So, let me get this straight...

These folks think that a significant piece of WTC debris doesn't belong in a museum dedicated to WTC debris?

Wow. Fail.

I say we offer them a one way plane ticket. "If you don't love it, leave it"

America was originally based on Christian values and beliefs. The falling away from this is America's greatest downfall and reason we are falling into the shape we are. If people of other religions and beliefs don't like what America stands for maybe they should find somewhere else to live. We need to bring America back to what it once was, a God fearing, Christian country.

TyrausP, sorry but your statement is biased and ignorant. God is not Christ. To be founded as a Christian nation our documents would say "Lord" or "Christ" or "Jesus" they refer to a generic God which does not invoke Christianity. If we're supposed to be a Christian country, founded on Christian values, why allow freedom of religion?

Let them get sick - I am here now

Let's not let this devolve into another pointless argument about theology.
Totally not the point here.

Workers at the WTC site found an iron crossbeam (no pun intended) among the rubble and decided to upright it as a symbol of hope. It remained at ground zero for nearly a year, highly visible and very much part of the site itself. Another key point: It was not placed there by any religious group, but by the hart-hat workers themselves. Like several other makeshift symbols that were crafted out of the rubble, it is part of the history of the event and as such it deserves a place in the WTC museum. To leave it out would be a very conspicous absence.

I'd say if there isn't an official symbol for atheism in use, then the fact that there is plenty of "empty space" in the memorial should be sufficient to represent atheists the world over, correct? ;-)

If the presence of the cross excludes non-Christians killed in the attack, wouldn't the absence of the cross exclude Christians killed in the attack? Perhaps the easiest solution would be to add another pedestal next to the cross but put nothing on it. Then no one is excluded.

There are over 730 established religions in the world. I'm not sure how many of them were represented in those killed in the attack, but does this mean we have to find out the religion of everyone who died and make sure a pedestal of that specific religion is represented? This is so absurd! The 9/11 Memorial & Museum is not even a government identity as the article states.

By the way, Jeffrey - If I recall correctly I don't even think the steal beam cross was up-righted by the workers. It was simply seen standing there sticking up out of the rubble. They simply cleared the rubble around it and left it there. That is why it was so inspirational to the workers; they were so amazed that these two beams stood standing there like a perfect cross while everything else was simply crushed rubble.

I think that before posting a story you should consult more than one source - especially the Huffington Post, one of the most liberal sites around. The fact that you rely on a single source is indicative of a relative shallowness which has beset the media.

From the article
"The 9/11 Memorial Museum is an independent, nonprofit corporation and not a government entity."

Case closed.....They can put crosses all over the thing, glue bibles to the crosses and glue tiny little Lego Jesus figures to the bibles if they want to .. The angry atheists/Muslims/Jews/Pastafarians can go pound sand as this is a "private entity"

It SHOULD remain.
It’s really not that hard a conclusion to reach.

I'm sorry Grant, sometimes you just can't win at all can you. :)

Larry, we really don't encourage personal attacks at all. It just seemed really odd on this one occasion when Grant agrees with what appears to be the general consensus, he still draws some fire for the way he agrees. These questions are to promote conversation and an opportunity to share a different viewpoint - we do however ask that everyone do so in a civil tone.

Apparently

it's my cross to bear....

Jeff nailed it. Bottom line is:
That cross is a very real part of American history. It was part of the building. It is an iconic symbol of that time in American history. When you get down to the brass tacks, These folks want to ban a piece of WTC debris from a museum of WTC debris.
The events of 911 are a part of our history. People saw it sticking up and it became a "symbol" of hope. All other "symbols" are a part of the museum. Much overreaching by the athiest community. I think they've over played their hand on this one.

It is NOT a cross, it is a cross shaped piece of debris which has become a symbol of that infamous day.

This cross shaped piece if metal should stay. It was found as it is, cleaned up and erected as a sign of hope. These people[?] who say it makes them sick, let it. All they want is to show how childish they are in having their own way. The "Cross" Beams were not an intentional fabrication, it ended up that was for a reason. Leave it and let stand.

Why don't you all just SHUT UP and remember the ones the memorial was created for!

A little more information on this story ..

It seems that while the museum may claim to be a private entity the property on which it sits , and where the cross is to be displayed is "government owned" and therefore may indeed be subject to abide by " Constitutional " edicts.

My take on it is that certainly the cross can stay , though attempts to disguise it by calling it "historically significant rubble" are disingenuous ... It's a CROSS and it's been a religious icon in practice and use since 9/11 so call a spade a spade.
If any other religious or non religious as the case might be wish to have their special "symbols" displayed on the grounds they must be allowed to display them as it is indeed government property. I'm gonna send them a Piratey Spaghetti Monster for sure ..

Link to the actual complaint for those interested..
http://www.atheists.org/upload/WTC_Complaint.pdf

What will be more interesting still is the overblown poutrage that is sure to ensue when a Muslim group wishes to install their religious icon on the site ..

I'm sure many of those that are so quick to claim "freedom of religion" in this case wont feel the same when it's not their religion being represented..
That will be lots of fun :)

My curiosity about all this is the fact that there are groups out there that are formed around something they don't believe in. They go out looking for things to be offended by. I find that bizarre. How do you identify yourself with something that you find imaginary, and thereby think others shouldn't believe in it? At what point do we tell this minority part of our country to get bent?

I don't personally believe aliens have landed on this world to this point, but I'm not forming a group that goes out being offended by mention of aliens. I just find the whole idea stupid. And if you don't feel represented by Christian representations at places like this or courthouses or whatever, then feel free to commission your own display.

For every angry atheist group doing something like this there are a dozen religious groups on the other side seeking to insert their religion into our government & our schools ...

While I agree that many (most?)of these groups (on both sides) are ridiculous it's how the system works. As noted in the complaint the museum and the property it sits on owned and at least partially funded by government . Government that is constitutionally prohibited from "establishing religion".

So , yeah , display the cross as you like but allow any and all who wish to have their religious icons displayed to do the same ....and let the angry atheists put their "atom" thing up as well

No one really wins here--athiests feel sick when they see that cross, so it should be removed. The fact that they ask for it to be removed makes ME sick. So, we're at an impasse.

The same thing applies when folks (usually college students) are told they cannot display the American flag on their dorm door, in their dorm room, outside their dorm window. But, "it offends me." Well, it offends ME that someone is telling me I can't indicate that I'm an American and am proud to be one. Another impasse.

That cross represents and means something to a group of people. Not looking at it means something to another group of people. May they put blinders on. I am getting tired of the nonreligious/pagan people forcing THEIR beliefs on ME.

Just as the 'state" cannot establish a religion, they should also not be able to establish an environment of "nonreligion". You can't please all of the people all of the time. Get over it and find something much more important to worry about--child abuse, marital abuse, the rape, torture, and murder of women, the economy, etc. etc. etc.

I'm tired of atheists dictating what everyone else can or cannot do! If this person gets sick at the sight of a cross they need a doctor, as in a psychiatrist, because it makes absolutely no sense. We all have to live in a vacuum, devoid of expression, in a country that has always defended individuality and freedom of expression just because of a few narrow minded people.

Atheists don't believe in anything, so why would they care?

Wouldn't it just be a big metal " t " to a atheist . They must have some belief if they see a cross .

Might I suggest reading the complaint they filed , might give some insight as to what they are actually on about

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

Ok then put two crosses side by side and call it a goal post . then put a large banner of a dollar bill with the words in god we trust .

By removing the cross, the free exercise of religion and freedom of speech have just been thrown out. If you want to cite the first amendment, you've gotta count ALL of it--not just the parts that suit you.

Larry your too smart ... you figure it out . Hope you get medical attention for your eyes. .Bless your heart. .

I appreciate your reply Larry , my grammar was pretty bad on that one .But i will stand with the content .

The fact that these beams look like a cross is the entire reason this particular piece of debris is significant. So to deny the religious element of this matter would be disengenious...

BUT...

Let's not lose the sight of the fact that this was NOT a religious symbol placed there from the outside by a religious group. It was just there...a legitimate part of the events that unfolded at ground zero. That cross is a part of the history of that time and place. To have it removed, unless other symbols of other religions of equal or greater heft are brought in from places other than pulled from the rubble, is PC mentality run amok.

Yes. It's a cross. But it's also a part of the building, a piece of wreckage and part of the disaster itself. It is a piece of WTC debris, and it has a place in a museum dedicated to pieces of WTC debris.

Actually Jeff.....

The cross has indeed been moved ...It's been doing duty in front of a nearby church for years and the issue has "risen" in response to it's return ..

Again , I agree that it belongs there as long as any and all displays of other religious (or not) icons are also allowed .

Okay, so it has to be moved...BACK...to whence it came from. As the WTC was cleared of debris in it's entirety, I'm certian that it wasn't the only piece of debris that will require transportation back. Kind of a minor point.

As noted above, i agree that any displays relevant to the WTC site should be displayed, regardless of religious affiliation. This is not a museum about religion, nor should it be made into one because one piece of debris resembles a cross and as such became a symbol. The history of how that came to be is relevant to the story of ground zero; as would be the case of, say, a Torah found in part of desk from one of the buildings, an Islamic prayer rug found among the debris, or even one of those atom thingees that was found among the rubble.

My point? That cross belongs, not because it's a cross (it is) but because it is also a part of the story of Ground Zero. Bringing in symbols from outside that place and time in history, including any other Christian symbols, makes the museum about something besides the story of ground zero.

I understand that you agree it should be there, not really arguing that point but I would disagree that random other symbols with no connection to Ground Zero belong "just because".

You can disagree if you like Jeff... you'll likely be wrong (again),

We agree that it is indeed a religious icon right? It has been used as such on church property for may years. We also agree that it is indeed government property and it seems , contrary to the article that the museum is at least partially funded by government funds , right?

Regardless of it's origin it is indeed a cross and as such can only be displayed on government property if any and all other religious icons are also allowed.

This isnt difficult , the government cant favor any specific religion and barring the display of other religious icons while allowing this one regardless of origin would certainly run afoul of that.

The other option , if it's the debris that's really important rather than the Christian symbolism would be to display either the upright beam or the horizontal one . Guessing that one wont fly ..

FWIW it wasnt just Christians that died on that day and it would certainly seem a fair and reasonable compromise to let any and all religions post their icons at a memorial .I have a hard time understanding why anyone would be opposed to something like that .
" Reasonable" and "religion" rarely seem to coincide unfortunately

Explain to me where I'm wrong. (Simply disagreeing with you doesn't count as "wrong" and contrary to what you may think, it never has)

I don't understand the need to split hairs here. Yes it's a cross. This should neither be a reason to include or exclude this particular piece of debris. If it were JUST a cross, I would be inclined to exclude it.

But it's not. It is a piece of debris, that happened to resemble a cross as it is. Nobody fashioned it to do that. It just fell, broke, landed and was uncovered that way. What it became, how it became that, are relevant to the events of that time and place in American History. Surely you agree with that. You said you did. Is that the part I'd be wrong about?

I also would support the notion of relics from other religions that were found on the site to be included in such a display. Is this the part I'd be wrong about?

This is not a religious holy ground...but it is sacred American ground. So why bring in unrelated "feel good" pieces in that had nothing to do with the events at ground zero in, just for the sake of political correctness? Is this the part where I'm wrong?

A random Bible doesn't belong in a museum reserved for significant pieces of debris from Ground Zero any more than a random Koran, Torah, Book of Moron or one of those Atom thingees. A significant piece of debris from Ground Zero does...even if it happens to look like a cross.

Grant and Jeff, are there other pieces which are being excluded from display? To me, the ground zero mosque should be allowed, as well as this cross. We are a nation of diversity, so to me, if there is a museum there, art goes it in. This is a great piece of art; to that end, if there is a picture of some muslims praying near the ruins that is a good, then that should go in too.

No one's rights are being trampled by having these pieces there. For the athiests, your rights are not trampled on here, neither are agnostics.

You're wrong because the Supreme Court has ruled time and time again that the government cannot display the religious materiel of one religion over the other regardless of "historical " value. See Cranston RI High School et al ...

Since
A) this is government property and the museum is funded in part by tax dollars
and
B) the cross is most certainly a religious Christian icon that has been , in practice and use , used as such (regardless of how it came to be) The government cannot be allowed to "establish" that religious icon to the exclusion of others.
Jeff writes
"So why bring in unrelated "feel good" pieces in that had nothing to do with the events at ground zero in, just for the sake of political correctness? Is this the part where I'm wrong?"

I would suggest that those of other religions who lost people at the site who wished to memorialize those people with some token of their faith would be offended at the suggestion that "political correctness " had anything to do with it. I find it fascinating that anyone , especially a person of "faith" would seek to exclude such a display , especially while clamoring to have their icon displayed.....
There are plenty of bits and pieces of other faiths there Jeff,no reason to exclude them just because they exploded ,burned or fell with the towers.

Grant - again - what is being excluded that is related to ground zero and being excluded?

Grant - I would have liked to see this sort of thing incorporated into that big ol' park that is currently down there with all of the names. WHy is that so secular?

Jack...

Did you read the complaint that I linked ?
The atheists want the cross taken down
What the case will boil down to is "government 'establishing' religion by the display. Generally the courts have held an all or nothing policy and it would seem to me the best way to keep the cross up would be to simply allow all other icons.

Allow everyone to display their trinkets , including the atheists and everyone is happy ...except Jeff

To answer Jack's question, "i.e. where is the damage? It is explained quite thoroughly in the complaint.

From the complaint, "47. The plaintiffs, and each of them, have suffered, are suffering, and will continue to suffer damages, both physical and emotional, from the existence of the challenged cross. Named plaintiffs have suffered, inter alia,
dyspepsia, symptoms of depression, headaches, anxiety, and mental pain
and anguish from the knowledge that they are made to feel officially
excluded from the ranks of citizens who were directly injured by the 9/11
attack and the lack of acknowledgement of the more than 1,000 nonChristian individuals who were killed at the World Trade Center.

48. As a direct and proximate result of the unconstitutional existence of the
cross, plaintiffs have suffered, and will continue to suffer, damages for
which they have no clear, speedy, or adequate remedy at law. Plaintiffs seek
a declaration that the inclusion of a cross at the September 11 Memorial
and Museum, in the absence of equal acknowledgment of those nonChristians who also were victims of the 9/11 attack, is unconstitutional."

Where are you reading "exclusion" into my statements, Grant?

I simply don't understand why elements that have no relevance to the events and history of ground zero have to be included because an artifact that very much does have relevance to that history happens to resemble a religious icon, and has been regarded as such. As stated a half dozen times or so, I take no issue with the inclusion of other religions' artifacts.

I'm happy. You cannot simply ignore the fact that this crossbeam that looks like a cross is a very real, relevant artifact from the ground zero site. To say it doesn't belong in a museum of real and relevant artifacts from ground zero unless an all-inclusive array of religious stuff that is non-relevant to the history of ground zero is given equal time is PC nonsense.

If they were trying to place a big cross in the museum that had no relevance to the site, just because, I would agree with you. Just as such an item should not be included because of it's Christian nature, Such an item as the historically relevant crossbeam should not be excluded.

Don't you see? It just shouldn't fact in one way or the other.

So, then do the atheists have a problem with the sponsored cobblestones on the Memorial? http://names.911memorial.org/#lang=en_US&page=search_cobblestones I searched for muslim, christian, lutheran - and they were all there. Athiest was not.

Bottom line is that the cross is useful to some people, and those are the folks who will enjoy it. It's not for others. For instance, I'm a christian, but i don't find solice in scultpures.

The athiests will find more peace with the fountains, names, and other parts. The memorial is meant to heal - I feel their complaint comes from the pain, but should be focused differently.

Jeff... What is the opposite of "inclusion"

So the religious beliefs of those that perished there who arent lucky enough to follow a religion whose icon happens to resemble standard construction techniques are simply irrelevant and they should have found a more structurally sound icon? Since "The Star of David" isnt generally used in structural beams those Jews that died there (and those that remember them) should just go pound sand?

So , maybe we display just the upright beam. It's just as much a "relevant artifact" isnt it ? That way the government is in the claer and no one is offended by a secular display ..

Does it matter if I really don't care?

Right...I understand that. For roughly the 7,000th time in this thread, I agree that memorializing those who died via display of religious artifacts RELEVANT to the site itself should absolutely be a part of this museum. Display of artifacts of a non-religious nature should be displayed.

Is this crossbeam, as is, relevant to the site? Yes or No?
It was a very visible part of the site for nearly a year. Like it or not, it was one of the most recognizable pieces of rubble at that site, right up there with the makeshift flagpole that displayed an American Flag at the same general time.

Now there's an interesting comparison...the flag. Many people of other nationalities died that day. Is it disrespect to display that flagpole, complete with that American Flag? Or maybe we should just display a flag from every single country that someone died from? Yeah...let's bring in a crisp, clean flag from every nation that someone died in and give it the exact same import as that bent metal pole and that torn flag that ACTUALLY FLEW at Ground Zero. How does that work?

Look...maybe a display of every nation, every religion represented among the victims of that terrible 9/11 isn't a bad idea...Actually, it's a good idea, I think we can find more agreement than not there.

But let's not hold actual pieces of history hostage in favor of political correctness. That's all I'm trying to say here.

Nice attempt at a Straw Man Jeff..
Just pulled out my Constitution and found not one single mention of the flag. Nothing about it at all in the First Amendment on which this complaint is based.

Here's the Official Flag Code http://www.usflag.org/uscode36.html

You'll note it is usual and customary , and completely legal for it to be displayed by government entities and civilians as they desire. So , no legal issue can be made there and I award no points. If someone wants to whine about the American Flag being flown in America, they have the right to do so but no legal standing to do anything about it .

It is also important to note that the wreckage was "modified" to make it even more "Christian -esque" as opposed to being an "as-is " artifact . There is no denying that this is a Christian thing
I agree that twisted metal from the wreckage can and should be displayed. I even agree that this particular bit can and should be displayed with the simple caveat that , since it is and has always been a religious artifact, other religious musts be allowed (not provided with ) a similar display in reverence to their loved ones

Jeffrey Allen wrote last Thursday...
10:40 am on Thursday, August 23, 2012

Let's not let this devolve into another pointless argument about theology.
Totally not the point here.

Is that what you really meant to say Jeffery?

Part of the problem with the discussion of this "cross" is that people of nonfaith believe that faith/religion starts when we enter a church and stop when we leave a church. Nothing could be further from the truth. In fact, that particular item of debris might bring comfort to certain individuals who visit.

As for the physical ailments experienced by the individuals filing the complaint--most such ailments are a sign of some type of psychological problem. I suggest that they seek a good therapist to see why they feel excluded.

"Look...maybe a display of every nation, every religion represented among the victims of that terrible 9/11 isn't a bad idea...Actually, it's a good idea, I think we can find more agreement than not there. But let's not hold actual pieces of history hostage in favor of political correctness. That's all I'm trying to say here."

-Me, one post up...

Posted again, seems to have gotten ignored the first time.

Pretty big difference between run of the mill political correctness and a violation of the first amendment Jeff.

Jeff writes

"I'm not arguing the theology of the thing. I can't for the life of me understand why anyone would seek to deny a piece of WTC debris from being in a museum full of WTC debris. "
Because Jeff, that "piece of debris" has been modified and changed into a religious icon of a single particular religion that not everyone believes in. The government is forbidden by the first amendment from "establishing" religion and displaying this religious icon on government property runs afoul of that limitation ...
Of course all of that is in the legal complaint .

I'm sure that there is plenty of debris to display, what's so important about this one again?

Oh yeah , thats right , it's a religious symbol..

Right...

If Grant and co had their way...a walk through the WTC museum...

CURATOR: Here we have a bunch of symbols from all the religions of the world. Here's a statue of Buddah, a nice draidel, a plate of pasta, and...the best one...a giant Atom! Very important that you all look at the atom thingee...

VISITING 4th GRADER: (raises hand) Ummm...were any of these things actually from the disaster site?

CURATOR: No, but that's not the point. Not everyone who died was a Christian, you know.

4th GRADER: That's not what I asked, sir. I just wondered what this stuff has to do with 9/11, if it wasn't part of the site. Do you have anything from the site here?

CURATOR: Well, we have this one thing, but we keep it in the basement because we don't want to hurt anyone's feelings. It was actually there, but...you don't want to see that. You might be offended. It's actually an iron crossbeam from the building themselves, but it looks like...no...I can't bring myself to say it, it's so awful...just look at the atom thingee that has nothing to do with 9/11. It's better that way.

4th GRADER: What, sir? What could be so awful that we have to keep it away, even though it's a real part of the history?

CURATOR: (Wailing) It's...it looks like a CROSS! whaaaa! (faints)

See how ridiculous that sounds?

Honestly I understand both sides. It is hurtful to go and see a cross when you feel attacked by christians who think the problem with America is the decent from christian values. I think if christians were more respectful to non-christians, then athiests wouldn't be so angry. But not all christians are that way, just many in the, especially fox news. I am athiest but I don't find the cross itself is damaging my beliefs. Let them have their cross. But make them stop putting us down. Stop saying whats wrong with America is the decent from Christian values.

For if we have been united with him in a death like his, we will certainly also be united with him in a resurrection like his. For we know that our old self was crucified with him so that the body ruled by sin might be done away with, that we should no longer be slaves to sin— because anyone who has died has been set free from sin. (Romans 6:5-7 NIV)

Whoever does not take up their cross and follow me is not worthy of me. Whoever finds their life will lose it, and whoever loses their life for my sake will find it. "Anyone who welcomes you welcomes me, and anyone who welcomes me welcomes the one who sent me. (Matthew 10:38-40 NIV)

The Cross does not represent Religion... It is a message of Undieing Love that anyone can connect to. Forgiveness. Peace. Love.