| Topic: |
Religions > Atheism |
| User: |
"J Young" |
| Date: |
04 Nov 2005 09:04:28 PM |
| Object: |
International Red Cross and Atheists |
How does any person, so vehement in their dedication to Atheism, condone
within themselves to either offer help or accept help to an organization
that makes no pretentions about being a secular organization. This is not
called "Red X", as atheists love to refer to "X-ians" or "X-mas". How does
an atheist reconcile within themselves that they are donating or accepting
work that is being done in Christ's name?
.
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: International Red Cross and Atheists |
07 Nov 2005 08:31:21 PM |
|
|
On 7-Nov-2005, Dubh Ghall <puck@pooks.hill.fey> wrote:
On Mon, 07 Nov 2005 14:39:23 GMT, Matt Silberstein
<RemoveThisPrefixmatts2nospam@ix.netcom.com> wrote:
On Sun, 06 Nov 2005 15:56:31 GMT, in alt.atheism , Dubh Ghall
<puck@pooks.hill.fey> in <054sm1h1kcdv4ntu7nbhqs5onujktobeip@4ax.com>
wrote:
On Sun, 06 Nov 2005 12:28:27 GMT, Matt Silberstein
<RemoveThisPrefixmatts2nospam@ix.netcom.com> wrote:
Besides, apart from Israel, where could the Star of David work, and be
as
trusted as the Red Cross, or the Red crescent?
Tsunami relief?
Provided it is not muslim communities that are suffering.
If you are claiming that Israel does not help Muslims then you should
back up your claim with some evidence.
Well, let me see. There is the land they stole off the Palestinians.
Lie #1.
Then
there is the murder of Palistinians.
Lie #2
Knocking down their homes.
For being sniper's nests, bomb factories and arms smuggling tunels.
Oh, how horrible of the Israelis to protect themselves!
Locking
Palestinians up in concent H^H^H^ sorry,
yes, you are a sorry little liar.
*re-plonk*
Susan
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Matt Silberstein" |
|
| Title: Re: International Red Cross and Atheists |
08 Nov 2005 08:25:56 PM |
|
|
On Mon, 07 Nov 2005 22:00:19 GMT, in alt.atheism , Dubh Ghall
<puck@pooks.hill.fey> in <67ivm19oq69gb21qae35m1csjeubtsnijn@4ax.com>
wrote:
[snip]
Well, let me see. There is the land they stole off the Palestinians. Then
there is the murder of Palistinians.Knocking down their homes. Locking
Palestinians up in concent H^H^H^ sorry, looking after Palestinians in refugee
camps.
The concentration camps were set up by Syria and Egypt and Jordan and
Lebanon.
[snip]
--
Matt Silberstein
Do something today about the Darfur Genocide
http://www.beawitness.org
http://www.darfurgenocide.org
http://www.savedarfur.org
"Darfur: A Genocide We can Stop"
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Les Hellawell" |
|
| Title: Re: International Red Cross and Atheists |
06 Nov 2005 04:47:15 AM |
|
|
On Sat, 05 Nov 2005 22:38:40 GMT, Matt Silberstein
<RemoveThisPrefixmatts2nospam@ix.netcom.com> wrote:
On Sat, 05 Nov 2005 20:06:49 GMT, in alt.atheism , Dubh Ghall
<puck@pooks.hill.fey> in <974qm11dtegs3nl7qe6qk44erlbrq53g8c@4ax.com>
wrote:
On Sat, 05 Nov 2005 05:07:26 GMT, Matt Silberstein
<RemoveThisPrefixmatts2nospam@ix.netcom.com> wrote:
On Sat, 05 Nov 2005 03:47:34 GMT, in alt.atheism , Douglas Berry
<penguin_boy@mindOBVIOUSspring.com> in
<ckaom1ts9a4llj373cu1a7sbls6mjsnao9@4ax.com> wrote:
What's so funny about peace, love and "J Young"
<youngopinions@aol.com> posting the following on Fri, 4 Nov 2005
22:04:28 -0500 iin alt.atheism?
How does any person, so vehement in their dedication to Atheism, condone
within themselves to either offer help or accept help to an organization
that makes no pretentions about being a secular organization. This is not
called "Red X", as atheists love to refer to "X-ians" or "X-mas". How does
an atheist reconcile within themselves that they are donating or accepting
work that is being done in Christ's name?
My, but you are an idiot. The IRC symbol is the Swiss flag with the
colors reversed.
Here's the homepage of the IRC.. Show me where they state they are a
Christian organization. If you can do that, I will donate $50 to any
charity you name.
If you can't, you make a donation to the charity of my choice. Deal?
http://www.icrc.org/web/eng/siteeng0.nsf/iwpList2/Home?OpenDocument
Why do you think they reject the Israeli star then?
Because they are non religious, and non political.
The Israeli star, is both.
How is the Israeli star religious and political and the Moslem
crescent is not? Declaring your cross non-religious is sort of like
saying that the 10 commandments on a court wall is not religious and
that a creche on city hall property is non-religious. Waving your
hands does not make the symbolism go away. It was offensive in 1948 to
demand that Israelis adopt the use of the cross to be allowed to join
an organization. Particularly when Moslems are allowed to use a
crescent.
Are they 'allowed to' or are they an independant body? There is surely
nothing to stop the Jews from setting up their own aid charity and
calling it what they will?
Les Hellawell
Greetings from:
YORKSHIRE The White Rose County
.
|
|
|
| User: "Mike Painter" |
|
| Title: Re: International Red Cross and Atheists |
06 Nov 2005 01:32:02 PM |
|
|
Les Hellawell wrote:
Are they 'allowed to' or are they an independant body? There is surely
nothing to stop the Jews from setting up their own aid charity and
calling it what they will?
In CPR and First Aid the average Israeli citizen is about at the First
Responder level in EMS. Their EMS system works far better than ours in a
disaster situation and far more attention is paid to the individual.
Disaster relief and shelter operations are probably as good, if not better.
In any event how the RC does it is no secret and easy to implement,
something that is built into the "how" part.
Why they want to join the club without learning the secret handshake and
wearing the badge is beyond me. They don't need it.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Mike Painter" |
|
| Title: Re: International Red Cross and Atheists |
06 Nov 2005 05:56:59 PM |
|
|
Until this thread started I never saw any more religious significne in the
Red Cross symbol than I did in the plus sign.
I wonder if Israil uses 1 <star of david> = 2
.
|
|
|
| User: "Matt Silberstein" |
|
| Title: Re: International Red Cross and Atheists |
07 Nov 2005 08:41:08 AM |
|
|
On Sun, 06 Nov 2005 23:56:59 GMT, in alt.atheism , "Mike Painter"
<mddotpainter@sbcglobal.net> in
<fLwbf.25046$6e1.3648@newssvr14.news.prodigy.com> wrote:
Until this thread started I never saw any more religious significne in the
Red Cross symbol than I did in the plus sign.
I wonder if Israil uses 1 <star of david> = 2
That is the point here. Israel's relief organization is not allowed as
a full member of the International Committee of the Red Cross and Red
Crescent Societies because Israel uses the wrong religious symbol.
--
Matt Silberstein
Do something today about the Darfur Genocide
http://www.beawitness.org
http://www.darfurgenocide.org
http://www.savedarfur.org
"Darfur: A Genocide We can Stop"
.
|
|
|
| User: "Mike Painter" |
|
| Title: Re: International Red Cross and Atheists |
07 Nov 2005 07:18:10 PM |
|
|
Matt Silberstein wrote:
On Sun, 06 Nov 2005 23:56:59 GMT, in alt.atheism , "Mike Painter"
<mddotpainter@sbcglobal.net> in
<fLwbf.25046$6e1.3648@newssvr14.news.prodigy.com> wrote:
Until this thread started I never saw any more religious significne
in the Red Cross symbol than I did in the plus sign.
I wonder if Israil uses 1 <star of david> = 2
That is the point here. Israel's relief organization is not allowed as
a full member of the International Committee of the Red Cross and Red
Crescent Societies because Israel uses the wrong religious symbol.
And no again. If the Red Cross is a religious symbol then so is the plus
sign.
.
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: International Red Cross and Atheists |
07 Nov 2005 08:33:51 PM |
|
|
On 7-Nov-2005, "Mike Painter" <mddotpainter@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
Matt Silberstein wrote:
On Sun, 06 Nov 2005 23:56:59 GMT, in alt.atheism , "Mike Painter"
<mddotpainter@sbcglobal.net> in
<fLwbf.25046$6e1.3648@newssvr14.news.prodigy.com> wrote:
Until this thread started I never saw any more religious significne
in the Red Cross symbol than I did in the plus sign.
I wonder if Israil uses 1 <star of david> = 2
That is the point here. Israel's relief organization is not allowed as
a full member of the International Committee of the Red Cross and Red
Crescent Societies because Israel uses the wrong religious symbol.
And no again. If the Red Cross is a religious symbol then so is the plus
sign.
The minute they start calling it "The Red Plus Sign" I'll agree with you.
This was the most stupid "argument" you've raised so far.
Susan
.
|
|
|
| User: "Les Hellawell" |
|
| Title: Re: International Red Cross and Atheists |
08 Nov 2005 06:05:40 AM |
|
|
On Tue, 08 Nov 2005 02:33:51 GMT, wrote:
On 7-Nov-2005, "Mike Painter" <mddotpainter@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
Matt Silberstein wrote:
On Sun, 06 Nov 2005 23:56:59 GMT, in alt.atheism , "Mike Painter"
<mddotpainter@sbcglobal.net> in
<fLwbf.25046$6e1.3648@newssvr14.news.prodigy.com> wrote:
Until this thread started I never saw any more religious significne
in the Red Cross symbol than I did in the plus sign.
I wonder if Israil uses 1 <star of david> = 2
That is the point here. Israel's relief organization is not allowed as
a full member of the International Committee of the Red Cross and Red
Crescent Societies because Israel uses the wrong religious symbol.
And no again. If the Red Cross is a religious symbol then so is the plus
sign.
The minute they start calling it "The Red Plus Sign" I'll agree with you.
This was the most stupid "argument" you've raised so far.
Do you see the plus sign as a religious symbol? A symbol with
a relatively long horizontal stroke to a short vertical one
symmetrically arranged vertically and horizontally as opposed to a
cruci-fiction symbol which has a relatively short offset horizontal
stroke and a long vertical one and therefore vertically assymetrical.
Write the plus sign 10' tall and 10' wide do you then see it as a
religious symbol?
What if this 10x10 cross shaped plus sign is placed in a red
rectangle? Do you then see a religious symbol or a one that
is identical to a Swiss flag? You should go to Switzerland
they fly them from every vantage point and building since
they love their country and flag which represents to them liberty
and freedom. It has been flying thus for much longer than
the Stars and Stripes and unlike the Stars and Stripes has
never been changed. The Swiss seem to know that they
need not leave their country in order to defend it. the
last people to invade and threaten their liberty was the US
airforce who bombed it several times in 1944-45.
Invert the colours and immediately you cry, 'gotcha it is a religious
symbol' even though it looks like more like a plus sign than a
cruci- fiction cross.
Whatever you see, the Red cross was meant to be the Swiss flag
inverted, to indicate neutrality. That's what they meant it to mean
but because idiots like you see cruci-fiction crosses everywhere they
'are now having to consider changing it to clarify what it is intended
to mean.
Les Hellawell
Greetings from:
YORKSHIRE The White Rose County
.
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: International Red Cross and Atheists |
08 Nov 2005 07:26:22 AM |
|
|
On 8-Nov-2005, Les Hellawell <myshredder@leswell.freeuk.com> wrote:
On Tue, 08 Nov 2005 02:33:51 GMT, wrote:
On 7-Nov-2005, "Mike Painter" <mddotpainter@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
Matt Silberstein wrote:
On Sun, 06 Nov 2005 23:56:59 GMT, in alt.atheism , "Mike Painter"
<mddotpainter@sbcglobal.net> in
<fLwbf.25046$6e1.3648@newssvr14.news.prodigy.com> wrote:
Until this thread started I never saw any more religious significne
in the Red Cross symbol than I did in the plus sign.
I wonder if Israil uses 1 <star of david> = 2
That is the point here. Israel's relief organization is not allowed
as
a full member of the International Committee of the Red Cross and Red
Crescent Societies because Israel uses the wrong religious symbol.
And no again. If the Red Cross is a religious symbol then so is the
plus
sign.
The minute they start calling it "The Red Plus Sign" I'll agree with you.
This was the most stupid "argument" you've raised so far.
Do you see the plus sign as a religious symbol?
Is the thing on the RED CROSS flag called "The Red Plus Sign"?
A symbol with
a relatively long horizontal stroke to a short vertical one
symmetrically arranged vertically and horizontally as opposed to a
cruci-fiction symbol which has a relatively short offset horizontal
stroke and a long vertical one and therefore vertically assymetrical.
And there are religious crosses that are also saltires, and Maltese crosses.
Your disingenuousness (rest smipped) is pathetic.
Susan
.
|
|
|
| User: "Les Hellawell" |
|
| Title: Re: International Red Cross and Atheists |
08 Nov 2005 01:55:37 PM |
|
|
On Tue, 08 Nov 2005 13:26:22 GMT, wrote:
On 8-Nov-2005, Les Hellawell <myshredder@leswell.freeuk.com> wrote:
On Tue, 08 Nov 2005 02:33:51 GMT, wrote:
On 7-Nov-2005, "Mike Painter" <mddotpainter@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
Matt Silberstein wrote:
On Sun, 06 Nov 2005 23:56:59 GMT, in alt.atheism , "Mike Painter"
<mddotpainter@sbcglobal.net> in
<fLwbf.25046$6e1.3648@newssvr14.news.prodigy.com> wrote:
Until this thread started I never saw any more religious significne
in the Red Cross symbol than I did in the plus sign.
I wonder if Israil uses 1 <star of david> = 2
That is the point here. Israel's relief organization is not allowed
as
a full member of the International Committee of the Red Cross and Red
Crescent Societies because Israel uses the wrong religious symbol.
And no again. If the Red Cross is a religious symbol then so is the
plus
sign.
The minute they start calling it "The Red Plus Sign" I'll agree with you.
This was the most stupid "argument" you've raised so far.
Do you see the plus sign as a religious symbol?
Is the thing on the RED CROSS flag called "The Red Plus Sign"?
Does it look like a red plus sign? Have a look at a plus sign!
See any similarity?
A symbol with
a relatively long horizontal stroke to a short vertical one
symmetrically arranged vertically and horizontally as opposed to a
cruci-fiction symbol which has a relatively short offset horizontal
stroke and a long vertical one and therefore vertically assymetrical.
And there are religious crosses that are also saltires, and Maltese crosses.
Your disingenuousness (rest smipped) is pathetic.
What really matters is what it was intended to represent not what
people like you think it is meant to represent. You are the one seeing
a cruci-fiction there. All I see is an( inverted plus sign) like Swiss
flag meant to represent 'neutral'
Les Hellawell
Greetings from:
YORKSHIRE The White Rose County
.
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: International Red Cross and Atheists |
09 Nov 2005 01:07:05 AM |
|
|
On 8-Nov-2005, Les Hellawell <myshredder@leswell.freeuk.com> wrote:
On Tue, 08 Nov 2005 13:26:22 GMT, wrote:
On 8-Nov-2005, Les Hellawell <myshredder@leswell.freeuk.com> wrote:
On Tue, 08 Nov 2005 02:33:51 GMT, wrote:
On 7-Nov-2005, "Mike Painter" <mddotpainter@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
Matt Silberstein wrote:
On Sun, 06 Nov 2005 23:56:59 GMT, in alt.atheism , "Mike Painter"
<mddotpainter@sbcglobal.net> in
<fLwbf.25046$6e1.3648@newssvr14.news.prodigy.com> wrote:
Until this thread started I never saw any more religious
significne
in the Red Cross symbol than I did in the plus sign.
I wonder if Israil uses 1 <star of david> = 2
That is the point here. Israel's relief organization is not
allowed
as
a full member of the International Committee of the Red Cross and
Red
Crescent Societies because Israel uses the wrong religious symbol.
And no again. If the Red Cross is a religious symbol then so is the
plus
sign.
The minute they start calling it "The Red Plus Sign" I'll agree with
you.
This was the most stupid "argument" you've raised so far.
Do you see the plus sign as a religious symbol?
Is the thing on the RED CROSS flag called "The Red Plus Sign"?
Does it look like a red plus sign? Have a look at a plus sign!
See any similarity?
Your despration proves that even you know you are wrong.
Susan
.
|
|
|
| User: "Les Hellawell" |
|
| Title: Re: International Red Cross and Atheists |
09 Nov 2005 12:03:08 PM |
|
|
On Wed, 09 Nov 2005 07:07:05 GMT, wrote:
On 8-Nov-2005, Les Hellawell <myshredder@leswell.freeuk.com> wrote:
On Tue, 08 Nov 2005 13:26:22 GMT, wrote:
On 8-Nov-2005, Les Hellawell <myshredder@leswell.freeuk.com> wrote:
On Tue, 08 Nov 2005 02:33:51 GMT, wrote:
On 7-Nov-2005, "Mike Painter" <mddotpainter@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
Matt Silberstein wrote:
On Sun, 06 Nov 2005 23:56:59 GMT, in alt.atheism , "Mike Painter"
<mddotpainter@sbcglobal.net> in
<fLwbf.25046$6e1.3648@newssvr14.news.prodigy.com> wrote:
Until this thread started I never saw any more religious
significne
in the Red Cross symbol than I did in the plus sign.
I wonder if Israil uses 1 <star of david> = 2
That is the point here. Israel's relief organization is not
allowed
as
a full member of the International Committee of the Red Cross and
Red
Crescent Societies because Israel uses the wrong religious symbol.
And no again. If the Red Cross is a religious symbol then so is the
plus
sign.
The minute they start calling it "The Red Plus Sign" I'll agree with
you.
This was the most stupid "argument" you've raised so far.
Do you see the plus sign as a religious symbol?
Is the thing on the RED CROSS flag called "The Red Plus Sign"?
Does it look like a red plus sign? Have a look at a plus sign!
See any similarity?
Your despration proves that even you know you are wrong.
All I did was ask a question!
So you do not see any similarity between the Red Cross and the
plus sign?
You snipped my main poin,t that being the flag was not intended
to represent a cruci-fiction cross but neutrality. That you intepret
it as a cruci-fiction cross and thus that the Red Cross is using
a religious symbol is incorrect. As I say, it looks more like a
plus sign than it does a cruci-fiction cross, or do you also see
the plus sign as a religious symbol? Maybe you think adding
is godly and subtracting the converse - the devil's work. I don't
know you religious people do have some rather strange beliefs
after all.
Anyway the Red Cross has realised that its symbol is being
misreprented and are seriously considering changing it. I
agree they need to purge any association however tenuous
with religion.
Les Hellawell
Greetings from:
YORKSHIRE The White Rose County
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Mike Painter" |
|
| Title: Re: International Red Cross and Atheists |
07 Nov 2005 07:16:59 PM |
|
|
Matt Silberstein wrote:
On Sun, 06 Nov 2005 23:56:59 GMT, in alt.atheism , "Mike Painter"
<mddotpainter@sbcglobal.net> in
<fLwbf.25046$6e1.3648@newssvr14.news.prodigy.com> wrote:
Until this thread started I never saw any more religious significne
in the Red Cross symbol than I did in the plus sign.
I wonder if Israil uses 1 <star of david> = 2
That is the point here. Israel's relief organization is not allowed as
a full member of the International Committee of the Red Cross and Red
Crescent Societies because Israel uses the wrong religious symbol.
No. The point is that "Israel's relief organization is not allowed as a
full member of the International Committee of the Red Cross and Red
Crescent Societies because Israel" did not get their symbol recognized by
the Geneva Convention and you have to use a recognized symbol to be a member
of the Red Cross.
It's a rule and if you want to join the club you have to follow the rules.
If Israel was serious about it they would be working with the people who are
responsible for the Geneva convention.
.
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: International Red Cross and Atheists |
07 Nov 2005 08:33:04 PM |
|
|
On 7-Nov-2005, "Mike Painter" <mddotpainter@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
Matt Silberstein wrote:
On Sun, 06 Nov 2005 23:56:59 GMT, in alt.atheism , "Mike Painter"
<mddotpainter@sbcglobal.net> in
<fLwbf.25046$6e1.3648@newssvr14.news.prodigy.com> wrote:
Until this thread started I never saw any more religious significne
in the Red Cross symbol than I did in the plus sign.
I wonder if Israil uses 1 <star of david> = 2
That is the point here. Israel's relief organization is not allowed as
a full member of the International Committee of the Red Cross and Red
Crescent Societies because Israel uses the wrong religious symbol.
No. The point is that "Israel's relief organization is not allowed as a
full member of the International Committee of the Red Cross and Red
Crescent Societies because Israel" did not get their symbol recognized by
the Geneva Convention and you have to use a recognized symbol to be a
member
of the Red Cross.
You do realize that this circular logic is fooling only you?
Susan
It's a rule and if you want to join the club you have to follow the rules.
If Israel was serious about it they would be working with the people who
are
responsible for the Geneva convention.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: International Red Cross and Atheists |
07 Nov 2005 02:49:10 AM |
|
|
On 6-Nov-2005, Les Hellawell <myshredder@leswell.freeuk.com> wrote:
How is the Israeli star religious and political and the Moslem
crescent is not? Declaring your cross non-religious is sort of like
saying that the 10 commandments on a court wall is not religious and
that a creche on city hall property is non-religious. Waving your
hands does not make the symbolism go away. It was offensive in 1948 to
demand that Israelis adopt the use of the cross to be allowed to join
an organization. Particularly when Moslems are allowed to use a
crescent.
Are they 'allowed to' or are they an independant body?
They are allowed to. That's the entire point.
There is surely
nothing to stop the Jews from setting up their own aid charity and
calling it what they will?
Which is precisely what they are doing, but Israeli thinking is that they
should not be denied membership on a false basis.
I agree with them on principle, but, given the choice, would thumb my
nose at the bastards & go my own way.
Susan
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Dubh Ghall" |
|
| Title: Re: International Red Cross and Atheists |
06 Nov 2005 08:18:19 AM |
|
|
On Sun, 06 Nov 2005 10:47:15 +0000, Les Hellawell
<myshredder@leswell.freeuk.com> wrote:
Are they 'allowed to' or are they an independant body? There is surely
nothing to stop the Jews from setting up their own aid charity and
calling it what they will?
IMFFHO
They want the appearance of "respectability(?)", and neutrality, that the aegis
of the Red Cross, and the Red Crescent, would give them.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Matt Silberstein" |
|
| Title: Re: International Red Cross and Atheists |
06 Nov 2005 04:28:35 PM |
|
|
On Sun, 06 Nov 2005 10:47:15 +0000, in alt.atheism , Les Hellawell
<myshredder@leswell.freeuk.com> in
<rlnrm1t4b7fhvlq0g80j7i52h038m1eb16@4ax.com> wrote:
[snip]
Are they 'allowed to' or are they an independant body? There is surely
nothing to stop the Jews from setting up their own aid charity and
calling it what they will?
The International Committee of the Red Cross and Red Crescent Society
refuses to allow Mogen David Adon as a full member because only the
Cross and the Crescent are acceptable symbols. No religion involved,
of course.
--
Matt Silberstein
Do something today about the Darfur Genocide
http://www.beawitness.org
http://www.darfurgenocide.org
http://www.savedarfur.org
"Darfur: A Genocide We can Stop"
.
|
|
|
| User: "Mike Painter" |
|
| Title: Re: International Red Cross and Atheists |
06 Nov 2005 05:53:26 PM |
|
|
Matt Silberstein wrote:
On Sun, 06 Nov 2005 10:47:15 +0000, in alt.atheism , Les Hellawell
<myshredder@leswell.freeuk.com> in
<rlnrm1t4b7fhvlq0g80j7i52h038m1eb16@4ax.com> wrote:
[snip]
Are they 'allowed to' or are they an independant body? There is
surely nothing to stop the Jews from setting up their own aid
charity and calling it what they will?
The International Committee of the Red Cross and Red Crescent Society
refuses to allow Mogen David Adon as a full member because only the
Cross and the Crescent are acceptable symbols. No religion involved,
of course.
The reason they don't allow it is because it is NOT RECOGNIZED by the Geneva
convention. The cross and the crescent is. The crescent exists because Islam
had the same silly idea about the cross that Israel does, they just took the
proper channel and had the crescent recognized.
.
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: International Red Cross and Atheists |
07 Nov 2005 02:50:46 AM |
|
|
On 6-Nov-2005, "Mike Painter" <mddotpainter@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
Matt Silberstein wrote:
The International Committee of the Red Cross and Red Crescent Society
refuses to allow Mogen David Adon as a full member because only the
Cross and the Crescent are acceptable symbols. No religion involved,
of course.
The reason they don't allow it is because it is NOT RECOGNIZED by the
Geneva
convention. The cross and the crescent is. The crescent exists because
Islam
had the same silly idea about the cross that Israel does, they just took
the
proper channel and had the crescent recognized.
Thanks for expounding on Matt's point that it's all religiouos bigotry.
Susan
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Uncle Vic" |
|
| Title: Re: International Red Cross and Atheists |
05 Nov 2005 02:12:22 PM |
|
|
on 04 Nov 2005 in alt.atheism, dear sweet J Young
(youngopinions@aol.com) made the light shine upon us with this:
How does any person, so vehement in their dedication to Atheism,
condone within themselves to either offer help or accept help to an
organization that makes no pretentions about being a secular
organization. This is not called "Red X", as atheists love to refer
to "X-ians" or "X-mas". How does an atheist reconcile within
themselves that they are donating or accepting work that is being
done in Christ's name?
The red cross came from the Swedish flag, dummy.
--
Uncle Vic
aa#2011
Supervisor, EAC Department of little adhesive-backed "L" shaped
chrome-plastic doo-dads to add feet to Jesus fish department
----
"The world is only 5-6 thousand years old does not mean the planet
earth is only 5-6 thousand years old. There have been many worlds
created and destroyed on this planet. The creation of the planet is
described in Genesis 1. The creation of the world is described in
Genesis 2. Two different kind of creations." --Eric Brze
.
|
|
|
| User: "Goodness Godless" |
|
| Title: Re: International Red Cross and Atheists |
06 Nov 2005 08:43:00 AM |
|
|
The Inversion of the Swiss Flag. Are U a Wanky?
"Uncle Vic" <address@withheld.com> wrote in message
news:Xns97057C707774Cvicman@127.0.0.1...
on 04 Nov 2005 in alt.atheism, dear sweet J Young
(youngopinions@aol.com) made the light shine upon us with this:
How does any person, so vehement in their dedication to Atheism,
condone within themselves to either offer help or accept help to an
organization that makes no pretentions about being a secular
organization. This is not called "Red X", as atheists love to refer
to "X-ians" or "X-mas". How does an atheist reconcile within
themselves that they are donating or accepting work that is being
done in Christ's name?
The red cross came from the Swedish flag, dummy.
--
Uncle Vic
aa#2011
Supervisor, EAC Department of little adhesive-backed "L" shaped
chrome-plastic doo-dads to add feet to Jesus fish department
----
"The world is only 5-6 thousand years old does not mean the planet
earth is only 5-6 thousand years old. There have been many worlds
created and destroyed on this planet. The creation of the planet is
described in Genesis 1. The creation of the world is described in
Genesis 2. Two different kind of creations." --Eric Brze
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Uncle Vic" |
|
| Title: Re: International Red Cross and Atheists |
05 Nov 2005 02:13:48 PM |
|
|
on 05 Nov 2005 in alt.atheism, dear sweet Uncle Vic (address@withheld.com)
made the light shine upon us with this:
on 04 Nov 2005 in alt.atheism, dear sweet J Young
(youngopinions@aol.com) made the light shine upon us with this:
How does any person, so vehement in their dedication to Atheism,
condone within themselves to either offer help or accept help to an
organization that makes no pretentions about being a secular
organization. This is not called "Red X", as atheists love to refer
to "X-ians" or "X-mas". How does an atheist reconcile within
themselves that they are donating or accepting work that is being
done in Christ's name?
The red cross came from the Swedish flag, dummy.
er... Swiss. <blush>
--
Uncle Vic
aa#2011
Supervisor, EAC Department of little adhesive-backed "L" shaped
chrome-plastic doo-dads to add feet to Jesus fish department
----
"The world is only 5-6 thousand years old does not mean the planet
earth is only 5-6 thousand years old. There have been many worlds
created and destroyed on this planet. The creation of the planet is
described in Genesis 1. The creation of the world is described in
Genesis 2. Two different kind of creations." --Eric Brze
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
