On 5-Nov-2005, "Mark K. Bilbo" <alt-atheism@org.webmaster> wrote:

In <16spm1td4llcu4hrhlngcn3tr0035csjih@4ax.com>, Matt Silberstein
<RemoveThisPrefixmatts2nospam@ix.netcom.com> wrote:

On Sat, 05 Nov 2005 08:28:50 -0600, in alt.atheism , "Mark K. Bilbo"
<alt-atheism@org.webmaster> in <dOedneYOxLkRXPHeRVn-pw@megapath.net>
wrote:

In <eJqdnZmp1elZvPHeRVn-gw@giganews.com>, "J Young"
<youngopinions@aol.com> wrote:

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 Swede Henry Dunant is the Christ? I did not know that.

By the way, the Red Cross movement is gearing up to dump the symbol:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_Cross_%28symbol%29

That would be nice. Then they might let Israel join as a full member.

Come on, the Israelis are just being bratty about this one.

Huh?
Even if that were true, then why should *they* be labelled as brats &
*not* the Muslims, who *have* been allowed to have their own religious
symbol *&* who have lied that the Jewish Star is a "political symbol" in
order to keep Israel out?

Yes, if you go back *centuries, the origins of the Swiss flag involve
Christianity. But the IRC symbol was done to honor their founder who was
Swiss. Not to indicate the organization was "Christian."

Which doesn'tchange the fasct that it is a Xian symbol, & that the Red
Cross *acknowledged* it as such when they allowed the Islamic countries to
change it for their own countries.

Muslims have historical reasons for being upset over a bunch of people
marching in with what *looks to be--even if not intended--a Christian
cross.

And Jews DON'T??

Of course you know what I mean.

Yes, you mean the Crusades.
We mean not only the Crusades (they weren't killing just Muslims) as well
as the Inquisition, which was more recent than the Crusades.

Now, the IRC could spend all day
trying to convince people that's not what they mean or they could
concede a relatively minor point and get on with saving lives.

Why is it relatively minor when dealing with Muslim countries, but "Israel
is being bratty"?

Israel is a Westernized, educated country that can know better. Sounds
to me like somebody's determined to take offense. Well, fine. Let 'em.
If they can't be grown ups... shrug.

If someone's not being a grown-up, it's not the Israelis.

On Sat, 05 Nov 2005 12:47:15 -0600, in alt.atheism , "Mark K. Bilbo"
<alt-atheism@org.webmaster> in
<7rednUvhGOmAY_HenZ2dnUVZ_sqdnZ2d@megapath.net> wrote:

In <16spm1td4llcu4hrhlngcn3tr0035csjih@4ax.com>, Matt Silberstein
<RemoveThisPrefixmatts2nospam@ix.netcom.com> wrote:

On Sat, 05 Nov 2005 08:28:50 -0600, in alt.atheism , "Mark K. Bilbo"
<alt-atheism@org.webmaster> in <dOedneYOxLkRXPHeRVn-pw@megapath.net>
wrote:

In <eJqdnZmp1elZvPHeRVn-gw@giganews.com>, "J Young"
<youngopinions@aol.com> wrote:

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 Swede Henry Dunant is the Christ? I did not know that.

By the way, the Red Cross movement is gearing up to dump the symbol:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_Cross_%28symbol%29

That would be nice. Then they might let Israel join as a full member.

Come on, the Israelis are just being bratty about this one.

Yes, if you go back *centuries, the origins of the Swiss flag involve
Christianity. But the IRC symbol was done to honor their founder who was
Swiss. Not to indicate the organization was "Christian."

And, yet, they won't let the Jews use the star, they demand they use a
cross. It sure is bratty for Israelis to not want to carry a cross.

Muslims have historical reasons for being upset over a bunch of people
marching in with what *looks to be--even if not intended--a Christian
cross.

But Jews don't?

Of course you know what I mean. Now, the IRC could spend all day trying
to convince people that's not what they mean or they could concede a
relatively minor point and get on with saving lives.

Israel is a Westernized, educated country that can know better. Sounds to
me like somebody's determined to take offense. Well, fine. Let 'em. If
they can't be grown ups... shrug.

It's unfortunate reality that the Muslim world is largely still third
world without the educational advantages the first world has.
Hopefully--for all our sakes--that will change over time. But what is,
just is. You could expend your efforts on trying to explain to
upset--and, yes, mistaken--people or you can make a trivial change and
get on with it.

I see. We have to cut some slack for the poor ignorant Moslems, but not
for the smart Jews.

If the Israelis want to stomp their little feets and have their own
symbol and organization, fine. But I find it childish. And, actually, we
don't know that's the general opinion or just some faction having a
tantrum. Do we?

Wow, bratty and stomp and little and childish. It is a good thing you are
trying to keep this logical and objective.

As a Westernized, educated atheist in a first world country, I would take
help from the Red Cross without squabbling over their symbol. Hell, I
could have been in the position where I would have had to take help from
them had Katrina not jogged to the East at the last minute. I wouldn't
have given a thought to their symbol, it's origin, it's meaning, none of
that.

And see no reason a Westernized, educated Israeli in a first world
country can't just easily do the same.

On 5-Nov-2005, "Mike Painter" <mddotpainter@sbcglobal.net> wrote:

By the way, the Red Cross movement is gearing up to dump the
symbol:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_Cross_%28symbol%29

That would be nice. Then they might let Israel join as a full
member.

"Until now, Israel's Star of David Society, or Magem David Adom
(MDA), has

only had observer status in the IFRC because its symbol - the Star of
David - is not recognised under Geneva Conventions. "

If Israel refuses to use, in a war zone, what is recognized under the
convention I would not want to be a member of the Red Cross there.

So I suppose you are against the Red Crescent, to, hmm?
Or is it only Israel that has to knuckle under to even subsconscious
Xian supremacy?

Frankly, I have no idea why Israel *wants to be a member of the Red
Cross. Not just because of the way they have been treated, or even
because of the way the Red Cross certified the camps "humane", but
because
of the way the Red Cross allows the PLO to use their ambulances for
transporting bombs & terrorists.