Atheist Group Sues over Proposed Cross at 9/11 Memorial
After almost 10 years, the 9/11 memorial will be unveiled in September. If they can get settle this cross thing. I say keep the memorial religion-free.
First, for the obvious reason. Separation of church and state. The US government has invested millions in the project. It should be neutral.
Second, not all of those who died in 9/11 were Christian. There were Jewish people, Muslims, Atheists, etc. Naturally, an atheist group filed the suit. Jewish people also joined. Interestingly, even a Protestant joined the suit. Because the cross came from a Catholic church, he feels it doesn’t represent his brother, who is Lutheran. If fellow Christians have a problem with it, just keep anything religious out of it.
Third, one of the greatest things about the United States are religious freedom and tolerance. We are not a Theocracy. You can worship how you want or not worship at all. To keep the memorial religion-free shows our respect for everyone who died there, religious or not.
Whatever is decided, I hope this suit does not push back the opening in September. To me, the fact that it’s taken almost 10 years to build a memorial is disgusting. The people of NYC have had to live almost a decade with gaping holes at Ground Zero, a constant reminder of that horrible day. There should have been a memorial or park years ago. Something beautiful and reverent born out of ugliness and pain. It’s way past time, so I hope this matter is settled soon.
July 29th, 2011 at 3:28 AM
there’s been so much haggling over the memorial, that i almost wish they’d just forget about having one. they’ve tainted it before it’s even been built by politicizing it. as for the cross, i would find it offensive. it’s not supposed to be a religious memorial, and as you said, little spinny, people of many and of no religion died there.
July 29th, 2011 at 1:15 PM
Exactly. It’s not supposed to be a religious memorial.
July 29th, 2011 at 6:02 AM
I have a difficult time believing people who say they find the cross “offensive.” I don’t find a Star Of David, or a Crescent and Star offensive. Not at all…
But that doesn’t mean I think the cross should stay. The memorial should be kept free of any kind of religious symbol, regardless of what it is.
I also find it disgusting that it has taken so long for something to be built on the site.
Personally, I would have preferred three towers built right next to each other, resembling the old towers. Only the one in the middle would rise above the other two, indicating a big, healthy “FUCK YOU.”
It would add something to it, don’t ya think?
July 29th, 2011 at 1:19 PM
You and I don’t find it offensive. Other people might because they hate religion, or don’t like it in their face.
I would soooo support that building configuration!!!
July 31st, 2011 at 12:52 AM
it’s not a matter of hating religion, at least not in my case. it’s a matter of people automatically assuming that someone or a group of people are christian. not sure if i’m making any sense. where i live, when there’s a fatality in an auto accident, they used to put up crosses on the spot where a person or persons died. there were times when the person was not christian, but there were people who insisted that the cross should be the default symbol. it’s disrespectful to people of other religions and to those who don’t subscribe to any religion at all. if someone wants to wear a cross or have one on their front door, i don’t find that offensive, because it’s someone’s personal choice paid for with his or her own money. however, when it comes to public places, it’s a different story. public buildings paid for by taxpayers are not places of worship. that’s what churches, synagogues, mosques. and temples are for.
July 31st, 2011 at 10:53 AM
It’s definitely the public thing for me.
July 29th, 2011 at 6:05 AM
Cross free…people died…not a religion…period!
July 29th, 2011 at 1:19 PM
Absolutely lobo!
July 29th, 2011 at 1:31 PM
I agree with the group here. No cross. We weren’t the target of 9/11 because we were Christian. Christianity had nothing to do with it. The World Trade Center was a place of commerce – not a church – before the bombing. Why does it need a cross now?
I know plenty of folks that find a cross offensive. There are crosses I find offensive. Not the cross itself – but the things that have been done in the name of the cross. People who have been oppressed by religion (particularly Christianity) in this country should be able to honor those involved – the victims and the rescuers who perished. Personally, I have been chewed out more viciously and treated more poorly by people wearing crosses than any one else. A cross around the neck of a bigot pr a homophobe – I find to be terribly offensive. The cross carries too much baggage to do anything but distract at a monument supposedly honoring everyone.
The cross is not to blame for my offended nature — the people are – however their actions have made that symbol one of division instead of unification – and the monument is supposed to be showing that unity is not intimidated by violence and that love is stronger than death.
July 31st, 2011 at 10:50 AM
and the monument is supposed to be showing that unity is not intimidated by violence and that love is stronger than death.
Spot on!!
August 3rd, 2011 at 7:33 AM
“he cross is not to blame for my offended nature — the people are – however their actions have made that symbol one of division instead of unification – and the monument is supposed to be showing that unity is not intimidated by violence and that love is stronger than death.”
Well put.
These people need to get that message (link via Joe My God)
http://i.imgur.com/1LXA1.jpg
They may read the bible, but they certainly don’t understand it.
July 29th, 2011 at 1:59 PM
It’s a good question to pose.
Why did it take so blasted long to get to this point, I wonder?
July 31st, 2011 at 10:51 AM
I think it was all that red tape. It sucks!!
July 30th, 2011 at 11:44 PM
Beagle,
I appreciate your sentiments. It’s true that many horrible things have been done by those carrying a cross. But I don’t think any of that outweighs the life and teachings of the man the cross represents.
Who would find the message of love, peace, and understanding offensive? That’s what the cross represents, no matter how many bigots and morons say different…
If people really think about it, terrible things have been done by those wrapped in the American flag. Do we now find the flag so offensive that we would ban in from the memorial? Of course some (nobody here that I know of) would welcome that.
My point is that we should not have the cross on the memorial because it is unconstituional, not because someone might find it offensive, which is relative anyway.
August 10th, 2011 at 7:57 AM
[...] disagree. This seems to be lost on some. For example, in a blog post from SpinnyLiberal titled 9/11 Memorial: Cross or No Cross, Spinny states the following about whether the memorial at Ground Zero which is set to unveil [...]
September 17th, 2012 at 9:40 AM
I say they should put the cross on display. This country was founded on the cross, and on the cross and Jesus it should remain!
September 17th, 2012 at 7:55 PM
The founding fathers were Deists, so I’m not sure I would say that the country was founded on the cross.
Thank you so much for reading and commenting!