Does this action by American Atheist Association seem as awful as the actions of the Westboro Baptist Church?

Question

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,311956,00.html

Read the news story and see if this atheist group putting the families of fallen law enforcement officers through even more grief offends you.

Answer 1

yes, it is offensive, but perhaps for a different reason than people think. Atheism is *disbelief* in god, biblical, or otherwise. So, they should not care... theoretically... but here the hypocrisy rears it's ugly head, by filing the suit they are proselytizing, how does it make them different from believers ? I wonder how many of the people who filed the suit refuse to handle money... if they stand on principle, they should, all that "in god we trust" offensive stuff...
yes, they should not offend the sensibilities of the families of the fallen... that, however, would take some cojones...

You are going to get a lot of relativistic crap in the answer, "yes, it is not as bad as..." BS! why ? maybe to the families of the fallen who defended our peace IT IS AS BAD as the antics of WORMS who belong to Westboro *church*, who are they to judge ?

Answer 2

While I personally wouldn't make an issue of it, I can see both sides of the issue.
There are other ways that they can memorialize the officers than putting up crosses. They can name stretches of highway after the officers. They could use billboards, or other types of signs. If the memorial is being erected by a government organization, is paid for using taxpayers money, and it is intended to be a permanent memorial, then it should be a truly secular memorial. A cross is not a "secular" symbol.

The problem is not as much the crosses, as it is the fact that the crosses were erected by a government organization, and is intended to be permanent. The side of the highway is not the place to put a permanent religious symbol. They can do anything they want at the grave site.

This is not even CLOSE to being comparable to what the Westboro Baptists do.

Answer 3

Don't be silly.

I wouldn't have done what that atheist group did, at least based on what's in that story (and who knows how much of the real story the media is keeping under wraps to avoid offending Christians?), but that action is FAR from Phelps' BS.

In the context of the societal demonizing of atheists, I think there's a fair chance that the insistence on crosses - particularly by people who so eagerly lie about the religious nature of those memorials - is a part of the ongoing religious attacks on Americans.

Answer 4

I am an atheist and I have never heard of this organization.

That being said, how can the state of Utah claim that crosses are "secular images" ? They are clearly NOT secular. They DO represent the cross upon which the christian prophet Jesus was hung. The state, or the police or whomever should have erected simple OTHER shapes to mark the spots where the service people died. Had they put up likenesses of Buddha kneeling were they going to say THOSE were secular images as well? In my view, they should be replaced with simple circular markers, not crosses.
What if one of those patrolmen was Jewish? Does a cross seem like the right secular image for him too? Christians are under the misguided belief that everyone approves their nonsense, and not everyone does.

Answer 5

I am an atheist and I have no problem with
such crosses on the side of roads. I follow
the argument of the families who see it as
a memorial. And I also see it as a warning
to some. However. I do understand why some
people might be offended. Since it's just
a memorial sign I'm sure there's an alternative
version that could be used.

Answer 6

that is reminiscent of putting forward that the Tea celebration is a set of liberal activists attempting to make extremely-perfect wingers look extremely severe, thereby forcing moderates decrease back to the left. WBC is called a set of atheists, for this reason potential faithies will be thrown any incorrect way. In both circumstances, the answer is 'no', in accordance to Occam's Razor. that's okay to settle for there are authentic lunatics interior the international with out having to demonstrate to an similar kind of lunacy to describe them.

Answer 7

Absolutely not.
The AAA are justifiably testing the legality of the memorials through the courts in accordance with the American Constitution.
They are not causing offence in a public place, they are not breaking the law. They are not being extremist.
Do they not have the right to question something they believe is breaking the law?

Answer 8

No, you could erect anything else but a cross. A plaque would do the same thing.

What do they erect when the person who died is not a christian, do they still erect a cross? How shameful.

Or is it just that the majority are christian in that area, and they can't wrap their little brains around the fact that not "everyone" is christian.

Just put up a plaque, a rectangular thing, something shaped like a cone.

You know, not a cross.... Is that really too hard to understand?

Answer 9

While I disagree with the AAA on this issue, the crosses offend no one, I do not see their objection to be based on hate.

Westboro lives and breathes hate and bigotry.

edit: I agree with many of the others that a good compromise would be to change the memorials to something that actually is secular. The crosses do not offend me but you cannot consider them to be secular.

Answer 10

Religious symbols purchased with taxpayer money and erected on government land is a clear violation of the Constitution.
If I were a family member of one of those fallen officers, I would be furious that people were using the death of my loved one as a justification to promote their religion in such a tasteless and illegal way. How disrespectful is it to "honor" those who died enforcing the law with an illegal act?
If the state of Utah wants to honor its fallen officers, it needs to do so in a tasteful, inoffensive and legal way.

Answer 11

No. The Westboro Baptist Church is a hate-based organization that knowingly and willingly disrupts the funerals of veterans. Comparing that to a group that has filed a lawsuit is worse that what they have done.