Columbine Article--Dad Cuts Down Killers' Crosses
Maggie8097
Dad cuts down killers' crosses
Markers for Columbine gunmen don't belong in memorial, father of slain student
says
By Lynn Bartels and Dina Bunn
Denver Rocky Mountain News Staff Writers
------------------------------------------------------------------------
The family of slain Columbine student Daniel Rohrbough on Friday destroyed two
crosses that had been erected in memory of the boy's killers.
"I don't think any thinking person in this country is going to going to
disgaree with me," said Brian Rohrbough, the father of 15-year-old Daniel.
"We never ever honor a murderer in the same place as the memorial for his
victims."
Crosses for the 13 victims and the two gunmen were erected at Clement Park this
week.
Rohrbough, 40, said the family took the gunmen's crosses "to a better place."
They were cut up and destroyed, he said.
It was an outrage that a Christian symbol was being used to honor Eric Harris,
18, and Dylan Klebold, 17, Rohrbough said.
Rohrbough and Daniel's stepfather, Rich Petrone, along with Daniel's
grandfather, tore down the crosses.
Most bystanders agreed with the action, Rohrbough said.
It began Thursday, Rohrbough said, when police took down signs that his family
had placed on the gunmen's crosses. The family asked the Jefferson County
Sheriff's Department to relocate the crosses, but nothing happened.
The Illinois carpenter who built the crosses had said earlier Friday that he
wanted to include the teen-age killers in his memorial.
"They had a mom and a dad," said Greg Zanis. "They had friends. I think
everyone has lost here."
Zanis has been planting crosses for victims of violent deaths for 21/2 years.
He estimates he has built almost 200 crosses in nine states.
"It's very important for a family member of a victim to go to the last place a
family member was alive," said Zanis, whose father-in-law was murdered in 1996.
Zanis first built a cross for Sandy Contreras, the mother of a 6-year-old who
was killed in a drive-by shooting. Then he put one up for his father-in-law.
People started asking him to erect crosses for their loved ones.
Zanis said Brian Anderson, a junior who survived the April 20 rampage at
Columbine, asked whether he would put up crosses for the 12 students and the
teacher who were killed.
Zanis met Brian at Clement Park when he arrived with the crosses.
"He didn't say much," Zanis said. "He was was just sitting on the hill crying."
Zanis and his son, Chris, who had driven 16 hours straight from Illinois, took
out their shovels and headed to the top of the hill. People in the park helped
dig.
When they finished, Zanis and his son drove away.
"I didn't want to stick around for any media," Zanis said "I'm not a counselor.
I'm not a minister. I'm a carpenter."
May 1, 1999
Maggie
"You don't really understand human nature unless you know why a child on a
merry-go-round will wave at his parents every time around--and why his parents
will always wave back."--William D. Tammeus
Kris Baker
>"I don't think any thinking person in this country is going to going
>to disgaree with me," said Brian Rohrbough, the father of 15-
>year-old Daniel. "We never ever honor a murderer in the same
>place as the memorial for his victims."
One statement not included in the article referred to
separating right from wrong -- and I totally agree!
Kris
Sund/Pelosso website at:
<http://pages.prodigy.com/GMVY23A/sundtime.htm>
Patty
the gunmen lived, but even more so, the gunmen would not even be considered
victims of this massacre as some have made them out to be.
Maggie8097 wrote in message <19990501144913...@ng122.aol.com>...
>From the Rocky Mountain News:
>
>Dad cuts down killers' crosses
>Markers for Columbine gunmen don't belong in memorial, father of slain
student
>says
>By Lynn Bartels and Dina Bunn
>Denver Rocky Mountain News Staff Writers
>
>------------------------------------------------------------------------
>The family of slain Columbine student Daniel Rohrbough on Friday destroyed
two
>crosses that had been erected in memory of the boy's killers.
>"I don't think any thinking person in this country is going to going to
>disgaree with me," said Brian Rohrbough, the father of 15-year-old Daniel.
>"We never ever honor a murderer in the same place as the memorial for his
>victims."
KenK
wrote:
>From the Rocky Mountain News:
>
>Dad cuts down killers' crosses
>Markers for Columbine gunmen don't belong in memorial, father of slain student
>says
>By Lynn Bartels and Dina Bunn
>Denver Rocky Mountain News Staff Writers
>
>------------------------------------------------------------------------
>The family of slain Columbine student Daniel Rohrbough on Friday destroyed two
>crosses that had been erected in memory of the boy's killers.
Can't say i blame Danny's family very much!
kkramer
I wouldn't think of being a spoil sport.
What took him so long?
I particularly liked the comment under Eric Harris' photo "Satan" - before
it was removed.
Thanks for the update. There is some sanity in an otherwise crazy world.
Keith
Volfie
surprised to see that they had put 15 crosses up in the first place. That goes
to show you how far out in left field we've gone trying to be "politically
correct" -- honoring the murderers alongside the victims really is just to much
PC for my taste.
Volfie ->less PC, more CS please
KenK
wrote:
I saw an interview with Danny's Mom on Fox New channel via my Real
Player on the internet. He was a sweet and caring boy, who cared
about his parents and stepdad and many others. It moved me to tears!
He died....why because he was trying to help other kids. He is the
kind of son i would have wanted, if I had married. I wish i could
have met him in life, and not just in death.
Ken
Kris Baker
"They" (Littleton) didn't do it -- it was done by an outsider,
some guy (Greg Zanis) from Illinois who has some sort
of crusade going to memorialize crime victims. His
*intentions* are very understandable, as his father-in-
law was murdered a few years ago.
<http://insidedenver.com/shooting/0501cros3.shtml>
But....I don't agree with his "deciding for Littleton" how
many crosses should be there.
Initially, 13 white crosses were put up in the field near
the school - then someone added two black crosses (and
people in this very newsgroup complained about that!)
Ma Kettle
No wonder america is screwed up?
On 1 May 1999 19:09:51 GMT, JDK...@prodigy.com (Kris Baker) wrote:
>maggi...@aol.comSPAMBLOC (Maggie8097) wrote:
>
>>"I don't think any thinking person in this country is going to going
>>to disgaree with me," said Brian Rohrbough, the father of 15-
>>year-old Daniel. "We never ever honor a murderer in the same
>>place as the memorial for his victims."
>
> One statement not included in the article referred to
> separating right from wrong -- and I totally agree!
>
>
>
Ma Kettle
Don't stop know your killing me, with such thoughtfulness!
>"I don't think any thinking person in this country is going to going to
>disgaree with me," said Brian Rohrbough, the father of 15-year-old Daniel.
>"We never ever honor a murderer in the same place as the memorial for his
>victims."
Ma Kettle
how even good kids act when no one is around, and believe me,
the shooters were victims of society too!
On Sat, 1 May 1999 13:24:16 -0700, "Patty" <x...@lmn.com> wrote:
>I was bothered by those two crosses. Of course, they would not be there had
>the gunmen lived, but even more so, the gunmen would not even be considered
>victims of this massacre as some have made them out to be.
>
>Maggie8097 wrote in message <19990501144913...@ng122.aol.com>...
Maggie8097
>> From the Rocky Mountain News:
>>
>> Dad cuts down killers' crosses
>> Markers for Columbine gunmen don't belong in memorial, father of slain
>student
>> says
>> By Lynn Bartels and Dina Bunn
>> Denver Rocky Mountain News Staff Writers
>>
>Harris,
>> 18, and Dylan Klebold, 17, Rohrbough said.
>
>Well, I understand the father's pain but this sentence says it all for me
>regarding Mr. Rohrbough.
***What does it say? (This is a serious question.)
Volfie
>***What does it say? (This is a serious question.)
It took me a few read throughs to figure it out too but I think it's because of
the dreaded "Xtian" word.
Volfie -> I generally dread that word, too, but it didn't bother me in that
article. Oh well.
Every9man
From: "Dog3" <do...@mindspring.com>
> >Dad cuts down killers' crosses
> >Markers for Columbine gunmen don't belong in memorial, father of >>slain
>>tudent
>> says
>> By Lynn Bartels and Dina Bunn
>>Denver Rocky Mountain News Staff Writers
>>
>>t was an outrage that a Christian symbol was being used to honor Eric
>>Harris,
>> 18, and Dylan Klebold, 17, Rohrbough said.
>Well, I understand the father's pain but this sentence says it all for me
>regarding Mr. Rohrbough.
>Michael
Me too Michael. I thought Christianity was supposed to be about forgiveness,
not depriving ~sinners~ of a Christian burial.
Barb
lo...@webtv.net
his shoes,,,GOD FORBID.
It may not be Christian,,,but it may be human?
We also need compassion for all those who are grieving,,I think.
Maggie8097
>
>> >Dad cuts down killers' crosses
>> >Markers for Columbine gunmen don't belong in memorial, father of >>slain
>>>tudent
>>> says
>>> By Lynn Bartels and Dina Bunn
>>>Denver Rocky Mountain News Staff Writers
>>>
>>>t was an outrage that a Christian symbol was being used to honor Eric
>>>Harris,
>>> 18, and Dylan Klebold, 17, Rohrbough said.
>
>>Well, I understand the father's pain but this sentence says it all for
>me
>>regarding Mr. Rohrbough.
Barb said:
>Me too Michael. I thought Christianity was supposed to be about forgiveness,
>not depriving ~sinners~ of a Christian burial.
***Burial? huh? A little rest doesn't seem to have done you any good at all.
Read the article. No one is trying to deprive anyone of a Christian burial.
(p.s.--BTW, Christians believe that we are all sinners)
glas
|
| From: "Dog3" <do...@mindspring.com>
|
| > >Dad cuts down killers' crosses
| > >Markers for Columbine gunmen don't belong in memorial, father of
>>slain
| >>tudent
| >> says
| >> By Lynn Bartels and Dina Bunn
| >>Denver Rocky Mountain News Staff Writers
| >>
| >>t was an outrage that a Christian symbol was being used to honor Eric
| >>Harris,
| >> 18, and Dylan Klebold, 17, Rohrbough said.
|
| >regarding Mr. Rohrbough.
|
|
| Me too Michael. I thought Christianity was supposed to be about
forgiveness,
| not depriving ~sinners~ of a Christian burial.
Excuse me. Those crosses had absolutely nothing to do with a "Christian
burial". They are part of a memorial on the lawn of the school. A memorial
to the VICTIMS. Nothing to do with burial or Christian forgiveness - just a
memorial to 13 innocent people cut down in the prime of their lives. A place
where the other innocent victims - the families of the slain and their
friends - can go to seek a bit of peace.
Regardless of the motivation of these boys, they are not the victims here
and the father is right, we don't memorilze the murderers in the same spot
as their victims. Let them find a different hill for the crosses of the
murderers, they wanted to stand out and be set apart, wish granted.
glas
--
alt.true-crime WebSite and FAQ can be found here -
http://www.geocities.com/~alttruecrime/
The dumber people think you are,
The more surprised they'll be when you kill them
--- William Clayton
|
| Barb
|
|
|
|
|
kkramer
friends. John 15.13
Moms and dads do it everyday one for the other and for their children.
Sometimes friends do it one for the other.
Keith
KenK wrote in message 372c8c2d...@news.escape.ca
kkramer
You are making assumptions not in evidence. Human? What because they
walked on two feet? They are savages. Animals kill to eat. These animals
killed for the thrill.
We are thinking. God gave (some of) us brains. We are supposed to be
different, better, than animals.
To call Harris or Klebold animals INSULTS MY DOG.
Keith
lo...@webtv.net wrote in message
<19962-372...@newsd-121.bryant.webtv.net>...
Kris Baker
>Excuse me. Those crosses had absolutely nothing to do with a "Christian
>burial". They are part of a memorial on the lawn of the school. A
memorial
>to the VICTIMS. Nothing to do with burial or Christian forgiveness -
just a
>memorial to 13 innocent people cut down in the prime of their lives. A
place
>where the other innocent victims - the families of the slain and their
>friends - can go to seek a bit of peace.
>Regardless of the motivation of these boys, they are not the victims
here
>and the father is right, we don't memorilze the murderers in the same
spot
>as their victims. Let them find a different hill for the crosses of the
>murderers, they wanted to stand out and be set apart, wish granted.
>glas
Bravo, glas!
I think there's a lot of confusion about Judeo-Christian
forgiveness (which *we* can't give - it's up to God.)
A memorial site for victims is no place for memorials
"honoring" those who caused the victimization.
kkramer
kkramer
Every9man
From: JDK...@prodigy.com (Kris Baker)
"glas" <true...@donet.com> wrote:
> Bravo, glas!
>Kris
Without getting into a theological discussion of whether we humans are capable
of forgiving those who trespass against us let me just say that I consider
these two kids who were treated like pariahs, marginalized, and bullied too be
victims as well.
I am not equating the degree of ~victimhood~ here nor am I blaming the other
victims.
I think these kids were a product of a society that worships violence ,
protects bullies and doesnt do much in the area of investigating methods of
treatment for troubled kids such as these.
That said, I can see why some would think that it is tasteless to have the
memorial in the same place.
Barb
KenK
>Every9man posted in a.t-c ...
>|
>| From: "Dog3" <do...@mindspring.com>
>|
>| > >Dad cuts down killers' crosses
>| > >Markers for Columbine gunmen don't belong in memorial, father of
>>>slain
>| >>tudent
>| >> says
>| >> By Lynn Bartels and Dina Bunn
>| >>Denver Rocky Mountain News Staff Writers
>| >>
>| >>t was an outrage that a Christian symbol was being used to honor Eric
>| >>Harris,
>| >> 18, and Dylan Klebold, 17, Rohrbough said.
>|
>| >Well, I understand the father's pain but this sentence says it all for me
>| >regarding Mr. Rohrbough.
>|
>| >Michael
>|
>| Me too Michael. I thought Christianity was supposed to be about
>forgiveness,
>| not depriving ~sinners~ of a Christian burial.
>
>Excuse me. Those crosses had absolutely nothing to do with a "Christian
>burial". They are part of a memorial on the lawn of the school. A memorial
>to the VICTIMS. Nothing to do with burial or Christian forgiveness - just a
>memorial to 13 innocent people cut down in the prime of their lives. A place
>where the other innocent victims - the families of the slain and their
>friends - can go to seek a bit of peace.
>
>Regardless of the motivation of these boys, they are not the victims here
>and the father is right, we don't memorilze the murderers in the same spot
>as their victims. Let them find a different hill for the crosses of the
>murderers, they wanted to stand out and be set apart, wish granted.
>
>glas
I agree they should have been placed in another spot
Demona888
>
>Excuse me?
>
>You are making assumptions not in evidence. Human? What because they
>walked on two feet? They are savages. Animals kill to eat. These animals
>killed for the thrill.
>
>We are thinking. God gave (some of) us brains. We are supposed to be
>different, better, than animals.
>
>To call Harris or Klebold animals INSULTS MY DOG.
>
>Keith
People like you are one of the reasons I am no longer an Xian.
Hester
You cannot go against nature because when you do go against nature, it's part
of nature,too. -- Love & Rockets "No New Tale to Tell"
kkramer
I am in charge of me. You are in charge of you.
Keith
Demona888 wrote in message <19990502135915...@ng-cd1.aol.com>...
EVLART
the destruction of the crosses was a total contradiction to part of what
xianity is Supposed to be about: forgiveness.
Eric and Dylan probably wouldn't have wanted crosses as a memorial, however it
takes one hell of a lot of shit dumped on a person to drive them to
murder/suicide on such a scale. Hate is a flower that grows well in any soil
and kills anything in its path.
Rest in peace, Eric and Dylan.
Evlart
Kris Baker
>That's all fine and good. It was the victim's father that dragged
>Christianity into it.
How come -- weren't the crosses themselves a significant
"clue" of Christianity?
Maggie8097
>> >Well, I understand the father's pain but this sentence says it all for
>me
>> >regarding Mr. Rohrbough.
>>
>> ***What does it say? (This is a serious question.)
Michael said:
>First off, I believe those crosses should never have been put there to begin
>with. They should have been put somewhere else. That said, I think
>Rohrbough's statement was hypocritical. Since when are symbols of
>Christianity reserved for victims only ? Even people on the way to the
>gas
>chamber are given last rights if they want.
***But are the priests required to administer those rites in the presence of
the killer's victims?
You snipped the sentence you objected to, but here it is:
> It was an outrage that a Christian symbol was being used to honor Eric
Harris,
> 18, and Dylan Klebold, 17, Rohrbough said.
I think you're asking an awful lot of a grieving father if you expect him not
to object to his son's killer being honored in the same way his son is honored.
And, as a matter of fact, since there is a *commandment* against killing, it
seems entirely appropriate to me for Mr. Rohrbough to point out that perhaps
the most sacred symbol of Christianity is not an appropriate memorial to two
people who have so egregiously broken a pretty major commandment.
Maggie8097
>> I think you're asking an awful lot of a grieving father if you expect
>him
>not
>> to object to his son's killer being honored in the same way his son is
>honored.
>> And, as a matter of fact, since there is a *commandment* against killing,
>it
>> seems entirely appropriate to me for Mr. Rohrbough to point out that
>perhaps
>> the most sacred symbol of Christianity is not an appropriate memorial
>to
>two
>> people who have so egregiously broken a pretty major commandment.
Michael said:
>You're missing the point. The father had every right to object to the
>killers being honored in the same *place* as his dead son. He has no right
>to dictate what *symbols* are used to honor the killers, or anyone else
>for
>that matter.
***Michael, I'm not missing the point. I simply disagree with you. You say no
one has the right to dictate what symbols are used to honor the killers and I
say that's hogwash. We're talking about crosses erected in a public park--not
on a gravesite or in a home. The crosses were erected on public property and
all the taxpayers in the jurisdiction have the right to agree or object.
Michael said:
Christianity and it's symbols belong to anyone that wants
>to
>embrace it and God is supposedly the final judge.
***If you could convince me that God erected those two crosses, I'd have to
agree with you. The fact, though, is that a human erected the crosses on
public land. Another human removed them. The person who removed him had as
much right to do that as the person who erected them.
Michael said:
What do you think would
>be an appropriate memorial for Harris and Klebold ?
***I think a public memorial for either Harris or Klebold is inappropriate in
the extreme. Their families are, of course, free to memorialize them in any
way they desire--on their own property.
kkramer
Keith
Dog3 wrote in message <7gil44$tuv$1...@nntp5.atl.mindspring.net>...
kkramer
An upside down cross with the word "Satan".
Thanks for asking.
Keith
Dog3 wrote in message <7gj9fg$ca1$1...@nntp3.atl.mindspring.net>...
snip
kkramer
I thought this was AMERICA and a ng at that...
Keith
Dog3 wrote in message <7giii1$5t4$1...@nntp5.atl.mindspring.net>...
>That's all fine and good. It was the victim's father that dragged
>Christianity into it. Putting the 2 additional crosses there may have been
>in bad taste or poor judgement and I certainly understand wanting them
taken
>down. Just don't go spouting off about symbols of Christianity while
you're
>doing it. I find that very hypocritical.
kkramer
God is a just God. Christianity teaches you about what each one of us
justly has coming and how to avoid it.
Keith
EVLART wrote in message <19990502182425...@ng-ce1.aol.com>...
glas
| Butting in here, appropriate under the circumstances?
|
| An upside down cross with the word "Satan".
|
| Thanks for asking.
You give Christians a bad name.
"Judge not, Lest ye be judged."
glas
--
alt.true-crime WebSite and FAQ can be found here -
http://www.geocities.com/~alttruecrime/
The dumber people think you are,
The more surprised they'll be when you kill them
--- William Clayton
|
| Keith
|
|
|
Laura Burchard
Something the father in question might wanna think about given that he's
so hot on Christianity. I'm sympathetic with his first impulse to cut them
down; I'm not going to tell a dad whose only child was shot down by
giggling killers that he has to do anything but hate them. I may
understand them all too uncomfortably well myself, but he's the one with
the dead kid.
But like Michael, I think he's got the right to criticize the place, but
not the symbols. I'm not a Christian, but everything I know about it says
that it is concerned with both the killers and the killed. And when the
carpenter who erected them (who spends a great deal of his time going
around the country putting up crosses to memoralize victims of violence)
went back and took them all down, unhappy at the controversy and
divisiveness, he said lovely things like "I question his motives. His
agenda was to create problems. To have their crosses mixed in with their
victims' is completely evil."
Calling someone else's clearly heartfelt, if different, interpretation of
Christianity evil... well, I don't think I'd have liked Mr. Rohrbough very
much even if I had met him before the killings.
Someone replaced them with one large cross, which hopefully will allow
everyone to put their own interpretation on it, and therefore keep
everyone happy.
Laura
Laura Burchard -- l...@radix.net -- http://www.radix.net/~lhb
X-Review: http://traveller.simplenet.com/xfiles/episode.htm
"Good design is clear thinking made visible." -- Edward Tufte
Every9man
From: "kkramer" <kkr...@2xtreme.net>
Butting in here, appropriate under the circumstances?
An upside down cross with the word "Satan".
Thanks for asking.
Keith
Thank you for your time and consideration. With God's love , we deliver Satan
to punish the wicked:)
Barb
Every9man
>From: "Dog3" <do...@mindspring.com>
>
>> >Dad cuts down killers' crosses
>> >Markers for Columbine gunmen don't belong in memorial, father of >>slain
>>>tudent
>>> says
>>> By Lynn Bartels and Dina Bunn
>>>Denver Rocky Mountain News Staff Writers
>>>
>>>t was an outrage that a Christian symbol was being used to honor Eric
>>>Harris,
>>> 18, and Dylan Klebold, 17, Rohrbough said.
>
Michael said:
>>Well, I understand the father's pain but this sentence says it all for
>me
>>regarding Mr. Rohrbough.
Barb said:
>Me too Michael. I thought Christianity was supposed to be about forgiveness,
>not depriving ~sinners~ of a Christian burial.
***Burial? huh? A little rest doesn't seem to have done you any good at all.
Read the article. No one is trying to deprive anyone of a Christian burial.
(p.s.--BTW, Christians believe that we are all sinners)
Maggie
I read it Maggie, I just expressed it badly. Let me reword. I thought
Christianity was supposed to be about forgiveness,
not depriving ~sinners~ of a Christian memorial.
Barb
lo...@webtv.net
Harris' and Klebolds crosses,,,,,I meant that it might be a human thing
to do.
I think we cannot judge what this bereaved Dad did as most of us have
NOT walked in his shoes...thank God.
I hope the anger eventually goes away,,,but I , for one,,,can just
imagine how it would be to lose a son or daughter in that horrible
fashion.
I was not saying,,,jst for the record,,,,in any way,,,shape or form
that what those 2 did was human,,,It was the epitome of tragedy.
Ma Kettle
wrote:
>As Jesus said, "Let the dead bury the dead."
>
>Keith
>
>
>
>Dog3 wrote in message <7gil44$tuv$1...@nntp5.atl.mindspring.net>...
>
>
He also said, "judge NOT, lest ye be judged".
bbcr...@my-dejanews.com
those crosses. I think that those two killers snuffed out their own futures
and hurt their own families severely. I don't think anyone can argue with
that statement. It's sad that people can't recognize that crime, and the act
of committing a crime, really hurts the person who commits the crime. I
mean, if every criminal took into account how much they would be personally
hurt before committing any crime then there would be less crime (that's 90%
of the idea behind the death penalty, right, prevention?). In the same way
that this father acted with indignant rage in cutting down the crosses, some
other person is vandalizing some other piece of property they don't own with
similar feelings of indignancy, and most thinking people would recognize
that, to paraphrase Mr. Rorabaugh.
I mean, there are people who committed suicide whose names appear on the
Vietnam Wall and it's ridiculous to not realize that everyone who dies
violently is not a victim of violence, just some are innocent and some are
not. It was too magnanimous a gesture to memorialize the two shooters and
obviously that town is not ready to forgive some very screwed up 18 yr olds.
In article <19990501144913...@ng122.aol.com>,
maggi...@aol.comSPAMBLOC (Maggie8097) wrote:
> From the Rocky Mountain News:
>
> Dad cuts down killers' crosses
> Markers for Columbine gunmen don't belong in memorial, father of slain student
> says
> By Lynn Bartels and Dina Bunn
> Denver Rocky Mountain News Staff Writers
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> The family of slain Columbine student Daniel Rohrbough on Friday destroyed two
> crosses that had been erected in memory of the boy's killers.
> "I don't think any thinking person in this country is going to going to
> disgaree with me," said Brian Rohrbough, the father of 15-year-old Daniel.
> "We never ever honor a murderer in the same place as the memorial for his
> victims."...
-----------== Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ==----------
http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Discuss, or Start Your Own
MS
>
> Christianity is about justice.
>
> God is a just God. Christianity teaches you about what each one of us
> justly has coming and how to avoid it.
>
"This is the first and great commandment. Thou shalt love the Lord thy
God with all thy heart, and all thy soul, and all thy mind. And the
second is like unto it: Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself. On
these two hang all the Laws and the Prophets."
*That* is what Christianity is "all about."
Martha
Ins...@ret.com
better to say "CONVICT NOT, LEST YE BE CONVICTED. Everyone makes judgments
everyday. I judge my time for work to be not enough; I judge my garden to
be dry.. etc. That is a judgment. There is nothing WRONG with judgment..
everyone MAKES judgments every day of their lives. It is what you DO with
that judgment that makes the difference.
We can JUDGE what the gunman did to be wrong. We can judge the victims, on
our presumptions, to be INNOCENT. We can judge anything we want. It is
when we make a CONVICTIONS that all goes awry! And ultimately, since the
killes are dead, it makes no DIFFERENCE what our convictions are, viewed in
a Xian way. It is THEY that must account to their Creator for taking the
actions that they did.
Ma Kettle <M...@truth.com> wrote in message
news:372dbf60...@news.koyote.com...
lilr...@my-dejanews.com
> I think the man showed considerable restraint in waiting this long. I was
> surprised to see that they had put 15 crosses up in the first place. That
goes
> to show you how far out in left field we've gone trying to be "politically
> correct" -- honoring the murderers alongside the victims really is just to
much
> PC for my taste.
>
> Volfie ->less PC, more CS please
This isn't being PC this is being compassionate and forgiving even for the
perpetrators. Obivously the parents have a lot of hate in them for what has
happened. Someday that hate will pass or it will kill them too. I don't blame
them for being hateful, but I don't believe in perpetuating hate for anyone or
anything. It absolutely serves no purpose. Not everyone wants to or will
understand that.
lilratbag
glas
|
| ***Burial? huh? A little rest doesn't seem to have done you any good at
all.
| Read the article. No one is trying to deprive anyone of a Christian
burial.
| (p.s.--BTW, Christians believe that we are all sinners)
|
|
|
| Maggie
|
| I read it Maggie, I just expressed it badly. Let me reword. I thought
| Christianity was supposed to be about forgiveness,
| not depriving ~sinners~ of a Christian memorial.
Nobody is depriving Eric Harris or Dylan Klebold of anything. They can have
all the Christian memorials they want just not right next to the ones in
memory of the people they cut down in cold blood.
Get a grip.
glas
--
alt.true-crime WebSite and FAQ can be found here -
http://www.geocities.com/~alttruecrime/
The dumber people think you are,
The more surprised they'll be when you kill them
--- William Clayton
|
| Barb
NCr1509660
>From: vol...@aol.comPackQ1 (Volfie)
>Date: 5/2/99 12:52 AM Eastern Daylight Time
>Message-id: <19990502005255...@ng-fd1.aol.com>
>
>Maggie asked:
>
>>***What does it say? (This is a serious question.)
>
>of
>the dreaded "Xtian" word.
>
>Volfie -> I generally dread that word, too, but it didn't bother me in that
>article. Oh well.
I thought the father objected to the killers' being represented on the same
hill as the victims. As a Christian, he did not object to the crosses, but the
location of them together with the victims' crosses. As an agnostic who avoids
the A-A word, I understand his not wanting those two crosses on the same
memorial site. At least one boy, Harris, was an A-A. Afterall, the most
dreaded word in this entire scenario is KILLER.
NCr1509660
>
>You give Christians a bad name.
>
>"Judge not, Lest ye be judged."
>
So, glas, you write the commemorative for the murdering boys - quote from
Jesus. Yet, every mind is reeling in trying to appoint blame and cause, and
every one here is judging. Because everyday, in everyway, we are judgemental,
weighing either/or, to be or not to be, and what should have been. You are
almost as judgemental as I am. God, if he is any kind of God at all, doesn't
want lame brains who cannot discern what a commandment means.
Maggie8097
>I thought the father objected to the killers' being represented on the same
>hill as the victims. As a Christian, he did not object to the crosses,
>but the
>location of them together with the victims' crosses. As an agnostic who
>avoids
>the A-A word, I understand his not wanting those two crosses on the same
>memorial site. At least one boy, Harris, was an A-A. Afterall, the most
>dreaded word in this entire scenario is KILLER.
***Alcoholics Anonymous? African American? Australian Aborigine?
Administrative Assistant?
kkramer
You need to use common sense. Common sense tells me that I don't have to
forgive someone who doesn't ask for forgiveness and show repentance.
If you don't forgive, you won't be forgiven. But, you must be asked and you
must demand CHANGE. No one in this matter has shown repentance or requested
forgiveness that I am aware. I haven't heard enough soon enough from
Klebolds. And I have seen and heard anything from Harrises except their
demand for immunity. That's enough!!
Keith
glas wrote in message ...
snip
kkramer
Keith
Laura Burchard wrote in message <7gk3e4$qnj$1...@saltmine.radix.net>...
kkramer
our lives.
Unfortunately, these murderous animals chose an eternity in Hell. Don't
believe in hell? It's still there and many are still going.
Keith
Every9man wrote in message <19990503082712...@ng-ca1.aol.com>...
kkramer
You had better!
Keith
Ma Kettle wrote in message <372dbf60...@news.koyote.com>...
kkramer
Can't you screw things up, misquote, take things out of context to justify
stupidity?
Me either.
Keith
Ins...@Ret.Com wrote in message ...
kkramer
1 Someone asking for forgiveness; and
2 Repentance <turning away from the wrongful conduct>.
If there isn't a change in behavior <repentance> and you nevertheless
forgive, you become part of the errant action. You ratify the sin. You
cannot do that.
Keith
Every9man wrote in message <19990503082917...@ng-ca1.aol.com>...
kkramer
You quoted only one of the Ten Commandments from the Old Testament.
You forgot THOU SHALT NOT KILL. Killing your co-student is not loving your
neighbor as thyself as required under the New Testament.
Keith
MS wrote in message <372DC6...@erols.com>...
glas
Unintelligible as ever.
Speaking in tongues again Nan? I'll get back to you after I dig out my
decoder ring.
Lars Eighner
the lovely and talented "kkramer" <kkr...@2xtreme.net>
broadcast on alt.true-crime:
|We all live our lives and we live with the consequences of decisions during
|our lives.
|
|Unfortunately, these murderous animals chose an eternity in Hell. Don't
|believe in hell? It's still there and many are still going.
|
|Keith
You are the kind of nut case that causes these things to happen. The
world will start to heal when the religious mumbo-jumbo stops.
--
Lars Eighner 700 Hearn #101 Austin TX 78703 eig...@io.com
(512) 474-1920 (FAX answers 6th ring) http://www.io.com/%7Eeighner/
Please visit my web bookstore: http://www.io.com/%7Eeighner/bookstor.html
* A PBS mind in an MTV world.
MS
>
> Wrong.
>
> You quoted only one of the Ten Commandments from the Old Testament.
>
> You forgot THOU SHALT NOT KILL. Killing your co-student is not loving your
> neighbor as thyself as required under the New Testament.
>
Nope. The words of Jesus, who ought to know.
Martha
Laura Burchard
kkramer <truthu...@my-dejanews.com> wrote:
>When did making "everyone happy" becoming a priority matter?
>Laura Burchard wrote in message <7gk3e4$qnj$1...@saltmine.radix.net>...
>>Someone replaced them with one large cross, which hopefully will allow
>>everyone to put their own interpretation on it, and therefore keep
>>everyone happy.
For a community memorial? It's usually *the* priority. But you knew that.
Lars Eighner
|Actually, religious people in general have standards and attempt to live by
|them. They include not stealing, coveting, killing and other things.
Bullshit. Religious people believe in killing people who doubt their
beliefs and who won't live as they think their gods command people to
live. They wear white hoods and set fire to their religious symbols
in the middle of the night in order to attempt to intimidate people
who don't look like themselves. They pick and choose the "commandments"
they wish to enforce against their neighbors - always taking care to
side-step "commandments" that might cramp their own style.
Religion exists to cloak unconscionable acts with sanctimonious
self-righteousness, to provide comfort and justification for
the powerful and privileged, and to put the stamp of holy approval
on the condition of the poor and oppressed.
Every aspect of religion is evil. Religion can never improve itself
because the truth is only what the priests and preachers say it is
and that version of the "truth" never has to be reconciled with
the real world.
--
Lars Eighner 700 Hearn #101 Austin TX 78703 eig...@io.com
(512) 474-1920 (FAX answers 6th ring) http://www.io.com/%7Eeighner/
Please visit my web bookstore: http://www.io.com/%7Eeighner/bookstor.html
* "If the shoe fits, buy it." Imelda Marcos
EVLART
>From: "kkramer" <kkr...@2xtreme.net>
>Date: Mon, May 3, 1999 19:40 EDT
>Message-id: <auqX2.15$UL1....@news-west.eli.net>
>
>Wrong.
>
>You quoted only one of the Ten Commandments from the Old Testament.
>
>You forgot THOU SHALT NOT KILL. Killing your co-student is not loving your
>neighbor as thyself as required under the New Testament.
>
>
>
>
>MS wrote in message <372DC6...@erols.com>...
>>This is the first and great commandment. Thou shalt love the Lord thy
>>God with all thy heart, and all thy soul, and all thy mind. And the
>>second is like unto it: Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself. On
>>these two hang all the Laws and the Prophets."
>>
>>*That* is what Christianity is "all about."
>
>
>
The one who kills the soul is more guilty than the one who kills only the body.
Evlart
kkramer
kills the soul.
How does that apply here?
Keith
EVLART wrote in message <19990503202034...@ng148.aol.com>...
NCr1509660
>Date: 5/3/99 6:46 PM Eastern Daylight Time
>Message-id: <19990503184621...@ng-fs1.aol.com>
You know the type: Agitating against crosses, stained glass windows, steeples
and Nativity Scenes, yet always ignore symbols and idols of Satanism and
Demonic stuff, and the really perverted. Very intolerant, still in the Dark
Ages. Think they are liberal.
ChevreTroi
<kkr...@2xtreme.net> writes this stuff and a bunch of other posts:
>The Bible says not to fear the one who kills the body, fear the one that
>kills the soul.
>
>How does that apply here?
>
>Keith
>
ENOUGH already. Please.
This is alt true-crime, not alt. lectures-by-kramer.
Grrrrrrrrr
Chev.
ChevreTrois
Eliza Wyndham
wrote:
>maggie said:
>>> I think you're asking an awful lot of a grieving father if you expect
>>him
>>not
>>> to object to his son's killer being honored in the same way his son is
>>honored.
>>> And, as a matter of fact, since there is a *commandment* against killing,
>>it
>>> seems entirely appropriate to me for Mr. Rohrbough to point out that
>>perhaps
>>> the most sacred symbol of Christianity is not an appropriate memorial
>>to
>>two
>>> people who have so egregiously broken a pretty major commandment.
>
>Michael said:
>>You're missing the point. The father had every right to object to the
>>killers being honored in the same *place* as his dead son. He has no right
>>to dictate what *symbols* are used to honor the killers, or anyone else
>>for
>>that matter.
>
>***Michael, I'm not missing the point. I simply disagree with you. You say no
>one has the right to dictate what symbols are used to honor the killers and I
>say that's hogwash.
But Maggie, your objection is actually to any public memorial at all,
right? The question Michael was addressing is, does the selection of
a cross make any difference? That's what Rohrbacher claimed to be
objecting to, and while he's a sympathetic figure, he's quite simply
wrong about the appropriateness of a cross for a murderer. A
Christian can and should invoke the cross in response to all sorts of
circumstances, including murder and murderers.
>We're talking about crosses erected in a public park--not
>on a gravesite or in a home. The crosses were erected on public property and
>all the taxpayers in the jurisdiction have the right to agree or object.
>
Certainly true -- whether it's a cross or not.
But both Rohrbacher and Michael were discussing the appropriateness of
the symbol itself, not the place it was erected. In fact, Michael
agreed with you about the place.
There seems to be some general confusion about the meaning of a cross
with reference to the dead. A cross over a grave (or in any similar
circumstances) in no way certifies nor even speaks to the goodness of
the person it memorializes. The cross is a recognition by the person
who erected it -- not the person underneath it -- that we are all in
the hands of Christ. It is as appropriate to construct such a message
for a killer as for an innocent toddler.
Eliza
NCr1509660
>Date: 5/3/99 9:58 PM Eastern Daylight Time
>
>nanleecro (NCr1509660) posted in a.t-c ...
>| >
>| >You give Christians a bad name.
>| >
>| >"Judge not, Lest ye be judged."
>| >
>| >glas
>|
>| So, glas, you write the commemorative for the murdering boys - quote from
>| Jesus. Yet, every mind is reeling in trying to appoint blame and cause,
>and
>| every one here is judging. Because everyday, in everyway, we are
>judgemental,
>| weighing either/or, to be or not to be, and what should have been. You
>are
>| almost as judgemental as I am. God, if he is any kind of God at all,
>doesn't
>| want lame brains who cannot discern what a commandment means.
>
>Unintelligible as ever.
>
>Speaking in tongues again Nan? I'll get back to you after I dig out my
>decoder ring.
>
>glas
>--
if you can descend the cliche summit.
kkramer
But, you know that.
Keith
Laura Burchard wrote in message <7glnod$43m$1...@saltmine.radix.net>...
snip
kkramer
them. They include not stealing, coveting, killing and other things.
If everyone lived by these standards outside of any religious precepts,
Columbine would never have happened.
Keith
Lars Eighner wrote in message ...
kkramer
words because it seemed so harsh. It reminds me that the Word is a two-edge
sword. And, it cuts.
Jesus meant: Let those who are alive physically but spiritually dead remain
behind and bury the physically dead. I believe He was leaving with His
disciples and one expressed obligations which Jesus said unequivocally that
he had no further responsibility. He also said at one point said, "He is
dead already" while referring to someone physically alive. Jesus
communication style was NOT POLITICALLY CORRECT.
Keith
Dog3 wrote in message <7glm5n$g6d$1...@nntp4.atl.mindspring.net>...
>Well, in this case, the dead DID bury the dead... so to speak....
NCr1509660
>Date: 5/3/99 7:26 PM Eastern Daylight Time
>
>God is a God of judgment.
God is open to alot of wide interpretation. I practice no religion, but any
reasonable person who is not religious can see the fundamental good sense of
the Ten Commandments even if God didn't etch them into stone. These two boys
committed against nearly 1/2 of them.
Whether it is given by nature, evolution or God, we have the capacity and will
to judge for ourselves. Otherwise, we are amoeba prodded mindlessly, without
will, by random forces within our environment.
>
>You need to use common sense. Common sense tells me that I don't have to
>forgive someone who doesn't ask for forgiveness and show repentance.
>Keith
Well, Keith, I don't dig forgiveness for unpardonable crimes. I believe in an
eye for an eye - Old Testament justice. Seems only fair.
kkramer
mouth of God.
For some of us, the Bible is our rule book. We seek to understand so our
lives will be easier. I don't understand how one can get through life
without God.
So, I would invite you to skip poster messages because I won't censor my
speech for you.
Keith
ChevreTroi wrote in message
<19990503222557...@ngol08.aol.com>...
Maggie8097
>> >You're missing the point. The father had every right to object to the
>> >killers being honored in the same *place* as his dead son. He has no
>right
>> >to dictate what *symbols* are used to honor the killers, or anyone else
>> >for
>> >that matter.
>>
>> ***Michael, I'm not missing the point. I simply disagree with you. You
>say no
>> one has the right to dictate what symbols are used to honor the killers
>and I
>park--not
>> on a gravesite or in a home. The crosses were erected on public property
>and
>> all the taxpayers in the jurisdiction have the right to agree or object.
>
>And I say your response is hogwash. Dead is *dead*. The Harrises and
>Klebods were tax paying citizens who's tax money probably went toward that
>public park. We do not disagree on this point except for the Christian
>reference made by the victim's father. I will reapeat this, I do not think
>those crosses should have been put there in the same place, his reference
>to Christian symbolism was really disgusting.
***I know you're not doing it on purpose, but you keep snipping the quote and I
keep forgetting exactly what it is. But I'm not sure I would disagree with the
father that a symbol of Christian martyrdom is an inappropriate public memorial
for a mass murderer.
>
>>
>> Michael said:
>> Christianity and it's symbols belong to anyone that wants
>> >to
>> >embrace it and God is supposedly the final judge.
>>
maggie said:
>> ***If you could convince me that God erected those two crosses, I'd have
>to
>> agree with you. The fact, though, is that a human erected the crosses
>on
>> public land. Another human removed them. The person who removed him
>had
>as
>> much right to do that as the person who erected them.
>
michael said:
>Well, with this thought, I'm retiring the Theological discussion. I've
>done
>way too much research into the Catholic religion. I rejected it at an early
>age. Christianity and it's barbarism and murder..... are far more than
>I
>care to get involved with. Maggie, God may as well have erected those two
>crosses IMO. Do you get the point yet ?
***I honestly don't. If we were talking about a memorial to the killers
erected on private property, I'd simply think it was in poor taste and I'd
agree that no one (other than the land's owner) has the right to remove it.
But the fact that land is public property doesn't mean that any member of the
public can make use of that land in any manner he desires. It comes down to a
(basicly) lowest common denominator thing--you have to offend the least number
of people possible. That basic rule was broken in Littleton with the, IMO,
inevitable consequences.
>
>
>> Michael said:
>> What do you think would
>> >be an appropriate memorial for Harris and Klebold ?
>>
maggie said:
>> ***I think a public memorial for either Harris or Klebold is inappropriate
>in
>> the extreme. Their families are, of course, free to memorialize them
>in
>any
>> way they desire--on their own property.
>
michael said:
>And this of course should be a *private* affair ?
***Yes, of course.
michael said:
Or do you think hanging
>their embalmed bodies from crosses in the Town's Square for display would
>be
>more appropriate ? Hang 'em up and let the good Christians throw their
>rocks and produce ?
***Don't be silly.
Michael said:
The Harrises and Klebolds should erect monuments to
>their sons if they see fit. Judgemental, narrow mindedness should play
>no
>part in it.
***Agreed, but they have no right to erect such monuments on public property.
Maggie8097
>>***Michael, I'm not missing the point. I simply disagree with you. You
>say no
>>one has the right to dictate what symbols are used to honor the killers
>and I
>>say that's hogwash.
>
>But Maggie, your objection is actually to any public memorial at all,
>right?
**True enough. I've barely gotten to the issue of the cross.
Eliza said:
The question Michael was addressing is, does the selection of
>a cross make any difference? That's what Rohrbacher claimed to be
>objecting to, and while he's a sympathetic figure, he's quite simply
>wrong about the appropriateness of a cross for a murderer. A
>Christian can and should invoke the cross in response to all sorts of
>circumstances, including murder and murderers.
***I'm no theological expert, but it strikes me that a symbol of Christian
martyrdom, while entirely appropriate for victims of indiscriminate mass
murderers, is not appropriate for the mass murderers themselves. Particularly
since one of those killers was Jewish (or, sort of Jewish).
maggie said:
>>We're talking about crosses erected in a public park--not
>>on a gravesite or in a home. The crosses were erected on public property
>and
>>all the taxpayers in the jurisdiction have the right to agree or object.
>>
Eliza said:
>Certainly true -- whether it's a cross or not.
>
>But both Rohrbacher and Michael were discussing the appropriateness of
>the symbol itself, not the place it was erected. In fact, Michael
>agreed with you about the place.
***I don't think so. Michael is in favor of a public memorial to the killers,
he just thinks it should be set apart from the memorials to the victims. I
think a public memorial to the killers is inappropriate.
>
Eliza said:
>There seems to be some general confusion about the meaning of a cross
>with reference to the dead. A cross over a grave (or in any similar
>circumstances) in no way certifies nor even speaks to the goodness of
>the person it memorializes. The cross is a recognition by the person
>who erected it -- not the person underneath it -- that we are all in
>the hands of Christ. It is as appropriate to construct such a message
>for a killer as for an innocent toddler.
***Perhaps, theologically speaking you are correct. But it doesn't seem right
to me, for the reason I mentioned above.
And you are right that my main objection is to the placement of the memorial on
public land.
The families and friends of the killers are perfectly free to establish any
monuments to their loved ones that they desire, even if I think the selection
of a cross is somewhat blasphemous. But they have no right to demand space in
a public park to erect such a memorial. If, however, a majority of the
citizens of Littleton decide that such a memorial is appropriate and
desireable, then, well, then, never mind.
NCr1509660
>From: "kkramer" <kkr...@2xtreme.net>
>Message-id: <0LtX2.59$UL1....@news-west.eli.net>
>
>Man does not live by bread alone but every word that proceedth out of the
>mouth of God.
>
>For some of us, the Bible is our rule book. We seek to understand so our
>lives will be easier. I don't understand how one can get through life
>without God.
>
>So, I would invite you to skip poster messages because I won't censor my
>speech for you.
>
>Keith
>
The big turnoff on religion is when it is force-fed. You haven't converted nor
convinced anyone from their original beliefs.
I know you are dedicated and sincere, and you have every right to express
yourself.
The crux of this tragedy is not the Cross.
MS
>
> In our last episode <ABtX2.56$UL1....@news-west.eli.net>,
> the lovely and talented "kkramer" <kkr...@2xtreme.net>
> broadcast on alt.true-crime:
>
> |them. They include not stealing, coveting, killing and other things.
>
> beliefs and who won't live as they think their gods command people to
> live. They wear white hoods and set fire to their religious symbols
> in the middle of the night in order to attempt to intimidate people
> who don't look like themselves. They pick and choose the "commandments"
> they wish to enforce against their neighbors - always taking care to
> side-step "commandments" that might cramp their own style.
>
> Religion exists to cloak unconscionable acts with sanctimonious
> self-righteousness, to provide comfort and justification for
> the powerful and privileged, and to put the stamp of holy approval
> on the condition of the poor and oppressed.
>
> Every aspect of religion is evil. Religion can never improve itself
> because the truth is only what the priests and preachers say it is
> and that version of the "truth" never has to be reconciled with
> the real world.
>
*swoon*
Laura Burchard
NCr1509660 <ncr15...@aol.com> wrote:
>>Subject: Re: Columbine Article--Dad Cuts Down Killers' Crosses
>>Date: 5/2/99 12:52 AM Eastern Daylight Time
>>Message-id: <19990502005255...@ng-fd1.aol.com>
>>
>>Maggie asked:
>>
>>>***What does it say? (This is a serious question.)
>>
>>It took me a few read throughs to figure it out too but I think it's because
>>of
>>the dreaded "Xtian" word.
>>
>>Volfie -> I generally dread that word, too, but it didn't bother me in that
>>article. Oh well.
>
>I thought the father objected to the killers' being represented on the same
>hill as the victims. As a Christian, he did not object to the crosses, but the
>location of them together with the victims' crosses. As an agnostic who avoids
>the A-A word, I understand his not wanting those two crosses on the same
>memorial site. At least one boy, Harris, was an A-A. Afterall, the most
>dreaded word in this entire scenario is KILLER.
No, actually, he *did* object to the crosses, not just the location. I
think everyone can understand him being upset with the location, even if
they personally didn't agree. He objected to the very idea of Christian
symbols being used anywhere, and not because it didn't match their
beliefs:
"It was an outrage that a Christian symbol was being used to honor Eric
Harris, 18, and Dylan Klebold, 17, Rohrbough said." (Rocky Mountain News)
and then after Greg Zanis took them all down, unhappy that they had caused
controversy instead of healing -- mind you, this is a man who
has spent a great deal of time putting up crosses for 200 crime victims,
starting with his murdered father in law -- he said...
"I question his motives. His agenda was to create problems," Rohrbough
said. "To have their crosses mixed in with their victims' is completely
evil." (Rocky Mountain News)
Which I think re-proves a basic truism of life: being a victim doesn't
mean you can't be a asshole as well.
EVLART
>From: "kkramer" <kkr...@2xtreme.net>
>Message-id: <NKrX2.35$UL1....@news-west.eli.net>
>
>The Bible says not to fear the one who kills the body, fear the one that
>kills the soul.
>
>How does that apply here?
>
>Keith
>
>
>
>>The one who kills the soul is more guilty than the one who kills only the
>body.
>
>
>
Hate kills the soul. Abuse provokes hate.
Evlart
Clifford Griffith
> And I say your response is hogwash. Dead is *dead*. The Harrises and
> Klebods were tax paying citizens who's tax money probably went toward that
> public park. We do not disagree on this point except for the Christian
> reference made by the victim's father. I will reapeat this, I do not think
> those crosses should have been put there in the same place, his reference
> to Christian symbolism was really disgusting.
Michael,
(Those parents paid tax dollars for the public schools, too; but that
didn't give their kids a right to go in shooting and bombing.)
In this country, we don't generally erect memorials to people who have
done such obviously "bad" things. Jeffrey Dahmer is dead, his parents
are probably grieving, and he was murdered. Where is *his* public
memorial? Regardless of one's religious affiliation or lack of one, we
don't usually pay tribute to murderers. I think erecting *black"
crosses was uncalled for, but I can understand the father's point about
having the murderers' crosses in the same place as their victims'.
If the parents want to put Christian symbols at their kids' gravesites,
that's fine. We can ask for God's mercy, even if the person for whose
soul we're praying had contempt for Him. Can't hurt.
Linda
Clifford Griffith
> There seems to be some general confusion about the meaning of a cross
> with reference to the dead. A cross over a grave (or in any similar
> circumstances) in no way certifies nor even speaks to the goodness of
> the person it memorializes. The cross is a recognition by the person
> who erected it -- not the person underneath it -- that we are all in
> the hands of Christ. It is as appropriate to construct such a message
> for a killer as for an innocent toddler.
But in a public place, like a square or site dedicated to memorials?
Where are the memorials to Ed Gein, Ted Bundy, Jeffrey Dahmer? (I don't
intend to make a pilgrimage; I just want to know what municipalities
sponsored tributes to murderers.)
Linda
Clifford Griffith
> "Judge not, Lest ye be judged."
>
> glas
True enough, but this has always bothered me a bit. We *can't* judge
what will ultimately happen to an individual, but we're called upon
(whether believers or not) to judge one's actions and ensure that our
own and those of our children conform to the norms of society, at least.
When a person commits an atrocity against humanity/society, we can't let
it go without comment. And we sure as hell don't erect a nice memorial
to him for his efforts!
Linda
Clifford Griffith
>
> God is a God of judgment.
>
> forgive someone who doesn't ask for forgiveness and show repentance.
Haven't you ever forgiven anyone for a slight they don't even realize
they committed?
If we don't forgive someone, how is that going to affect *that person*?
It only affects *us*, so we might as well do our best to
forgive...repentance expressed to *us* or not. We have little or no
control over another sinner's outcome.
Linda
Clifford Griffith
Linda
Ins...@Ret.Com wrote:
>
> I feel funny about this phrase: JUDGE NOT, LEST YE BE JUDGED. I find it
> better to say "CONVICT NOT, LEST YE BE CONVICTED. Everyone makes judgments
> everyday. I judge my time for work to be not enough; I judge my garden to
> be dry.. etc. That is a judgment. There is nothing WRONG with judgment..
> everyone MAKES judgments every day of their lives. It is what you DO with
> that judgment that makes the difference.
>
> We can JUDGE what the gunman did to be wrong. We can judge the victims, on
> our presumptions, to be INNOCENT. We can judge anything we want. It is
> when we make a CONVICTIONS that all goes awry! And ultimately, since the
> killes are dead, it makes no DIFFERENCE what our convictions are, viewed in
> a Xian way. It is THEY that must account to their Creator for taking the
> actions that they did.
Clifford Griffith
> Me too Michael. I thought Christianity was supposed to be about forgiveness,
> not depriving ~sinners~ of a Christian burial.
But Barbara,
Nobody's saying "Don't give them a Christian burial"! (although the
Jewish mother of the Jewish boy might not want one); we're saying,
"Don't erect a memorial to killers." There's a big difference between a
Christian/Jewish burial and a public tribute to two boys who spat in the
face of society and its mores. It's not just "organized religion" that
their actions offended.
Linda
Clifford Griffith
> If there isn't a change in behavior <repentance> and you nevertheless
> forgive, you become part of the errant action. You ratify the sin. You
> cannot do that.
What part of the Our Father (aka "The Lord's Prayer") is that in?
(or what part of the Bible?)
BTW, the Columbine shooters can't change their behavior now. If I can't
forgive them to the best of my ability, in spite of their lack of
change, *I'm* in trouble now, according to you...and I didn't kill
ANYBODY! "Forgive us our trespasses as we forgive those..."
Linda
Eliza Wyndham
wrote:
>maggie said:
>>>***Michael, I'm not missing the point. I simply disagree with you. You
>>say no
>>>one has the right to dictate what symbols are used to honor the killers
>>and I
>>>say that's hogwash.
>>
>Eliza said:
>>But Maggie, your objection is actually to any public memorial at all,
>>right?
>
>**True enough. I've barely gotten to the issue of the cross.
>
>Eliza said:
>The question Michael was addressing is, does the selection of
>>a cross make any difference? That's what Rohrbacher claimed to be
>>objecting to, and while he's a sympathetic figure, he's quite simply
>>wrong about the appropriateness of a cross for a murderer. A
>>Christian can and should invoke the cross in response to all sorts of
>>circumstances, including murder and murderers.
>
>***I'm no theological expert, but it strikes me that a symbol of Christian
>martyrdom, while entirely appropriate for victims of indiscriminate mass
>murderers, is not appropriate for the mass murderers themselves.
But it's much more than a "symbol of Christian martyrdom" -- it's a
symbol of the whole religion.
Particularly
>since one of those killers was Jewish (or, sort of Jewish).
This has become an issue with some of the highway crosses, but I don't
think it applies here. I don't have the impression that the family is
actually Jewish; celebrating Jewish holidays is not necessarily
un-Christian/non-Christian behavior, since Christians generally look
to Judaism as the nascent form of Christianity, so to speak. I doubt
there are any Christian denominations at all that would object to
their members celebrating Jewish holidays as well as Christian ones
(although I think some Jews object); some Christian congregations
actually encourage it. As a child, I went to at least one Seder
sponsored by my Catholic parish.
>maggie said:
>>>We're talking about crosses erected in a public park--not
>>>on a gravesite or in a home. The crosses were erected on public property
>>and
>>>all the taxpayers in the jurisdiction have the right to agree or object.
>>>
>Eliza said:
>>Certainly true -- whether it's a cross or not.
>>
>>But both Rohrbacher and Michael were discussing the appropriateness of
>>the symbol itself, not the place it was erected. In fact, Michael
>>agreed with you about the place.
>
>***I don't think so. Michael is in favor of a public memorial to the killers,
>he just thinks it should be set apart from the memorials to the victims. I
>think a public memorial to the killers is inappropriate.
I agree that it's inappropriate (depending on your definition of
public; yes, inappropriate on public lands). I do think this episode
of poor judgment was made with all good intentions. I read Michael to
be focusing almost entirely on the concept of the appropriateness of
the cross itself, although I may have missed something because I was
trying to catch up quickly after a couple of weeks offline.
>Eliza said:
>>There seems to be some general confusion about the meaning of a cross
>>with reference to the dead. A cross over a grave (or in any similar
>>circumstances) in no way certifies nor even speaks to the goodness of
>>the person it memorializes. The cross is a recognition by the person
>>who erected it -- not the person underneath it -- that we are all in
>>the hands of Christ. It is as appropriate to construct such a message
>>for a killer as for an innocent toddler.
>
>***Perhaps, theologically speaking you are correct. But it doesn't seem right
>to me, for the reason I mentioned above.
I know it's jarring, but then there's no reason religious ideas
shouldn't be jarring. (Sorry, I know that sounds patronizing, but
it's a point I feel I must make and I can't think of how to make it
sound any other way.) At least as much as "Thou shalt not kill,"
Christianity emphasizes the importance of forgiveness and the love of
God for all, sinners and victims alike; I think it's very important to
keep that in mind when discussing what's appropriate from a Christian
point of view.
Eliza
Clifford Griffith
well.
(I know you'll go on about your day, secure in the knowledge that you
have my "blessing". ;-) )
Linda
Kris Baker wrote:
>
> "glas" <true...@donet.com> wrote:
>
> >Excuse me. Those crosses had absolutely nothing to do with a "Christian
> >burial". They are part of a memorial on the lawn of the school. A
> memorial
> >to the VICTIMS. Nothing to do with burial or Christian forgiveness -
> just a
> >memorial to 13 innocent people cut down in the prime of their lives. A
> place
> >where the other innocent victims - the families of the slain and their
> >friends - can go to seek a bit of peace.
>
> >Regardless of the motivation of these boys, they are not the victims
> here
> >and the father is right, we don't memorilze the murderers in the same
> spot
> >as their victims. Let them find a different hill for the crosses of the
> >murderers, they wanted to stand out and be set apart, wish granted.
> >glas
>
> Bravo, glas!
>
> I think there's a lot of confusion about Judeo-Christian
> forgiveness (which *we* can't give - it's up to God.)
>
> A memorial site for victims is no place for memorials
> "honoring" those who caused the victimization.
>
> Kris
> Sund/Pelosso website at:
> <http://pages.prodigy.com/GMVY23A/sundtime.htm>
Eliza Wyndham
wrote:
>Wrong.
>
>You quoted only one of the Ten Commandments from the Old Testament.
>
>You forgot THOU SHALT NOT KILL. Killing your co-student is not loving your
>neighbor as thyself as required under the New Testament.
>
>Keith
>
And this is, Keith?
(what follows is a quote from an earlier post of yours in this
thread):
>Butting in here, appropriate under the circumstances?
>An upside down cross with the word "Satan".
You're giving Christianity a bad name, and I, personally, resent it
profoundly.
There are a ton of applicable Bible quotes I could throw at you --
"Judge not" etc. -- but suffice it to say that no version of
Christianity recognizes the right of Keith to consign people to Satan,
regardless of their actions.
Eliza
LITTLEPJoo
PJ
Maggie8097
>> And you are right that my main objection is to the placement of the
>memorial on
>> public land.
>
>Public land means freedom of expression IMO.
***So you think that public land is there for you to do whatever *you* want
with it? Interesting concept. I suggest you think it through to its logical
conclusion, keeping in mind the US population, and get back with us.
>
maggie said:
>> The families and friends of the killers are perfectly free to establish
>any
>> monuments to their loved ones that they desire, even if I think the
>selection
>> of a cross is somewhat blasphemous. But they have no right to demand
>space in
>> a public park to erect such a memorial. If, however, a majority of the
>> citizens of Littleton decide that such a memorial is appropriate and
>> desireable, then, well, then, never mind.
>
Michael said:
>They have every right to erect any type of monument they choose on any
>public landscape of their choosing. Denying this is denying the freedom
>of
>expression in this country.
***ROTFL. Well, all I can say is that there is a lot of denial of freedom of
expression going on in this country. Been to a national park lately, Michael?
Maggie8097
>> The Harrises and Klebolds should erect monuments to
>> >their sons if they see fit. Judgemental, narrow mindedness should play
>> >no
>> >part in it.
>>
>> ***Agreed, but they have no right to erect such monuments on public
>property.
michael said:
>We need to end this because we will always disagree on it and I don't have
>time for it....... BUT :) why do the Klebolds and Harrises have no right
>to
>erect such monuments on public property ?
***Because it is against the law to convert public property to private use.
kkramer
SPEECH and therefore subject to reasonable restraint.
What did the jack asses do? Removed EVERYTHING but only because it suited
their agenda. Authorities want off the National Hot Box for this blunder.
Kramer
Dog3 wrote in message <7go9g1$j69$1...@nntp2.atl.mindspring.net>...
kkramer
is committed in this ng daily.
Kramer
NCr1509660 wrote in message
<19990503232125...@ng-ci1.aol.com>...
kkramer
It insures my eternity. If I don't forgive, I am going to hell! I would
never want that...
Kramer
Clifford Griffith wrote in message <372F927F...@home.com>...
kkramer
Kramer
Lars Eighner wrote in message ...
kkramer
And, you well know it.
Kramer
Dog3 wrote in message <7go870$ppd$1...@nntp2.atl.mindspring.net>...
>Hmmmm.... well, pray tell how could the witch hunts and murders have been
>circumvented ?
kkramer
Kramer
EVLART wrote in message <19990504192840...@ng-cj1.aol.com>...
kkramer
My parents are godless. But, they followed every commandment because they
have standards. I discovered God in 1979 while traveling down my Damascus
Road. It happens. I am grateful because conversions after 30 are a rare
thing. I was 29.
BTW: Now-a-days, people no longer follow basic decent moral absolute
standards - with or without God.
Kramer
Dog3 wrote in message <7go7vq$1hg$1...@nntp2.atl.mindspring.net>...
>Providing you believe in the Bible.
kkramer
Kramer
Eliza Wyndham wrote in message <372fbefa...@news.mindspring.com>...
kkramer
Actions speak louder than words.
I think it goes something like this: Depart from me workers of iniquity.
I never knew you.
Makes me shutter. You can fool man but you can't fool God. Your personal
belief in whether God exists, or not, doesn't change reality.
Kramer
truthu...@my-dejanews.com
Dog3 wrote in message <7go7uh$h4g$1...@nntp2.atl.mindspring.net>...
Hate to burst your bubble but some people don't believe in God.
glas
news:weVX2.203$UL1....@news-west.eli.net...
| There is nothing meaner than a "religious" person who doesn't know God.
|
| Kramer
We've noticed.
glas
--
alt.true-crime WebSite and FAQ can be found here -
http://www.geocities.com/~alttruecrime/
The dumber people think you are,
The more surprised they'll be when you kill them
--- William Clayton