Atheists Protest Ground Zero Cross

WorldNetDaily ^ | Posted: June 18, 2002 | By Ron Strom

[Bad~Rodeo]

Decry plan to use symbol as part of 9-11 memorial

:

The organization American Atheists is protesting a proposal to use a large steel cross found in the rubble of the World Trade Center in a memorial to victims of the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks.

Describing itself as a "nationwide movement which defends the civil rights of nonbelievers," the group said in a statement yesterday that use of the cross in a government-funded monument "would violate the separation of church and state, be insensitive to those victims who had no religious beliefs and would incredibly pay homage to religion – the prime motivating factor in the faith-based attack of Sept. 11."

The Lower Manhattan Development Corporation is the local agency in charge of planning for the rebuilding of the site.

Ed Malloy, president of the Building and Construction Trades Council and a board member of the agency, has asked that the cross be made a permanent part of any future memorial.

According to the New York Daily News, construction workers, firefighters, police officers and family members have held weekly Sunday services at the site of the cross since Sept. 11.

"We're hoping it will stay right where it is and become part of any permanent memorial," Malloy was quoted as saying in the Daily News.

Ellen Johnson, president of American Atheists objects to the possibility that the cross might be used in a taxpayer-supported project.

"This is an inappropriate use of taxpayer money," she said in the statement, "You can't take government funds to promote religion, especially sectarian religion in the form of a cross or any other religious symbol."

Johnson added that any memorial to the victims of the attacks "should bring Americans together, not divide them on the basis or religion or anything else."

Ron Barrier, national spokesman for the group, stressed that Muslims, Hindus and other non-Christians were killed in the attacks as well.

What about them? he asked. "Are we going to turn the site of the WTC into a religious shrine with competing religious slogans, symbols and displays? Any monument to the victims, and those who helped in the aftermath of Sept. 11 should be tasteful, as well as a unifying statement about America and humanity.

"Christian symbols are as inappropriate as a Muslim crescent or some other religious label," Barrier said.

Construction worker Frank Silecchia happened upon the perfectly symmetrical cross in the midst of the WTC wreckage just a few days after the attacks. It was standing straight, 20-feet high, surrounded by many smaller crosses.

"When I first saw it, it took my heart," Silecchia said. "It helped me heal the burden of my despair, and gave me closure on the whole catastrophe."

Said WorldNetDaily columnist Ann Coulter in an October column : "The cross at Ground Zero was not simply the cross beams remaining from an existing building. It was formed out of beams from Building One plunging, splitting and crashing into Building Six."

"There's no symmetry to anything down there," an FBI chaplain said at the time, "except those crosses."

Johnson said that her group would go to court if necessary to challenge the use of government money for the placement of any religious symbol at the WTC site.

[stands2reason]

Atheism is not a religion. If you disagree, please provide the name of the deity that atheists worship.

Do you think Buddhism is a religion?

[cake_crumb]

"I'm sure there's a place for each and every one of those artifacts. Just because it's not incorporated into the site memorial does not mean they cease to exist"

...I am sure that we can agree to disagree.

Obviously a bloody body would not be used in a permanent memorial. That would be disgusting and indiscribably disrespectful of the dead. I don't think that was what you had in mind either.

I don't know about you, but I am totally tired of being forced to conform to the twisted ideas of small groups of people. In fact, I find the idea of being forced to conform to twisted ideas generally OFFENSIVE. I still say the artifacts should stay at the site, as they are.

[stands2reason]

Hello! I must be one of those perverts you're referring to, since I'm not a Christian. I don't recall Christ saying, "Perverts, come to me..."

[stands2reason]

The message of Christ is supposed to OFFEND? So, how many converts have you made this way? I'm curious.

[rdb3]

Thank you! That's going on the profile page.

[Gurn]

C'mon! Let's hear (some more) from our tiny gang of atheist Freepers! Tell us what idiots we are, again.

[whattajoke]

While I'll rise above taking your bait, I would like to point out that I find it laughable that most Christians (and other religious folk) seem to think that atheists have no ethics. (And please don't dredge up Stalin, Hitler, and Mao again). Are you telling me that you are so weak of constitution that if you woke up one day and their was suddenly irrefutable proof that god didn't exist you would suddenly go on a raping and pillaging spree? Of course not, you're better than that...so why is it that those of us (unadulterating, family loving, value having) non theists are somehow "unethical." Hell, even Klintoon goes to church every Sunday.

[Grampa Dave]

Two lines that laser into the reality of most so called left wingers supposedly against religion:

Notice that these 'atheists' have no problem with Muslims or any of the 'designer religions' that have popped up, like Scientology.

I think most of them aren't really atheists, they are just anti-Christian.

[cake_crumb]

"I think most of them aren't really atheists, they are just anti-Christian."

I think their aim is to force the world to convert to their anti-religion, just like the Islamoc terrorists are.

There's a huge movement among the Arab populace which very err..."militantly" wants to know if the rest of the world is with them (and thus the Palestinian homocide bombers) or with Israel...the EEEEEVEEEEEL zionist occupier. The are ganging up on Americans overseas ant insisting they make a choice.

[Hila]

We protest atheists for being intolerant and ignorant. America was founded as a believing nation, with faith in the God of the Bible, so therefore it will always be appropriate to honor the One who is our God. Their whining and whoring with the moon-god of islam is truly a stench. The recovery of our people, the healing, the hope and the mercy and strength come from the Father of Lights, and so we shall honor Him and Him alone.

[MissAmericanPie]

Unless there is federal money involved is it really any of their business?

[4Godsoloved..Hegave]

Atheism is not a religion. If you disagree, please provide the name of the deity that atheists worship.

they worship "themselves".

Romans 1:25 Who changed the truth of God into a lie, and worshipped and served the creature more than the Creator, who is blessed for ever. Amen.
Romans 10:3 For they being ignorant of God's righteousness, and going about to establish their own righteousness, have not submitted themselves unto the righteousness of God.

[whattajoke]

"America was founded as a believing nation, with faith in the God of the Bible, so therefore it will always be appropriate to honor the One who is our God. Their whining and whoring with the moon-god of islam is truly a stench. The recovery of our people, the healing, the hope and the mercy and strength come from the Father of Lights, and so we shall honor Him and Him alone"

geeze, I'll be sure to invite you to my next party! you have demonstrated quite clearly the rational thought of the Fundamentalist Christian. Your clear thinking and obvious use of your own thoughts have convinced me.

by the way...Scientology is reprehensible and islam is as silly to me as any other religion. Its all the same.

[Gurn]

I don't see where I said anything about the collective -- or individual -- ethics of atheists. I just think most atheists have a religious-like agenda.

[Gurn]

Shalom. I respect your opinion, and I am a card-carrying Christian Zionist. My heart breaks for Israel and God's Chosen on a day like today.

Answer for me, though, a simple question: What is harmed by the display? Who is harmed? That's something I'd truly like to understand.

Thanks.

[The Old Hoosier]

Time to deport all whiners. NOW!!!

[Tolerance Sucks Rocks]

In other news, A new movie just out of Japan is causing quite a stir. It is called Destroy All Atheists!

[flyervet]

...I am sure that we can agree to disagree.

Apparently, we will have to. Unfortunately, or perhaps fortunately, the ultimate decision for the size, design, and very existance of a location memorial is in the hands of the Port Authority, the owners of the land.

Obviously a bloody body would not be used in a permanent memorial. That would be disgusting and indiscribably disrespectful of the dead. I don't think that was what you had in mind either.

What is this about? Shock value? Not only would a bloody body be inappropriate it would also be unworkable in a permanent memorial. Not only that, it would also be an inaccurate, as there were precious few intact bodies at the WTC site.

I don't know about you, but I am totally tired of being forced to conform to the twisted ideas of small groups of people.

Hmmm. I have rarely been forced to conform to anything in my life. Certainly in this case, neither of us are being forced to conform to anything, since neither of us are on the memorial design selectio committee. Unless you're actually working for the Port Authority of New York, of course.

I still say the artifacts should stay at the site, as they are.

You have the right to your own opinion, and hopefully you realize others have that same right, regardless of their religion, or lack thereof. Personally, I believe memorials should be built with an eye toward a strong design rather than scoring political or religious points. Others of course will disagree. Regardless, we now have a sixteen acre site for a memorial. I certainly hope that the desire for a suitable memorial will be balanced with the need to rebuild and renew the site and the neighborhood.

[tortoise]

Answer for me, though, a simple question: What is harmed by the display? Who is harmed? That's something I'd truly like to understand.

As long as my tax dollars aren't spent on it, I have no problem with it. I don't care what people do with their own money. Keep it equitable and its fine with me.

[Thorondir]

The use of "greater" is completely ambiguous

Sorry. I didn't think "greater" was one of those big words that grownups use to confuse the simple. Look it up in the dictionary. It won't be that hard to understand. Really.