[Home]  [Headlines]  [Latest Articles]  [Latest Comments]  [Post]  [Sign-in]  [Mail]  [Setup]  [Help] 

Status: Not Logged In; Sign In

The Attack on the USS Liberty (June 8, 1967) - Speech by Survivor Phillip Tourney At the Revisionist History of War Conference (Video) ‘I Smell CIA/Deep State All Over ThisÂ’ — RFK Jr. VP Nicole Shanahan Blasts Sanctuary Cities, we see peaceful protests launching in Los Angeles” - Democrat Senator Cory Booke We have no legal framework for designating domestic terror organizations Los Angeles Braces For Another Day Of Chaos As Newsom Pits Marxist Color Revolution Against Trump Admin Methylene Blue Benefits Another Mossad War Crime 80 served arrest warrants at 'cartel afterparty' in South Carolina When Ideas Become Too Dangerous To Platform The silent bloodbath that's tearing through the middle-class Kiev Postponed Exchange With Russia, Leaves Bodies Of 6,000 Slain Ukrainian Troops In Trucks Iranian Intelligence Stole Trove Of Sensitive Israeli Nuclear Files In the USA, the identity of Musk's abuser, who gave him a black eye, was revealed Return of 6,000 Soldiers' Bodies Will Cost Ukraine Extra $2.1Bln Palantir's Secret War: Inside the Plot to Cripple WikiLeaks Digital Prison in the Making? In France we're horrified by spending money on Ukraine Russia has patented technology for launching drones from the space station Kill ICE: Foreign Flags And Fires Sweep LA 6,000-year-old skeletons with never-before-seen DNA rewrites human history First Close Look at China’s Ultra-Long Range Sixth Generation J-36Jet I'm Caitlin Clark, and I refuse to return to the WNBA Border Czar Tom Homan: “We Are Going to Bring National Guard in Tonight” to Los Angeles These Are The U.S. States With The Most Drug Use Chabria: ICE arrested a California union leader. Does Trump understand what that means?Anita Chabria White House Staffer Responsible for ‘Fanning Flames’ Between Trump and Musk ID’d Texas Yanks Major Perk From Illegal Aliens - After Pioneering It 24 Years Ago Dozens detained during Los Angeles ICE raids Russian army suffers massive losses as Kremlin feigns interest in peace talks — ISW Russia’s Defense Collapse Exposed by Ukraine Strike

Religion
See other Religion Articles

Title: College removes cross – from chapel!
Source: WND
URL Source: http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=52646
Published: Oct 27, 2006
Author: Staff
Post Date: 2006-10-27 12:39:53 by bluegrass
Ping List: *New History*
Keywords: None
Views: 7231
Comments: 252

The cross from the altar area of the chapel at the College of William & Mary in Williamsburg, Va., has been removed to ensure the space is seen as a nondenominational area, explains Melissa Engimann, assistant director for Historic Campus.

"In order to make the Wren Chapel less of a faith-specific space, and to make it more welcoming to students, faculty, staff and visitors of all faiths, the cross has been removed from the altar area," Engimann announced in an e-mail to staff.

The cross will be returned to the altar for those who wish to use it for events, services or private prayer.

The cross was in place because of the college's former association with the Anglican Church. Though the college is now nondenominational and became publicly supported in 1906, the room will still be considered a chapel, college officials said.

Post Comment   Private Reply   Ignore Thread  

Begin Trace Mode for Comment # 58.

#1. To: bluegrass (#0)

This is kind of a private matter - it's not like this came from a court order, etc.

So it really is non of our business.

Destro  posted on  2006-10-27   12:50:33 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  

The chapel is part of the Wren Building, the oldest academic building in America. It's had a cross in it since the chapel was added in 1732.

This is akin to what the Bolsheviks did to Russian religious history during their tyranny.

bluegrass  posted on  2006-10-27   13:05:31 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  

The chapel is part of the Wren Building, the oldest academic building in America. It's had a cross in it since the chapel was added in 1732.

It's a private matter - none of my business or yours.

Destro  posted on  2006-10-27   14:16:00 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  

It's a private matter - none of my business or yours.

I live in Virginia. W&M is a "public" school.

It's my biz.

bluegrass  posted on  2006-10-27   14:20:24 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  

I live in Virginia. W&M is a "public" school.

Then the cross should be removed since the state should not fund a religous specific chapel.

Destro  posted on  2006-10-27   14:22:24 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  

By that reasoning, the publicly funded 'Holocaust' Museum in DC should have all of the six-pointed stars removed.

The larger issue is that the State has no business supporting universities.

bluegrass  posted on  2006-10-27   14:25:25 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  

By that reasoning, the publicly funded 'Holocaust' Museum in DC should have all of the six-pointed stars removed.

A) I am against the existence of the Holocaust musuem in America - if it should exist anywhere it should be in Berlin/Europe.

With that said:

B) The Star of David was used as a identifying symbol by the Nazis so you could not have it removed from a museum that touches on the subject.

C) Was not the schismatic and heretical Anglican church founded by an overweight serial killer?

Destro  posted on  2006-10-27   14:28:56 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  

The German Nazis used the genocide and 'ethnic cleansing' of Native Americans as one of the models to plan and execute their genocide and ethnic cleansing of those they found odious.

I would keep the museum and make the Shoah exhibit a wing. It needs exhibits showing what happened to 'New World' peoples, and to peoples in all the other corners of the world when their particular 'holocausts' happened.

The lesson that the museum teaches is an important one, it just need to be reorganized and changed to show that this is a sort of thing that has happened in different degrees at different times in human history.

To make it just cover the Shoah, it sends the false message that what the Nazis did was highly unusual, when in fact, it isn't. The museum is needed because this sort of thing will happen again if we don't use all the tools at our disposal to remember history to keep from repeating it.

Ferret Mike  posted on  2006-10-27   14:39:36 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  

The German Nazis used the genocide and 'ethnic cleansing' of Native Americans as one of the models to plan and execute their genocide and ethnic cleansing of those they found odious.

I would keep the museum and make the Shoah exhibit a wing. It needs exhibits showing what happened to 'New World' peoples, and to peoples in all the other corners of the world when their particular 'holocausts' happened.

The lesson that the museum teaches is an important one, it just need to be reorganized and changed to show that this is a sort of thing that has happened in different degrees at different times in human history.

To make it just cover the Shoah, it sends the false message that what the Nazis did was highly unusual, when in fact, it isn't. The museum is needed because this sort of thing will happen again if we don't use all the tools at our disposal to remember history to keep from repeating it.

Hell Mike it's going to happen again no matter how many museums are put up; you can't change human nature and human beings are warlike creatures. In fact it is happening in the Middle East, and other parts of the world that we don't hear much about.

If there is one thing I have learned these past few years, it's that people in general can and do behave like monsters.

I think your claim about the nazis using the extermination of American Indians as a model is an urban legend of sorts, as the vast majority of Indians died from diseases they had no immunity against, and there was no concrete policy carried out to exterminate Native Americans, it happened over a long period of time, an incident here, incident there, and was not an organized effort.

As long as there are people, there will be selfishness, cruelty and cowardly behavior. As this country descends further into dictatorship, look for many cowards to come crawling out of the woodwork (for instance those who rat on others in order to score brownie points with those they perceive as being the powerful ones).

Diana  posted on  2006-10-27   17:37:34 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  

there was no concrete policy carried out to exterminate Native Americans,

I think you are mistaken.

Making the Cherokees walk the Trail of Tears from the Carolinas to Oklahoma may not have been sold as racial extermination but that's pretty much what it accomplished.

Killing en masse the "praying" ie Christianized Indians of New England was pretty much the same thing.

Handing out smallpox infected blankets as Gen Amherst did was as blatant as it gets.

Massacring the families of the tribes encamped in the Palo Duro Canyon was pure genocidal behavior.

Take off those rose colored glasses and subscribing to the whitewashing of history. It's nasty.

swarthyguy  posted on  2006-10-27   17:44:08 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  

Handing out smallpox infected blankets as Gen Amherst did was as blatant as it gets.

I cited this once and a fellow took me to task for it.

He showed me a quote from a letter that was the source of this, and otherwise there is no evidence that such a thing ever took place.

HOUNDDAWG  posted on  2006-10-27   18:06:03 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  

I beg to differ. IMO, it's part of the whitewashing of history.

This link takes you to some of the source documents and actual statements.

Now, as to whether he personally handed them out or ordered it, fine, but there is no doubt as to his sentiments concerning them.

http://www.na tiveweb.org/pages/legal/amherst/lord_jeff.html

There are links to microfiche records and biographies and historical documents including William Trent's journal from the 1760's in which he describes certain incidents. The judgement of all these is up to you.

Some quotes from Bouquet to Amherst -

"...that Vermine ... have forfeited all claim to the rights of humanity" (Bouquet to Amherst, 25 June) [149k] "I would rather chuse the liberty to kill any Savage...." (Bouquet to Amherst, 25 June) [121k] "...Measures to be taken as would Bring about the Total Extirpation of those Indian Nations" (Amherst to Sir William Johnson, Superintendent of the Northern Indian Department, 9 July) [229k] "...their Total Extirpation is scarce sufficient Attonement...." (Amherst to George Croghan, Deputy Agent for Indian Affairs, 7 August) [145k] "...put a most Effectual Stop to their very Being" (Amherst to Johnson, 27 August [292k]; emphasis in original).

In short, it's almost immaterial now, but the sentiment to exterminate is very well documented among the writings of that time.

swarthyguy  posted on  2006-10-27   18:21:32 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  

#62. To: swarthyguy (#58)

Some quotes from Bouquet to Amherst -

"...that Vermine ... have forfeited all claim to the rights of humanity" (Bouquet to Amherst, 25 June) [149k] "I would rather chuse the liberty to kill any Savage...." (Bouquet to Amherst, 25 June) [121k] "...Measures to be taken as would Bring about the Total Extirpation of those Indian Nations" (Amherst to Sir William Johnson, Superintendent of the Northern Indian Department, 9 July) [229k] "...their Total Extirpation is scarce sufficient Attonement...." (Amherst to George Croghan, Deputy Agent for Indian Affairs, 7 August) [145k] "...put a most Effectual Stop to their very Being" (Amherst to Johnson, 27 August [292k]; emphasis in original).

In short, it's almost immaterial now, but the sentiment to exterminate is very well documented among the writings of that time.

His "sentiment to exterminate" is not a point that I wished to controvert.

The operative word was "evidence".

HOUNDDAWG  posted on  2006-10-27 18:56:03 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  

"...that Vermine ... have forfeited all claim to the rights of humanity" (Bouquet to Amherst, 25 June) [149k] "I would rather chuse the liberty to kill any Savage...." (Bouquet to Amherst, 25 June) [121k] "...Measures to be taken as would Bring about the Total Extirpation of those Indian Nations" (Amherst to Sir William Johnson, Superintendent of the Northern Indian Department, 9 July) [229k] "...their Total Extirpation is scarce sufficient Attonement...." (Amherst to George Croghan, Deputy Agent for Indian Affairs, 7 August) [145k] "...put a most Effectual Stop to their very Being" (Amherst to Johnson, 27 August [292k]; emphasis in original).

In short, it's almost immaterial now, but the sentiment to exterminate is very well documented among the writings of that time.

Well then, you've fingered some unsavory characters.

I just didn't see the order to send the sick blankets out to the natives.

There's no question that they probably would if the opportunity to execute it criminally and with stealth presented.

There were some people in positions of power who dealt with natives, and they had no sense of entitlement toward the gritty savages. Probably because they had a history of going ape and getting bloody, and the notion of the white man's burden to educate and shoe them had not yet matured as fashion.

But, I didn't see any general order there or anywhere up the line to authorize the wholesale reduction in native numbers through microbe contamination.

HOUNDDAWG  posted on  2006-10-27 21:42:32 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  

In short, it's almost immaterial now, but the sentiment to exterminate is very well documented among the writings of that time.

Absolutely. The decimating diseases were a godsend, from the point of view of the white colonists.

The British

All the great European empires followed the same patterns, and the British furnish as good an example as any of racial incoherence and even naïveté. A surprising example of the latter was the establishment of the first permanent settlement in Jamestown in 1607 (see AR, Jan. 2004). By then, the Spanish had been in the New World for over a century, and had a reputation for massacre. The English were determined to do better, bringing civilization and Christianity to what they expected would be grateful natives. As one backer of the Virginia Company wrote of the Indians he had never seen: “Their children when they come to be saved, will blesse the day when first their fathers saw your faces.”

The colonists did not consider themselves superior to the “naturals,” no matter how primitive. They reasoned that the ancient Britons had been savages, civilized by the Romans, and that this process would be repeated. Although the colonists considered themselves racially different from Africans and “Moors,” they thought the Indians were born white and turned dark from exposure to the sun and to skin dyes.

The president of the colony, Edward-Maria Wingfield, was so determined to set a loving example that he forbade construction of fortifications and training in the use of weapons. The colony was only ten days old when hundreds of Indians attacked it. If the English had not panicked them with canon fire, the Indians would probably have massacred them all. It was only after this edifying encounter that the colonists built their famous three-sided stockade.

The Indian reaction to colonization was the mirror-image of what became the rule in European attitudes towards natives: The tribes that lived closest to Jamestown hated the English and tried to kill them. The more distant ones were friendly and willing to trade.

Despite frequent attacks, the English did not give up hope that benevolence would win over the Indians. After the first conversions to Christianity, they set aside 10,000 acres for a college where Indians would be instructed in the faith. One English leader, George Thorpe, was especially insistent on kindness to Indians, and even publicly hanged dogs whose barking had frightened them.

As the years went by, Indians and colonists began to mingle, with hired Indians working together with the English in shops and in the field. The appearance of friendliness was false. In 1622, Indians carried out a carefully-hatched extermination plan, turning on the colonists with whom they worked, killing as many as they could. In some areas, they lost the element of surprise and therefore killed only 400 of Jamestown’s 1,200 whites. For Thorpe, the special friend of the Indians, they reserved a particularly cruel death and elaborate mutilation. The remaining colonists launched a war of revenge, but after a year or so relations returned to an appearance of friendliness.

Amazingly, in 1644, Indians carried out an identical sneak attack, and managed to kill 400 to 500 people. This time, the English retaliated mercilessly, and in 1646, the Virginia General Assembly noted that the natives were “so routed and dispersed that they are no longer a nation, and we now suffer only from robbery by a few starved outlaws.”

What is remarkable about Jamestown is the behavior of the English, not that of the Indians. The English approached the Indians with as much good will as it was probably possible for colonizers to approach the colonized. It was the Indians who recognized that colonization meant dispossession, and they resisted in every way they could.

Eventually, of course, the English lost their illusions. By 1690, Governor John Archdale of the Carolinas was praising God for the diseases that killed so many natives: “The Hand of God has been eminently seen in thinning the Indians to make room for the English.” Still, it is sobering to note that even 400 years ago, whites were capable of dangerous illusions in their dealings with non-whites, though they did come to their senses before it was too late.

Tauzero  posted on  2006-10-27 22:51:31 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  

Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest

[Home]  [Headlines]  [Latest Articles]  [Latest Comments]  [Post]  [Sign-in]  [Mail]  [Setup]  [Help]