It came on Good Friday, a gift from God and U.S District Judge Deborah Batts. The lawsuit by American Atheists seeking to ban the cross found at Ground Zero from being displayed in a museum has been tossed out, and the cross will be permitted to stay.
The fact that this ruling came on the holiest week of the year for Christians is a delicious irony, one that I can bask in for months, possibly even years to come.
I thank God for the sensibility of Judge Batts. Those fun-loving folks over at American Atheists – who despise any and all things Christian and would file a lawsuit against their ailing mother or best friend, if it involved Christianity – claimed the inclusion of the cross at the 9/11 Memorial Museum was causing them all manner of illnesses. Thank Heaven good sense ruled the day and the cross will be displayed in the National September 11th Memorial and Museum where it rightfully deserves its place.
While most Americans agree that it should be allowed to stay, most atheists are up in arms. Not only did the ruling come on Good Friday, but American Atheists were happily celebrating their 50th anniversary of godlessness at their annual convention that weekend, which took place in Austin, Texas, this year. I’m pretty sure this ruling must have put a damper on that celebration. Naturally, though, they aren’t going down without a fight.
“We will appeal. We’re fighting it. This is not dead,” American Atheists’ President Dave Silverman said of the ruling. “This is a place where religion destroyed American lives. This is something all Americans must fight. This is injustice. What could possibly be more religious than a cross? The only thing would be a cross with the name ‘Jesus’ carved in it.”
Edward F. Kagin, an attorney for American Atheists, called the ruling an effort by the government “to endorse Christianity as the national religion of the United States.” That statement is so absurd it doesn’t really even deserve comment, but here goes anyway:
How does a single cross, in one museum, constitute the government endorsing Christianity? One cross at one museum and suddenly Christianity is now the “preferred religion” of the United States? Is the government calling on people to bow before it at the museum? Is the government demanding everyone must immediately sign up for, and attend a Christian church?
Please, Mr. Kagin, for an educated man you speak utter nonsense, and you know it. Your ludicrous statement is absurd and insulting to anyone with half a brain, and frankly, these kind of statements coming from non-believers are really tiresome.
Atheists claim 500 non-believers died on 9/11 and feel those non-believers are not being honored. Please, show me an atheist symbol found in the wreckage and I will lead the charge to have it included in the museum. If not, shut up and go away.
In the ruling, Judge Batts wrote that the cross “helps demonstrate how those at ground zero coped with the devastation they witnessed during the rescue and recovery effort, and she called its purpose “historical and secular.”
The judge noted the cross will be displayed in the museum in the “Finding Meaning at Ground Zero” section with placards explaining its meaning and the reason for its inclusion. Additionally, non-religious and secular artifacts will accompany it.
So then, what exactly is the problem atheists have with this ruling? Comments around the Web range from blatant disrespect of Christianity to rage and name calling, with the occasional reasonable argument thrown in.
Hemant Mehta, the so-called “Friendly Atheist” had this to say at Patheos.com:
“When steel beams fell that day, a couple of them criss-crossed, as you might expect, and some Christians took that to mean a sign from God (why God didn’t intervene earlier that day has yet to be determined). If a church wanted to display that particular cross, they had every right to do so, but for a historical museum to have a display with the cross suggested to AA that Christian victims were being treated as difference from (and better than) other victims. AA offered to donate a symbol of their own for inclusion in the memorial, but the museum curators rejected their donation.”
So American Atheists offered to donate a symbol of their own, hmm? No doubt a sign stating religion is a myth that poisons minds, much like the atheist signs that have been put up around Christmastime to counter all the religious stuff they so despise. And the museum turned them down. No wonder there.
Mehta also writes: “The problem with the ruling is that it still gives preference to a symbol some Christians found meaning in after 9/11. Yes, it’s part of history. But other, non-Christian groups found meaning and symbolism in other places and relics of their memories are not being displayed in the museum.”
I have no idea what Mehta is talking about. What relics were found in the rubble that are not being displayed, as he claims? The American Atheists symbol is an atom – and to my knowledge, there was not a twisted steel piece in the shape of an atom found at the site. Nor was there a menorah or any other type of religious symbol found in the rubble. What was found was a cross. Plain and simple. To not include it would be to deny history.
Just look at some of the comments from atheists beneath Mehta’s article:
It really is pathetic to consider this as some sort of sign from “god.” If it is a
sign then it is a sign that their god has abandoned them. Seriously, their god
allowed thousands to be killed by non-believers and all he/she left was a
pseudo-cross in the rubble? Reminds me of t-shirts that say “I ran a marathon
and all I got was this t-shirt.”
Then why is it erected as a cross? All it is missing is the J man. Why not an X, or an upside down cross, or a horizontal cross? This is complete bullshit and the judge knows it. Pisses me off.
onamission5 Joseph Stalin
People found comfort in it because they saw it as a sign from their god, and that is precisely why it is being displayed. Because it's a comforting representation of religious belief. Hardly secular.
What are you going to do. It's an ugly piece of crap that devalues the people who died, and devalues any monument commemorating the event. But it's a good place to let your dog take a piss if you're passing by. But if you're a Christian, maybe it makes sense, since God destroyed the towers.
Carmelita Spats Joe Petersast
Joe Pederast...I find immense aesthetic comfort in Andres Serrano's crucifix lodged in a bucket of urine...It is regularly on display in museums...The last time, a group of Catholic fanatics almost destroyed the work of art while on display at a museum in France...The curator left the damaged piece to show the barbaric, obtuse, tactless, insensitive, cunt-hood of wide-eyed Eucharist munchers...Just sayin'.
From the Washington Post came these comments:
Incredibly Gay Jesus cammo99
The hate from religion is why the towers came down in the first place. To pretend that Christianity is the victim after examining Christianity's past, is foolish to say the least.
Steve Darnell Zureiter
I suppose I need to repeat this for you, as well. "Respecting an establishment of religion," does not mean establishing a religion. It means giving preference to a religion, which including a cross (or any other religious symbol) in a government memorial does. The freedom of religion clause of the 1st Amendment means that the government will neither endorse a religion nor prevent adherents to a religion from worshipping as they please. It exists to keep the state from telling the church what it can do (within the reasonable confines of the law) and to keep the church from telling the state what to do.
David Batista FreeManinAmerica
Ignorance: state of being uninformed. Faith: Belief without proof.
No proof = Uninformed on a topic as you are not able to back it up.
therefore, Faith = Ignorance and Your religion requires faith so you shouldn't be be calling other ignorant when your whole religious belief is based on IGNORANCE.
And from The Blaze:
The museum should be allowed to show rubbish that was got from the collapse, espesially if it looks like well known death tool and religious symbol since a religion was a key motivator in causing he thousands of deaths there. (Spelling error is the poster’s, and I have to say I can’t tell you how many times I’ve read that Christians are uneducated sheep.)
But there are actually some atheists who think it’s okay for the cross to be included, such as this poster:
I’m an atheist, and I don’t see why this shouldn’t be a part of the museum. I remember the news showing people using thus cross formed from the beams of the building as a means of comfort, and that was a part of the history of the aftermath.
I have a back ground in history (archaeology degree), and I don’t see how this is any different from a museum showing other pieces of history that just happen to also be religious in nature. One cannot simply wipe religion from the history books. It has had and still has, a major impact on the events of the world. Religion was even a part of the history that lead up to the attack on Sept. 11.
Excellent point, Atrum Angelus. You have proven not all atheists are ignorant Christ haters.
The_Doors_of_Perception gets off track as the original argument often does with this response to another poster:
The things you say…they are so elegant…as if Jesus could have spoken them himself. I’m sure Jesus cant wait to hang out with you in heaven. You can tell dirty jokes and talk about homosexuality in detail to each other…
Oh and you do know that you don’t have to be an athiest to believe in the fact of evolution or the big bang correct? Most sane people do… (An atheist who does not know how to spell his own disbelief.)
And on and on it goes. This is just a sampling of comments, but without a doubt, after studying many sites and comments, what’s been posted above is the general tone and spirit if you will, of non-believers.
Encouraged by lawsuits where they have won, such as removing 10 Commandment Displays and other religious displays, across the Web, many atheists band together in their disbelief and utter hatred of Christianity. Their common goal is their desire to remove any Christian signs or symbols from the public square, and they are fueled by the many wins they've had over the years.
But as I’ve written before, these lawsuits are costly and time-consuming, and this lawsuit is by far the most insulting to Christians and very unpopular. At the same time, though, it serves the purpose of educating people about American Atheists, their follwers, and what they stand for - a secular, godless America.
Certainly there will be an appeal by American Atheists in this matter and they will most certainly lose again. I look forward to perhaps, say, a Christmastime ruling.