A humanist group wants to tear down the Bladensburg Cross in Bladensburg MD because it offends them.

http://www.washingtontimes....aped-world-war-i-me/

quote The lawsuit names the American Humanist Association, Steven Lowe, Fred Edwords and Bishop McNeill as the plaintiffs. Mr. Lowe says he was shocked the first time he saw the cross and gets upset every time he drives by it. “He believes that the Bladensburg Cross associates a Christian religious symbol with the state and gives the impression that the state supports and approves of Christianity, as opposed to other religions, and that the state may even prefer Christians and Christianity over other religions,” the complaint says. “As a non-Christian, Mr. Lowe is personally offended and feels excluded by this governmental message.”

Mr. Lowe says he was shocked the first time he saw the cross and gets upset every time he drives by it.



Shocked? wow upset? good grief.

Some of us recognize the problem. This man needs a night with a paid professional.

"O's no's! A cross!"

[This message has been edited by Tony Kania (edited 05-31-2014).]

quote Mr. Lowe says he was shocked the first time he saw the cross and gets upset every time he drives by it.

Then maybe he should stop driving by it... or put on his Big Boy Pants and stop being such a crybaby.

Even as a non-Christian, I find this to be ridiculous.

quote Originally posted by Blacktree: Then maybe he should stop driving by it... or put on his Big Boy Pants and stop being such a crybaby.

What good would that do ? It would still be like the first days after he was told that Santa Clause was not real.

I feel offended and excluded every time I see a Lamborghini driving down the road. I don't care that somebody else earned that car and has a right to their opinion. I'm offended by it and I want them all removed from the road Immediately.

Welcome to the real world Mr. Lowe. Grow a pair and deal with it.

quote Originally posted by rinselberg:

hahaha

quote [B][/B] Mr. Lowe says he was shocked the first time he saw the cross and gets upset every time he drives by it.

So he gets it removed - then what?? Every Star of David or Crescent Moon symbol he sees??


------------------
Calgary time/temp

3.4L Supercharged 87 GT Click me
Super Duty 4 Indy #163 Click me

[This message has been edited by fierosound (edited 06-01-2014).]

quote Originally posted by fierosound: So he gets it removed - then what?? Every Star of David or Crescent Moon symbol he sees??

Yes, yes. We can't have a single person offended. But in the process of eliminating the offense of one, we trample on thousands.

------------------
Whade' "Darkwing" Duck
Fieroless (11/18/12)

Easy: just remove the cross-bar and then it's just a memorial. If that's it's purpose (as stated), everybody should be happy, right?

I'm offended by addition. The + sign is clearly a religious symbol and causes me stress and to feel disenfranchised by algebra.

When was it constructed? I'm not a fan of removing anything legacy unless there is overwhelming support. Times change but you can't just go around tearing down the past. Arguing that new one's shouldn't be constructed with public money or on public land is valid. Part of these changing times.

But geez, leave the past the past and a monument to who we are.

quote Originally posted by TK: When was it constructed? I'm not a fan of removing anything legacy unless there is overwhelming support. Times change but you can't just go around tearing down the past. Arguing that new one's shouldn't be constructed with public money or on public land is valid. Part of these changing times. But geez, leave the past the past and a monument to who we are.

By and large, I'd agree with that.

quote Originally posted by TK: When was it constructed?

It was built in 1925. As far as I can tell (through some quick Google research), it was originally built on private land. But the land was bought by the state government to build a road, and the road was built around the monument. So the state government "inherited" the monument.

Edit to add: I think the state could sidestep the whole issue by selling the monument to a private owner.

[This message has been edited by Blacktree (edited 06-01-2014).]

I think it would be funny if the two adjacent privately owned properties both erected giant crosses. I wonder how long it would take for this case to be dropped? Either by the plaintiff for not wanting to spend his money in vain since he will still have to see those terrible symbols or by the judge that would tell him that the removal would be moot for the same reason.

quote Originally posted by Blacktree: Edit to add: I think the state could sidestep the whole issue by selling the monument to a private owner.

Oh no's. The state is suppose to destroy it. To allow it to exist, to make money from the sale of it, unthinkable.

quote Originally posted by Blacktree: It was built in 1925. As far as I can tell (through some quick Google research), it was originally built on private land. But the land was bought by the state government to build a road, and the road was built around the monument. So the state government "inherited" the monument. Edit to add: I think the state could sidestep the whole issue by selling the monument to a private owner.

For me that's legacy and it stays. Now if everyone it's remembering is Jewish ...