Atheist group sues over cross at 9/11 memorial

[DiAnna]

how retarded that we have an association for atheists.

Why do you say that? Is it any more unreasonable that non-religious individuals might have an association devoted to their own interests, than it is for various religious and ethnic groups to have associations devoted to their interests?

but i don't see why other memorials/faiths can't be represented. i think that's reasonable - and in today's climate, called for.

I agree with this. If religion is going to be made a part of this primarily tax-funded memorial, then all applicable religions need to be included.

 

[DiAnna]

Ugh! I am so sick of this! We have become country governed by some group or another whose feelings got hurt or someone did something against THEIR principles. We are constantly bending over backwards to appease folks. Frankly, I don't see this as a religious symbol at all, I see it as expression of love for those we lost and respect and honor for those who responded. Surely to heavens folks ought to be able to get over themselves and their righteous indignation and allow folks to derive whatever peace of mind or comfort they find from this.

It appears that what you actually mean is that, in effect, those who are not Christian should get over themselves and their righteous indignation and allow Christian folks to derive whatever peace of mind or comfort they find from this.

The thing about America and it's freedom of religion is that people who do not worship the religion of the majority are also entitled to derive peace of mind and comfort... especially when the federal government is funding the lion's share of it.

I know you didn't mean this to be disparaging to those who were genuinely hurt by the omission of their loved one's beliefs but that's kind of how it sounds. This is America, melting pot of the world. Of course we're trying to appease people... because the people we try to appease are Americans, too!

 

[lilbug]

Ugh! I am so sick of this! We have become country governed by some group or another whose feelings got hurt or someone did something against THEIR principles. We are constantly bending over backwards to appease folks. Frankly, I don't see this as a religious symbol at all, I see it as expression of love for those we lost and respect and honor for those who responded. Surely to heavens folks ought to be able to get over themselves and their righteous indignation and allow folks to derive whatever peace of mind or comfort they find from this.

It appears that what you actually mean is that, in effect, those who are not Christian should get over themselves and their righteous indignation and allow Christian folks to derive whatever peace of mind or comfort they find from this.

The thing about America and it's freedom of religion is that people who do not worship the religion of the majority are also entitled to derive peace of mind and comfort... especially when the federal government is funding the lion's share of it.

I know you didn't mean this to be disparaging to those who were genuinely hurt by the omission of their loved one's beliefs but that's kind of how it sounds. This is America, melting pot of the world. Of course we're trying to appease people... because the people we try to appease are Americans, too!

We are talking about atheists here...if there's a symbol for that, let them erect it. I am aware there may have been others of different religions who lost their lives. I am perfectly content with folks displaying their symbols, but not at the cost of others being allowed to do so.

And..frankly I don't get why there has to be a fight or lawsuit over it....just submit whatever to whomever for permission to display your symbol.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

They clearly have a legitimate case based upon the facts of the complaint:

[The plaintiffs] are being subjected to, and injured in consequence of having, a religious
tradition that is not their own imposed upon them through the power of the
state, in violation of the First and Fourteenth Amendments to the
Constitution of the United States, and in violation of Sections 3 and 11 of
the Constitution of the State of New York.

The installation of the cross at the September 11 Memorial and
Museum is violative of Article 4 Section 40 of New York’s Civil Rights Act,
which mandates, inter alia:

All persons within the jurisdiction of this state shall be entitled to
the full and equal accommodations, advantages, facilities and
privileges of any places of public accommodations, resort or
amusement, subject only to the conditions and limitations
established by law and applicable alike to all persons.

57. The September 11 Memorial and Museum is included within Article 4
Section 40 of New York’s Civil Rights Law, which specifically includes “any
such public library, kindergarten, primary and secondary school, academy,
college, university, professional school, extension course, or other
educational facility, supported in whole or in part by public funds or by
contributions solicited from the general public.”

http://atheists.org/upload/WTC_Complaint.pdf

The question now is to determine if the cross has a secular purpose, is it meant to promote religion in any way, and is there an inappropriate entanglement of religion and state.

I frankly see no point of the cross other than to express a specific, Christian message, and is un-Constitutional accordingly.

How does allowing this on the grounds of a place that isn't even government controlled (it is controlled by a non profit, the area is run by an agency) create the establishment of a religion by the government?

See above – it’s a public policy and funding issue.

To Christians it is a sign that God took all of those that died, into heaven because this is a religious war.

And this would be evidence in support of the plaintiffs. In this and similar issues, Christians often have only themselves to blame.

What I'm saying was the intent of the establisment clause was to prevent the creation of something such as the Church of England. Also everyone forgets the free exercise part.

This is a typical misconception, enjoining religious groups from expressing their religion in a pubic venue is not a violation of the Free Exercise Clause.

 

[EPluribusUnum]

Ugh! I am so sick of this! We have become country governed by some group or another whose feelings got hurt or someone did something against THEIR principles. We are constantly bending over backwards to appease folks. Frankly, I don't see this as a religious symbol at all, I see it as expression of love for those we lost and respect and honor for those who responded. Surely to heavens folks ought to be able to get over themselves and their righteous indignation and allow folks to derive whatever peace of mind or comfort they find from this.

It appears that what you actually mean is that, in effect, those who are not Christian should get over themselves and their righteous indignation and allow Christian folks to derive whatever peace of mind or comfort they find from this.

The thing about America and it's freedom of religion is that people who do not worship the religion of the majority are also entitled to derive peace of mind and comfort... especially when the federal government is funding the lion's share of it.

I know you didn't mean this to be disparaging to those who were genuinely hurt by the omission of their loved one's beliefs but that's kind of how it sounds. This is America, melting pot of the world. Of course we're trying to appease people... because the people we try to appease are Americans, too!

We are talking about atheists here...if there's a symbol for that, let them erect it. I am aware there may have been others of different religions who lost their lives. I am perfectly content with folks displaying their symbols, but not at the cost of others being allowed to do so.

And..frankly I don't get why there has to be a fight or lawsuit over it....just submit whatever to whomever for permission to display your symbol.

"I am perfectly content with folks displaying their symbols, but not at the cost of others being allowed to do so."

This makes no sense whatsoever, you're saying you're content with people displaying there own symbols but not if others are also allowed to display their symbols. What?

"frankly I don't get why there has to be a fight or lawsuit over it"

This has already been discussed, christianity shouldn't be shown favoritism by the government at this memorial especially when it doesn't represent all deaths and families involved. Either all their beleifs or lack thereof be recognized or revoke the christian symbolism there, to not do so would in fact show favoritism towards christianity.

"We have become country governed by some group or another whose feelings got hurt or someone did something against THEIR principles."

THEIR principles? Should we bend to YOUR principles instead? Exactly whose principles are we to bend and not bend towards? If we do what you say then we're appeasing to your principles, I'm sorry but at some point this nation must stand for it's OWN principles and guess what, that's exactly what it's doing by not showing favoritism towards christianity in this memorial. For that's a principle this nation stands by through the constitution and one which it should stand by.

 

[Ravi]

Ugh! I am so sick of this! We have become country governed by some group or another whose feelings got hurt or someone did something against THEIR principles. We are constantly bending over backwards to appease folks. Frankly, I don't see this as a religious symbol at all, I see it as expression of love for those we lost and respect and honor for those who responded. Surely to heavens folks ought to be able to get over themselves and their righteous indignation and allow folks to derive whatever peace of mind or comfort they find from this.

Well, yeah. We should bend over backwards to appease Christians.

 

[lilbug]

It appears that what you actually mean is that, in effect, those who are not Christian should get over themselves and their righteous indignation and allow Christian folks to derive whatever peace of mind or comfort they find from this.

The thing about America and it's freedom of religion is that people who do not worship the religion of the majority are also entitled to derive peace of mind and comfort... especially when the federal government is funding the lion's share of it.

I know you didn't mean this to be disparaging to those who were genuinely hurt by the omission of their loved one's beliefs but that's kind of how it sounds. This is America, melting pot of the world. Of course we're trying to appease people... because the people we try to appease are Americans, too!

We are talking about atheists here...if there's a symbol for that, let them erect it. I am aware there may have been others of different religions who lost their lives. I am perfectly content with folks displaying their symbols, but not at the cost of others being allowed to do so.

And..frankly I don't get why there has to be a fight or lawsuit over it....just submit whatever to whomever for permission to display your symbol.

"I am perfectly content with folks displaying their symbols, but not at the cost of others being allowed to do so."

This makes no sense whatsoever, you're saying you're content with people displaying there own symbols but not if others are also allowed to display their symbols. What?

"frankly I don't get why there has to be a fight or lawsuit over it"

This has already been discussed, christianity shouldn't be shown favoritism by the government at this memorial especially when it doesn't represent all deaths and families involved. Either all their beleifs or lack thereof be recognized or revoke the christian symbolism there, to not do so would in fact show favoritism towards christianity.

"We have become country governed by some group or another whose feelings got hurt or someone did something against THEIR principles."

THEIR principles? Should we bend to YOUR principles instead? Exactly whose principles are we to bend and not bend towards? If we do what you say then we're appeasing to your principles, I'm sorry but at some point this nation must stand for it's OWN principles and guess what, that's exactly what it's doing by not showing favoritism towards christianity in this memorial. For that's a principle this nation stands by through the constitution and one which it should stand by.

First, let me just spit out all the words that folks keep putting in my mouth.

I guess you missed the part of my quote where I said it was fine with me if others erected their own symbol, therefore, there would be no favortism shown. Just find a means of doing so without the fuss and lawsuits. Why does every damn issue have to be settled in court? Seek permission to erect your own symbol/recognition of your faith/spirituality or lack thereof. And...if as result of this lawsuit the symbol isn't allowed to be displayed at all, then indeed, one groups rights would thereby be trampled upon.

 

[martybegan]

I don't know if it qualifies or not. Hasn't it been ruled that allowing only one religion is considered an establishment of religion if it is paid for with taxpayer's money?

If you took religion out of the issue, then there would be no issue. Are you now trying to claim a cross has no religious symbolism?

What I'm saying was the intent of the establisment clause was to prevent the creation of something such as the Church of England. Also everyone forgets the free exercise part.

Somehow the courts have mutated it into meaning anything involving any government organziation cannot even mention religion.

It is a long way from having to look at something that looks like a cross, to having to pay a tithe to the "Church of the United States." The 1st amendment's prohibition of the establishment of a state religion has been bastardized into a method used by people of an assholian nature to scrub any mention of religion from the commons.

Of course the cross has symbolism of a religous nature, but how does including it in a public memorial establish a religion, or prevent someone elses free exercise therof?

It prohibits government on any level showing favoritism for one religion over another (or irreligion).

How is allowing this cross in a memorial showing favoritism? Is the government forcing someone to worship by it when they walk by? Are they forcing them to pay a tithe when they view it?

On your second point, removing any trace of religion from the commons IS showing favoritism to Irreligion, otherwise known as atheism.

 

[martybegan]

Ugh! I am so sick of this! We have become country governed by some group or another whose feelings got hurt or someone did something against THEIR principles. We are constantly bending over backwards to appease folks. Frankly, I don't see this as a religious symbol at all, I see it as expression of love for those we lost and respect and honor for those who responded. Surely to heavens folks ought to be able to get over themselves and their righteous indignation and allow folks to derive whatever peace of mind or comfort they find from this.

Well, yeah. We should bend over backwards to appease Christians.

Or we have to bend over backwards to appease some butthurt atheists.

Either way someone loses. To me the losers should be any oversensitive asshat.

 

[martybegan]

From what I understand, the Federal government is pouring money into the memorial. So yeah, IMO, it should be all religions or none. And if any atheists died that day, they could have some sort of representation as well.

That is just a really unworkable concept. Also just because it is a cross doesnt mean people of other religons are automatically offended. Its a small percentage. So we have to let a small percentage of the population with sand in thier crack dictate exactly what is allowed in a memorial.

I have decided I am now offended by fire engines. I don't want one of the crushed fire engines in the museum. Also if we actually do it, we need to include an NYPD police car, an ambulance, a PA Police car, a sanitation truck, and a regular car.

See how stupid that sounds?

Why is it unworkable? They make it work at Arlington.

it works at arlington because the place is so damn big, and each grave is the individual resting place of a person. You could basically throw any symbol you want, and it wouldn't and shouldn't be a problem

The comparison here would be an atheist saying he doesnt want to see ANY cross or religous symbol on the grounds. I wonder how well that would go over?

 

[martybegan]

From what I understand, the Federal government is pouring money into the memorial. So yeah, IMO, it should be all religions or none. And if any atheists died that day, they could have some sort of representation as well.

That is just a really unworkable concept. Also just because it is a cross doesnt mean people of other religons are automatically offended. Its a small percentage. So we have to let a small percentage of the population with sand in thier crack dictate exactly what is allowed in a memorial.

I have decided I am now offended by fire engines. I don't want one of the crushed fire engines in the museum. Also if we actually do it, we need to include an NYPD police car, an ambulance, a PA Police car, a sanitation truck, and a regular car.

See how stupid that sounds?

You're right we shouldn't afford the minority honor, respect, and fairness since they're apart of the minority.

Sorry but this is deeper than simply the arbitrariness of what people are offended by or especially what they value (ie their religion). This is about how Christianity is shown favoritism above all other religious and non-religious views, that shouldn't be allowed as it deliberately neglects honoring and respecting a significant portion of deaths and families involved.

So basically If your specific viewpoint or belief is not represented, everyone can piss off. How chariatable of you.

How is a person of another religon or of no religion harmed by having this at the memorial? Where is the damage? Where is the establishment of a state religion?

 

[Si modo]

We are talking about atheists here...if there's a symbol for that, let them erect it. I am aware there may have been others of different religions who lost their lives. I am perfectly content with folks displaying their symbols, but not at the cost of others being allowed to do so.

And..frankly I don't get why there has to be a fight or lawsuit over it....just submit whatever to whomever for permission to display your symbol.

"I am perfectly content with folks displaying their symbols, but not at the cost of others being allowed to do so."

This makes no sense whatsoever, you're saying you're content with people displaying there own symbols but not if others are also allowed to display their symbols. What?

"frankly I don't get why there has to be a fight or lawsuit over it"

This has already been discussed, christianity shouldn't be shown favoritism by the government at this memorial especially when it doesn't represent all deaths and families involved. Either all their beleifs or lack thereof be recognized or revoke the christian symbolism there, to not do so would in fact show favoritism towards christianity.

"We have become country governed by some group or another whose feelings got hurt or someone did something against THEIR principles."

THEIR principles? Should we bend to YOUR principles instead? Exactly whose principles are we to bend and not bend towards? If we do what you say then we're appeasing to your principles, I'm sorry but at some point this nation must stand for it's OWN principles and guess what, that's exactly what it's doing by not showing favoritism towards christianity in this memorial. For that's a principle this nation stands by through the constitution and one which it should stand by.

First, let me just spit out all the words that folks keep putting in my mouth.

I guess you missed the part of my quote where I said it was fine with me if others erected their own symbol, therefore, there would be no favortism shown. Just find a means of doing so without the fuss and lawsuits. Why does every damn issue have to be settled in court? Seek permission to erect your own symbol/recognition of your faith/spirituality or lack thereof. And...if as result of this lawsuit the symbol isn't allowed to be displayed at all, then indeed, one groups rights would thereby be trampled upon.

The Occam's Razor solution.

Too bad they rarely happen when the authorities are involved.

 

[lilbug]

Ugh! I am so sick of this! We have become country governed by some group or another whose feelings got hurt or someone did something against THEIR principles. We are constantly bending over backwards to appease folks. Frankly, I don't see this as a religious symbol at all, I see it as expression of love for those we lost and respect and honor for those who responded. Surely to heavens folks ought to be able to get over themselves and their righteous indignation and allow folks to derive whatever peace of mind or comfort they find from this.

Well, yeah. We should bend over backwards to appease Christians.

Or we have to bend over backwards to appease some butthurt atheists.

Either way someone loses. To me the losers should be any oversensitive asshat.

Yeah...what he said! But, IMO nobody should be bending to appease anyone. That approach sure hasn't done us any good, lawsuits, upon silly lawsuits. Pretty soon folks aren't going to be able to step foot out of their homes for fear of offending someone and being sued. It's ridiculous. Folks need to come on down from their high and mighty and just live and let live.

 

[Lovebears65]

This country has become so political correct to the point its ridiculous. Cant say Merry Christmas because it might offend another religious group but its ok when they have their religious holidays.
Why cant they have the cross. If your offended by it dont look at it at the memorial. If it makes the families of the 9/11 feel better to have the cross let them have it. That is who matters in this memorial. The friends and families who lost a love one or the people who worked in the world trade center. People are to sensitive or they are just wanting to stir the pot. I do not get offended on others religion unless they try to shove it down my throats in words not by symbols.

 

[Si modo]

This country has become so political correct to the point its ridiculous. Cant say Merry Christmas because it might offend another religious group but its ok when they have their religious holidays.
Why cant they have the cross. If your offended by it dont look at it at the memorial. If it makes the families of the 9/11 feel better to have the cross let them have it. That is who matters in this memorial. The friends and families who lost a love one or the people who worked in the world trade center. People are to sensitive or they are just wanting to stir the pot. I do not get offended on others religion unless they try to shove it down my throats in words not by symbols.

It's funny to hear folks talk about saying 'Merry Christmas'. I have said it all my life around Christmas season. I say it a lot. And, although raised Roman Catholic, I am not a Christian, but I say it still, because I think it's a nice greeting. And, I have lived all over the USA (and elsewhere).

Never once has anyone ever taken offense to it. Never once has anyone corrected me for saying it to them. They respond in kind or say 'Happy Holidays' or 'Happy Winter' or something like that.

I'm wondering where these folks are that take any 'Merry Christmas' greeting in offense.

 

[yidnar]

Atheist group sues over proposed cross at 9/11 memorial | The Lookout - Yahoo! News

You gotta be fucking kidding me!

I shit you not! I recall these religious zealots trying to stop a mosk from being built up the street from the 911 sight. I thought the same thing, Are you kidding me??? LOL!!

EVERY TIME A MUSLIM SCREAMS AN ANGEL GETS IT"S WINGS

 

[yidnar]

It is sad this day in age, the 21st century, that people still believe in the man in the sky. Sad.

DO you hate GOD because you look like you've been bobbing for french fries???or did someone shove your head into a beehive???DAMN DUDE I KNOW YOU CAN"T HELP BEING UGLY BUT YOU DON"T HAVE TO SHARE IT WITH US!!!

 

[Ravi]

"I am perfectly content with folks displaying their symbols, but not at the cost of others being allowed to do so."

This makes no sense whatsoever, you're saying you're content with people displaying there own symbols but not if others are also allowed to display their symbols. What?

"frankly I don't get why there has to be a fight or lawsuit over it"

This has already been discussed, christianity shouldn't be shown favoritism by the government at this memorial especially when it doesn't represent all deaths and families involved. Either all their beleifs or lack thereof be recognized or revoke the christian symbolism there, to not do so would in fact show favoritism towards christianity.

"We have become country governed by some group or another whose feelings got hurt or someone did something against THEIR principles."

THEIR principles? Should we bend to YOUR principles instead? Exactly whose principles are we to bend and not bend towards? If we do what you say then we're appeasing to your principles, I'm sorry but at some point this nation must stand for it's OWN principles and guess what, that's exactly what it's doing by not showing favoritism towards christianity in this memorial. For that's a principle this nation stands by through the constitution and one which it should stand by.

First, let me just spit out all the words that folks keep putting in my mouth.

I guess you missed the part of my quote where I said it was fine with me if others erected their own symbol, therefore, there would be no favortism shown. Just find a means of doing so without the fuss and lawsuits. Why does every damn issue have to be settled in court? Seek permission to erect your own symbol/recognition of your faith/spirituality or lack thereof. And...if as result of this lawsuit the symbol isn't allowed to be displayed at all, then indeed, one groups rights would thereby be trampled upon.

The Occam's Razor solution.

Too bad they rarely happen when the authorities are involved.

From what I understand they did try to resolve the issue without the lawsuit. They asked to erect some kind of symbol to honor those that died that were atheists and were refused.

They have also stated that they will drop the suit if symbols from all the religions of those that died are included.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

Why does every damn issue have to be settled in court?

As opposed to where else?

The issue isn’t lawsuits but the apparent ignorance of Constitutional law on the part of various jurisdictions.

It’s very simple: if you don’t want lawsuits don’t establish religious symbols in public venues, or as in this case publicly funded venues.

How is allowing this cross in a memorial showing favoritism? Is the government forcing someone to worship by it when they walk by? Are they forcing them to pay a tithe when they view it?

It has nothing to do with favoritism or forcing people to worship, it’s an issue of conforming to established Constitutional case law with regard to religious symbols in public venues, where there is a possible Establishment Clause violation. Every American has the right to challenge such a possible violation in court. And again: if you don’t want lawsuits, don’t establish religious symbols in public venues.

This country has become so political correct to the point its ridiculous. Cant say Merry Christmas because it might offend another religious group but its ok when they have their religious holidays.
Why cant they have the cross. If your offended by it dont look at it at the memorial. If it makes the families of the 9/11 feel better to have the cross let them have it. That is who matters in this memorial. The friends and families who lost a love one or the people who worked in the world trade center. People are to sensitive or they are just wanting to stir the pot. I do not get offended on others religion unless they try to shove it down my throats in words not by symbols.

This has nothing to do with ‘political correctness,’ no one is restricted from any kind of religious expression. Just keep it out of the pubic venues where it doesn’t belong. Very simple.

 

[MeBelle]

Something that was lost in this story is what this 'cross' really stands for.
I was in NYC last year and had the opportunity to actually see the cross while it was still in the church yard.

On that cross are spray painted written memorials to those that lost their lives on 9/11. Fireman, Policeman etc. It is a tribute, that just so happens to be in the shape of a cross. It is not considered a religious symbol.

I will see if I can find the photos that I took of it, although they will not be great ones since they were taken at night.