[BronUVT]

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2011/07/27...t-11-memorial/


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.

It's just two steel beams from the towers that intersects and appears to be a cross. So what? Does it have to be a cross? Does it have to represent only Christianity? No it doesn't.

This is the definition on Wikipedia: The cross is one of the most ancient human symbols, and is used by many religions, such as Christianity. It is frequently a representation of the division of the world into four elements (Chevalier, 1997) or cardinal points, or alternately as the union of the concepts of divinity, the vertical line, and the world, the horizontal line (Koch, 1955).

History: It is not known when the first cross image was made; after circles, crosses are one of the first symbols drawn by children of all cultures. There are many cross-shaped incisions in European cult caves, dating back to the earliest stages of human cultural development in the stone age. Like other symbols from this period, their use continued in the Celtic and Germanic cultures in Europe. For example, celtic coins minted many centuries before the Christian era may have an entire side showing this type of cross, sometimes with the cardinal points marked by concave depressions in the same style as in stone age carvings. Other coins may be showing the cross held by a rider on a horse and springing a fern leaf, sometimes identified as a Tree of Life symbol.

It's just two beams that intersect. I don't see how this is "unconstitutional" especially when there is no such thing in the Constitution as separation of church and state. I don't see it as religious in any way.

[Goooooblin]

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2011/07/27...t-11-memorial/


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.

It's just two steel beams from the towers that intersects and appears to be a cross. So what? Does it have to be a cross? Does it have to represent only Christianity? No it doesn't.

Sorry, but looking at that picture there is NO WAY that was NOT intended to be a Christian cross.

This is the definition on Wikipedia: The cross is one of the most ancient human symbols, and is used by many religions, such as Christianity. It is frequently a representation of the division of the world into four elements (Chevalier, 1997) or cardinal points, or alternately as the union of the concepts of divinity, the vertical line, and the world, the horizontal line (Koch, 1955).

History: It is not known when the first cross image was made; after circles, crosses are one of the first symbols drawn by children of all cultures. There are many cross-shaped incisions in European cult caves, dating back to the earliest stages of human cultural development in the stone age. Like other symbols from this period, their use continued in the Celtic and Germanic cultures in Europe. For example, celtic coins minted many centuries before the Christian era may have an entire side showing this type of cross, sometimes with the cardinal points marked by concave depressions in the same style as in stone age carvings. Other coins may be showing the cross held by a rider on a horse and springing a fern leaf, sometimes identified as a Tree of Life symbol. Moon and stars have been watched and studied by civilizations since the dawn of time...why not put up a giant star and crescent near the WTC?

It's just two beams that intersect. If it's just two beams...the why not make them into an A-frame or something else.?

I don't see how this is "unconstitutional" especially when there is no such thing in the Constitution as separation of church and state. Separation of Church and state is the law of the land, affirmed on many occasions by the US Supreme Court.

I don't see it as religious in any way. Perhaps you missed this part of the article:

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.

[Kdgjhytiy]

People scream seperation of church and state then quote the bible to keep the gays out. Interesting. Not saying anybody did it here, but I've seen it lately.

[Beragagnu]

People scream seperation of church and state then quote the bible to keep the gays out. Interesting. Not saying anybody did it here, but I've seen it lately.

Could it be they are different people?

Most of the Bible-quoters, generally don't seem to think Separation of Church and state is necessary.

[beneitpedro]

No its people that will generally use ANYTHING to get something there way even if it contradicts a previous argument.

[drugstore]

Because it was extreamist muslims that destroyed the WTC we need to put a cross in the memorial.... Yeah this is a religious statment with a very specific religion in mind, Chrisitanity (and its denominations). This smacks of a religion trying to place itself before Americans, as if this was a Christian Nation and it wants the world to know that the attacks of 9/11 were an attack on Christian Values, not Americans.

I'll admit that I get sick of seeing Atheist groups sueing everytime Christianity (lets admit it, its mostly the Christians that Atheists target, whether justified or not) steps over "the wall of seperation" but in this instance, good. Its two freaking beams that instersect in the form of a cross! New Flash, every support structure in the world, since the begining of the history of skeletal building frame work, has crosses in it. Its nothing spiritual or invisible sky-guy magic, its just simple construction principles in practice. And quite frankly I find its display to be morbid and disgusting to a degree that far out strips the idea of just one dead guy being asociated with it.

I got an idea. Put up the big piece of industrial garbage but put a nice sign next to it, to remind everyone that sees it "Religion did this."

[BqTyG9eS]

Well, whatever the reasons or truth this statement reveals the group protesting to be the asshats they truly are. Couldn't just cite your reasons without the insulting rancor?

"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."

[metropropuskruww]

No matter how I edit Dave Silverman's statement in my head, the sting of insult is still there. He could have maybe been less insulting, but the fact of the matter is, he makes a very good point. Either God is an sociopath with a sick sense of humor, or he doesn't exist and cross beams are a product of good constrution habits and not divine influence, either way the WTC Cross is inappropriate.

[DeilMikina]

Yeah its a cross. Whats there to debate there?

It should have just stayed with a church and problem solved.

[Lapsiks]

Given the current deficit, maybe they could just scrap the two beams. I'm guessing they'd fetch a decent amount...

[fedelwet]

No matter how I edit Dave Silverman's statement in my head, the sting of insult is still there. He could have maybe been less insulting, but the fact of the matter is, he makes a very good point. Either God is an sociopath with a sick sense of humor, or he doesn't exist and cross beams are a product of good constrution habits and not divine influence, either way the WTC Cross is inappropriate.

I suppose if you believe that God's plan contains every single event that occurs in the world (ala The Adjustment Bureau) then yes I suppose he has a point. Unfortunately a cross states no such assertion and some religious people would tell you that free-will negates that premise.

Silverman's cause is not served by being an asshat.

[margoaroyo]

Okay,

1. Silverman's comment is definitely mocking and inappropriate.

2. I don't even necessarily agree with the lawsuit...if this piece is going to be placed in a museum/memorial as an artifact of the time, etc. Fine with me. When you first look at the picture it looks like they are erecting it in the middle of ground zero, but that's not what is happening...they are lifting it out of there on a crane. If it's in a museum-type setting...I'm cool with it, it's part of the history.

3. The biggest insult (to our intelligence) however, is the suggestion that there is nothing religious about it, that's it's merely two beams...puhhleeze. There were plenty of beams and things found in the rubble, I'm sure. This was a big deal because it looks like a Christian cross, so some people think God had a hand in that, or used that as a source of strenth/hope.

[Searmoreibe]

I'm sorry, I can't see the WTC cross as anything but a piece of garbage. Its a symbol of stupidity if anything else. Religious extremism caused the deaths of thousands of people in an instant and how are we going to remember them, more religion.

[freeprescriptionplanrrx]

Separation of Church and state is the law of the land, affirmed on many occasions by the US Supreme Court.

Unfortunately that is true, even though the 1st amendment only says that "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof..."

I'll admit that I get sick of seeing Atheist groups sueing everytime Christianity (lets admit it, its mostly the Christians that Atheists target, whether justified or not) steps over "the wall of seperation" but in this instance, good. Since it is not a govt site, how is it 'stepping over the bounds'?? And if that is the case, why is it that athests ONLY seem to go after christianity.. Why not islam, or hindu?


No matter how I edit Dave Silverman's statement in my head, the sting of insult is still there. He could have maybe been less insulting, but the fact of the matter is, he makes a very good point. Either God is an sociopath with a sick sense of humor, or he doesn't exist and cross beams are a product of good constrution habits and not divine influence, either way the WTC Cross is inappropriate.
Agred. Wrong way to say it, but right thing to say.. IF god did exist why does he allow things like this t happen?

[invasuant]

Unfortunately that is true, even though the 1st amendment only says that "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof..."

So, you are opposed to a separation of church and state?

[N9u9ie4p]

I can't help but think this group is the same or related to the group who previously brought us the lawsuit/complaint against the street sign a few weeks ago (the one by the firehouse that no one objected to until it was a done deal). If they are the same group or even affiliated, I feel like asking, "u mad, bro?"

If they are going to put up iconography, I'd say there's plenty of room for others, if crosses just don't tickle your fancy. After all, many diverse faiths, as well as racial/ethnic/socioeconomic groups make up the WTC fallen.

And anyway, personally, I see that the cross in this instance has a generic "religious" factor, not unlike roadside crosses that mark where fatal car wrecks occurred. Yes there is overt symbolism, but I don't see it as some kind of excuse to proselytize, and the victims are not here to catch the difference.

As to why God "allows" such destruction and the depravity it comes from: It is our own free will that leads someone to decide to carry out a given act, and our own free will that must rectify and bring justice, preferably i time to stop said acts. We all "signed up for this" on some cosmic level (not just terrorist acts, but life on this planet in general).

[Heclailia]

I can't help but think this group is the same or related to the group who previously brought us the lawsuit/complaint against the street sign a few weeks ago (the one by the firehouse that no one objected to until it was a done deal). If they are the same group or even affiliated, I feel like asking, "u mad, bro?"

I figured as much as well

If they are going to put up iconography, I'd say there's plenty of room for others, if crosses just don't tickle your fancy. After all, many diverse faiths, as well as racial/ethnic/socioeconomic groups make up the WTC fallen. Hell, Muslims can't even put up a privately-owned and funded activity center within 2 blocks of ground zero.

And anyway, personally, I see that the cross in this instance has a generic "religious" factor, not unlike roadside crosses that mark where fatal car wrecks occurred. Yes there is overt symbolism, but I don't see it as some kind of excuse to proselytize, and the victims are not here to catch the difference. I always thought those roadside crosses were Christian as well.

I mean, I've seen some roadside Stars of David also.

As to why God "allows" such destruction and the depravity it comes from: It is our own free will that leads someone to decide to carry out a given act, and our own free will that must rectify and bring justice, preferably i time to stop said acts. We all "signed up for this" on some cosmic level (not just terrorist acts, but life on this planet in general). yeah, I don't think any god intervenes with what is going on down here, either.

[xtc2d6u8]

I suggest we put all the brainless zealots into one state - say Texas (most of them came from there to start with) - and let them set up a theocracy where the ten commandments and Jesus are the law of the land. And see how many minutes it lasts before they burn it to the ground.

[drugimpotence]

Okay,

1. Silverman's comment is definitely mocking and inappropriate.

2. I don't even necessarily agree with the lawsuit...if this piece is going to be placed in a museum/memorial as an artifact of the time, etc. Fine with me. When you first look at the picture it looks like they are erecting it in the middle of ground zero, but that's not what is happening...they are lifting it out of there on a crane. If it's in a museum-type setting...I'm cool with it, it's part of the history.

3. The biggest insult (to our intelligence) however, is the suggestion that there is nothing religious about it, that's it's merely two beams...puhhleeze. There were plenty of beams and things found in the rubble, I'm sure. This was a big deal because it looks like a Christian cross, so some people think God had a hand in that, or used that as a source of strenth/hope.

I don't think its mocking or inappropriate.

So, you are opposed to a separation of church and state?

Absolutely. Religion has no place in government.

Hell, Muslims can't even put up a privately-owned and funded activity center within 2 blocks of ground zero.

THIS. How is this not a double standard? We're OK with a Christian symbol but screw any other religion.

I suggest we put all the brainless zealots into one state - say Texas (most of them came from there to start with) - and let them set up a theocracy where the ten commandments and Jesus are the law of the land. And see how many minutes it lasts before they burn it to the ground.

Agreed

[29clepayJainync]

I don't think its mocking or inappropriate.

Absolutely. Religion has no place in government. That would mean you SUPPORT the separation of church and state.