person viewing it.

  11. RegualLlegna says:

    Why they not sue the American Red Cross, the International Red Cross or Red Crescent Movement?… they use the symbol of a big simetrical red cross or the OPHIUCHUS symbol, so a double religious symbol, a christian symbol and a greek symbol based on greek mythology (religious greek mythology).

  12. pennywit says:

    I don’t have much use for this kind of folderol …

  13. Ratheist says:

    You didn’t debunk a damn thing. You’re only response to this statement from Mehta:

    “Part of the problem with this idea of NOMA is that science does have something to say about morality.”
    was a big fat ad hominem, which is a logical fallacy, not surprisingly.

  14. Dhay says:

    @Ratheist: That post — Friendly Atheist Claims Science and Religion are Incompatible. He’s Wrong — was posted a long time ago, 17 May 2016.

    https://shadowtolight.wordpress.com/2016/05/17/3441/

    Two things: it was a extensive post — is this the only fault you can find with it, or rather, is this the only item (of many) you choose to wave your hands at; why are you responding in this thread, not that?

  15. TFBW says:

    Ratheist is just demonstrating his powers of reason by posting an unsubstantiated dismissal to an unquoted argument in the wrong thread. At least he got the right website.

  16. RegualLlegna says:

    Are not the Ratheist, the atheists people of the sub reddit r/atheism?

  17. Michael says:

    Ratheist: You didn’t debunk a damn thing.

    Yes I did. The whole “science and religion are incompatible” talking point has been refuted. We can tell because you can’t show where I am wrong about this. Look, I no one expects you to actually admit the talking point has been debunked.

    You’re only response to this statement from Mehta:

    “Part of the problem with this idea of NOMA is that science does have something to say about morality.”
    was a big fat ad hominem, which is a logical fallacy, not surprisingly.

    Wrong again. You should read and ponder my reply.

  18. TFBW says:

    John has pointed out that option #1 in the OP entails “Christophobia”. It strikes me that option #2 entails perjury, or something very like it, since it would entail making false representation to the courts. So we can strengthen the claims of the OP and say that the atheist activists in question must be either:
    1. Genuinely, pathologically Christophobic, or
    2. Wilful, cynical perjurers attempting to use the courts as a tool of activism.
    … or possibly a little of both (e.g. genuinely Christophobic, but making exaggerated claims).

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s