From here:
A group of atheists has filed a lawsuit claiming the display of the World Trade Center cross at the 9/11 memorial in lower Manhattan is unconstitutional, calling it a “mingling of church and state.”
[…..]
The cross, which consists of two intersecting steel beams that were found intact in the rubble at Ground Zero, was initially constructed on a side of a church in lower Manhattan. The cross was then placed inside the 9/11 Memorial Museum during a ceremony over the weekend.
“The WTC cross has become a Christian icon. It has been blessed by so-called holy men and presented as a reminder that their god, who couldn’t be bothered to stop the Muslim terrorists or prevent 3,000 people from being killed in his name, cared only enough to bestow upon us some rubble that resembles a cross,” the group’s president, Dave Silverman, said in a press release. “It’s a truly ridiculous assertion.”
What is truly ridiculous is David Silverman’s objection to displaying the cross that was formed out of the two beams. If he is right and there is no God, the cross is meaningless and he is free to ignore it. If there is a God, particularly a Christian God, the cross is a symbol of God’s identification with people’s suffering and of the future resurrection; Silverman is free to ignore that, too. Either way, it is nonsense for him to cavil because a God he doesn’t believe in won’t run the universe the way he, Silverman, wants.
It’s amazing how much atheists hate someone they claim doesn’t exist.
It is part of the athiest agenda to remove God from everywhere. By forcing religous symbols to be removed from public places they hope to further this cause. So they have no respect for the Constitutional rights to Freedom of Religion and Freedom of Expression. Instead they pervert these rights into rules that prevent the expression of religion. How very sad that they have been so successful in making up into down, black into white, and Rights into Wrongs.
I would encourage you all to actually meet an atheist and talk to him/her rather than assume you know anything about how we think or why we think it. What both responses show here is nothing but projection of your own opinions onto millions of people so that you can dismiss them without actually having any idea of what they stand for and why they stand for it. That’s called a straw man argument, and you should both look it up and see why its ridiculous and unfair in any argument.
There is no atheist agenda. We dont have secret meetings, we dont get together and decide what we all like and dislike. More atheists than not are actually opposed to this lawsuit, but many ARE in fact against having this cross at the memorial.
I would be glad to explain why I’M against it. I speak for myself and no one else. The reason is simple, and twofold. 1) This is not a christian-only nation, and 2) not only christians died in or were affected by this tragedy. Putting a uniquely christian symbol at the public memorial is simply insulting to the non-christians among us–atheists and non-atheists alike. If its just a piece of rubble, then choose a piece of rubble that is not a uniquely christian symbol, blessed by christian priests, with christians bowing their heads in reverence. I dont need every religion or lack there of to be represented here, but if a symbol is to be used, it should be one that represents all of us, not just some of us. Choose a symbol that unites America, not one that divides it. If one cant be found, then have no symbols.
Take that cross, and put it where it belongs: in a church. In a public memorial that is meant to stand for all who were effected by this event, it is an ignorant and selfish thing to insist upon.
And just FYI, if the world trade center memorial is government owned, it is 100%, undeniably unconstitutional to place ANY religious symbol there. Knowing and understanding the constitution is not making up into down, black into white, and rights into wrongs–its called being patriotic and educated.
A few points:
I used to be an atheist, so I have at least some understanding of how atheists think.
The US constitution states: “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof ….” By no stretch of the imagination could mounting a cross at the 9/11 memorial be construed as establishing a religion.
Like it or not, public life in the US is suffused with Christianity and its influence. Christianity is the predominant religion: your coins have had “in God we trust” on them since 1864, your pledge of allegiance has had “one nation under God” in it since 1954, your president attends a yearly prayer breakfast.
Contemporary atheism, insofar as it is based on the unprovable assumption that God does not exist, has all the characteristics of a religion: it has its basic assumptions, evangelists, apostles, acolytes and bigots. However, it is very much a fringe sect with a world view that is largely incoherent. To have the cross removed on the grounds that it offends atheists is to tacitly favour the religion of atheism. Much better, surely, to use a symbol of the majority religion, one that has 225,000,000 adherents in the US, has a consistently reasonable view of reality and one that offers hope to those who were affected by 9/11.