Skip to main content

I grew up in a Baptist church, and while I haven't been a regular church-goer in years and have doubts about many of the things I was taught, I still respect the moral teachings of Jesus and my own morality is largely shaped by Christian values.  In particular, I've always viewed the commands to "love one another" and "love your neighbor as yourself" to be fundamental to Christian morality, and love is a word I strongly associate with the people of the church I grew up in.  That's why I really, truly cannot understand when I see something like this:

 

http://www.allfacebook.com/fox...eath-threats-2011-08

 

To summarize, an atheist group objects to a proposed crucifix at the World Trade Center Memorial and is filing a lawsuit to stop it and any other religious symbols from being erected at the site.  I can understand both sides to the argument, but what I can't understand is the reaction I see there from so-called "Christians":  8,000 death threats.  I'm a bit annoyed at this group and hope the cross goes up anyway, but seriously, we're talking about a single religious symbol, not restricting anyone's freedom to worship or threatening Christianity in any way.  To threaten someone with death who objects to a single crucifix in a public place is just deeply un-Christian, or at least un-Christian as I've always understood Christianity.  I mean, 8,000 death threats.  We're almost in Mohammed cartoon territory here.

 

My point is that while I have always associated Christianity with love, when I look at many Christians today I see hate, and it saddens me.

Original Post

Replies sorted oldest to newest

Team, I agree. It seems that quite a few of the faiths have become quite rabid.  They are carrying guns now and exhibiting a lot of the values (if you can call them that) of the KKK. It seems to be more prevelant among the republican community. This countries values need a healthy "spring cleaning". Will it happen? I don't think so, not with the present attitude of the leading political parties.

Mein, you have just identified what has to be regarded as the utmost kind of hypocrisy on the part of those moronic bigots who advocate death for those with whom they disagree concerning the controversy over the steel structural remnant at the site of the former World Trade Center. I suspect that many of those same murderously-inclined partisans also would also insist, and absurdly so, that they believe in strict construction of the U.S. Constitution.  What they actually believe in is the selective interpretation of the Constitution where it seems to them that it supports their biases and the ignoring of those elements of the Constitution that impede their extremist Christian Nationist goals!

Like I said, I don't have a problem with a cross (or any other religious symbol) as a memorial at a site where so many people died.  I think the atheist group is wrong here, assuming that the monument is tasteful and doesn't dominate the entire memorial site as many of the people making death threats would no doubt have it do.  After all, the memorial is for all the innocent people who died that day, not just Christians.

Originally Posted by TheMeInTeam:

Like I said, I don't have a problem with a cross (or any other religious symbol) as a memorial at a site where so many people died.  I think the atheist group is wrong here, assuming that the monument is tasteful and doesn't dominate the entire memorial site as many of the people making death threats would no doubt have it do.  After all, the memorial is for all the innocent people who died that day, not just Christians.

************************************************************************************************************

How are the atheists wrong here?  There are even family members of people killed in the attack that oppose the cross because it doesn't reflect the belief of the ones killed. There are plenty of things they could place there as a memorial that wouldn't offend anyone.

I don't know the details of the memorial.  Obviously the main monument should be non-religious and a memorial to all the innocent people who died that day.  But beyond that, I see no reason why there shouldn't be separate, smaller monuments for the people of different religions who died there.  Such monuments would not only be appreciated by the victims' families that do adhere to those religions, but would also celebrate our diversity and the idea of E Pluribus Unum.

The cross is part of the wreckage left after the Twin Towers fell. It became a significant part of the site to the workers and families because of the way it stood out. It's just simply part of the history of the event. It's not necessarily making a religious statement, rather than symbol of people finding something that gave them hope in a time of disaster.

 

Someone who follows Christ tries to live as He did. Just because someone sits in church on Sunday and say they are Christian doesn't mean they are actually following His teachings. I agree that making death threats over this issue is wrong and goes against what Christ taught.

Originally Posted by TheMeInTeam:

I don't know the details of the memorial.  Obviously the main monument should be non-religious and a memorial to all the innocent people who died that day.  But beyond that, I see no reason why there shouldn't be separate, smaller monuments for the people of different religions who died there.  Such monuments would not only be appreciated by the victims' families that do adhere to those religions, but would also celebrate our diversity and the idea of E Pluribus Unum.

*******************************************************************************************************

 

If all of them were honored with their symbols there wouldn't be anything to protest, and I think it was even suggested that they do just that, but interesting that you'd say smaller monuments for others of different or non-beliefs.

Originally Posted by NashBama:

The cross is part of the wreckage left after the Twin Towers fell. It became a significant part of the site to the workers and families because of the way it stood out. It's just simply part of the history of the event. It's not necessarily making a religious statement, rather than symbol of people finding something that gave them hope in a time of disaster.

 

Someone who follows Christ tries to live as He did. Just because someone sits in church on Sunday and say they are Christian doesn't mean they are actually following His teachings. I agree that making death threats over this issue is wrong and goes against what Christ taught.

*************************************************************************************************************

From the comments:

 

HIGHLIGHT
Gramercy
New York, NY
July 29th, 2011
8:49 am
I am a practicing christian. That said, I have to also admit that any civil engineer would agree that the WTC was full of beams that crossed each other and the odds that a piece of debris having that shape were pretty high, so let's not start by looking for miracles.

Sure. Put up all kinds of religious monuments at the siteof a religiously motivated attack.

Give the bastids ANOTHER reason to hit it again.

 

I think if people wanna commemorate something -it shoud be the EVENT itself and the tragic loss of innocent lives, not any religious significance.

 

Putting up religious monuments'd effectively be giving the terrorists what they wanted.

The Trade Center was a symbol of commerce and wealth-not a religious institution.  I think giving it religious significance by erecting religious monuments would send the wrong message...to everybody.

 

Americans don't do jihad, if I remember correctly.

Originally Posted by Jennifer:
Originally Posted by NashBama:

The cross is part of the wreckage left after the Twin Towers fell. It became a significant part of the site to the workers and families because of the way it stood out. It's just simply part of the history of the event. It's not necessarily making a religious statement, rather than symbol of people finding something that gave them hope in a time of disaster.

 

Someone who follows Christ tries to live as He did. Just because someone sits in church on Sunday and say they are Christian doesn't mean they are actually following His teachings. I agree that making death threats over this issue is wrong and goes against what Christ taught.

*************************************************************************************************************

From the comments:

 

HIGHLIGHT
Gramercy
New York, NY
July 29th, 2011
8:49 am
I am a practicing christian. That said, I have to also admit that any civil engineer would agree that the WTC was full of beams that crossed each other and the odds that a piece of debris having that shape were pretty high, so let's not start by looking for miracles.
 
 
I never said the cross was a miracle and I know that it was simply one of many iron joints in the two buildings.
 
My point is that for those who were there after the collapse, they saw the cross and it took on a significance for them. There is also the metal globe sculpture, the survivor tree, and an American flag.
 
The iron cross was found and salvaged as having significance by those who were there. The memorial is dedicated to them, the victims, and the victim's families. Like I said, it's simply part of the history of the event. Whether it was in the shape of a crescent moon or big middle finger, it wouldn't matter. It's an item connected historically to 9/11 and should be included in the memorial if those who were part of the event wish it to be.

Some of you people are so ignorant. You can't group ALL Christians into one basket and say that ALL Christians are alike. That's like saying all athiest are identical and they all think alike. The Bible says that you will know a true Christian by their fruits. What are some of those fruits? Love, meekness, gentleness, being humble etc........in other words, being like Christ. A person that is not like Christ or striving to be like Him IS NOT a Christian at all. They are only fooling themselves.

Originally Posted by NashBama:
Originally Posted by Jennifer:
Originally Posted by NashBama:

The cross is part of the wreckage left after the Twin Towers fell. It became a significant part of the site to the workers and families because of the way it stood out. It's just simply part of the history of the event. It's not necessarily making a religious statement, rather than symbol of people finding something that gave them hope in a time of disaster.

 

Someone who follows Christ tries to live as He did. Just because someone sits in church on Sunday and say they are Christian doesn't mean they are actually following His teachings. I agree that making death threats over this issue is wrong and goes against what Christ taught.

*************************************************************************************************************

From the comments:

 

HIGHLIGHT
Gramercy
New York, NY
July 29th, 2011
8:49 am
I am a practicing christian. That said, I have to also admit that any civil engineer would agree that the WTC was full of beams that crossed each other and the odds that a piece of debris having that shape were pretty high, so let's not start by looking for miracles.
 
 
I never said the cross was a miracle and I know that it was simply one of many iron joints in the two buildings.
 
My point is that for those who were there after the collapse, they saw the cross and it took on a significance for them. There is also the metal globe sculpture, the survivor tree, and an American flag.
 
The iron cross was found and salvaged as having significance by those who were there. The memorial is dedicated to them, the victims, and the victim's families. Like I said, it's simply part of the history of the event. Whether it was in the shape of a crescent moon or big middle finger, it wouldn't matter. It's an item connected historically to 9/11 and should be included in the memorial if those who were part of the event wish it to be.

One's emotional attachment to a religious object does not trump the Constitution of the US or NY. The memorial/museum is on public land and is mostly funded by the taxpayers. There's two suggested solutions, either no religious iconography is depicted or all have to be. If it's the latter, American Atheists will fund a memorial for all the atheists and no-religious that died on 9/11 to be placed on the same public land in/on the site which is funded primarily by tax-payers.

Originally Posted by I am the Fireman:

Some of you people are so ignorant. You can't group ALL Christians into one basket and say that ALL Christians are alike. That's like saying all athiest are identical and they all think alike. The Bible says that you will know a true Christian by their fruits. What are some of those fruits? Love, meekness, gentleness, being humble etc........in other words, being like Christ. A person that is not like Christ or striving to be like Him IS NOT a Christian at all. They are only fooling themselves.

Ignorant? You're the one who celebrates every other Bill Gray post. LOL Bill is the least Christ-like person on this forum.

The Constitution does not say that religious symbols are forbidden on public grounds or monuments. Congress is not endorsing or prohibiting the practice of religion if an iron cross salved from the WTC wreckage is placed at the WTC monument. I don't think that Congress has anything to do with the memorial at all.

 

I'm not familiar with the NY state constitution. If there is something in there forbidding religious symbols to be displayed on or at monuments, I'd love to see it.

Originally Posted by NashBama:

The Constitution does not say that religious symbols are forbidden on public grounds or monuments. Congress is not endorsing or prohibiting the practice of religion if an iron cross salved from the WTC wreckage is placed at the WTC monument. I don't think that Congress has anything to do with the memorial at all.

 

I'm not familiar with the NY state constitution. If there is something in there forbidding religious symbols to be displayed on or at monuments, I'd love to see it.

SCOTUS does not agree with your Constitutional argument about religious symbols.

Originally Posted by I am the Fireman:

Some of you people are so ignorant. You can't group ALL Christians into one basket and say that ALL Christians are alike. That's like saying all athiest are identical and they all think alike. The Bible says that you will know a true Christian by their fruits. What are some of those fruits? Love, meekness, gentleness, being humble etc........in other words, being like Christ. A person that is not like Christ or striving to be like Him IS NOT a Christian at all. They are only fooling themselves.

 

******************************************************************************************************

Say what????? As one of Bill Gray's faithful followers, surely you're not saying Bill is loving, meek, gentle, humble, Christ like, & bears good fruit???

 

Well, I guess someone ought to go tear down all of those "roadside memorials" people put up at the site of fatal accidents. I agree that they can be distracting, but people put them up to help ease their pain. If someone gets comfort from a symbol, religious or otherwise, I say let them have their symbol. Why don't atheists have a symbol they can put up to give comfort to the atheist beveaved? Then they could be there, right beside crosses and Stars of David and sacred cows and any other symbol of comfort.

the mein,

 

Fundy Xtians are running a bit scared these days.  Their numbers are dwindling, and there's a good reason why.  What they say is not true.

 

Regarding the Ground Zero Cross, it's not a remarkable artifact, if one knows the least thing about steel construction.  Those among my fellow atheists who object to its being displayed as part of the 9-11 exhibition are not without their points, but I personally would not pick that particular fight.  Imagine if the display said "Christians took heart at this remnant of the debris".  Simple enough.

 

Now, imagine that a steel beam, bent into a crescent, with a bit of ragged debris that resembled a star was displayed as a symbol that Allah was on hand for the event.  Imagine.

 

DF

Originally Posted by O No!:

Well, I guess someone ought to go tear down all of those "roadside memorials" people put up at the site of fatal accidents. I agree that they can be distracting, but people put them up to help ease their pain. If someone gets comfort from a symbol, religious or otherwise, I say let them have their symbol. Why don't atheists have a symbol they can put up to give comfort to the atheist beveaved? Then they could be there, right beside crosses and Stars of David and sacred cows and any other symbol of comfort.

_________

I'm with you 110% ono, those roadside crosses need to go.  Not because they are Christian, but because they are cheesy, often tasteless, and narcissistic.

Crust , I’m surprised at the value you place on these markers.

I have a much different feeling when I see them.

I was second at the scene where a young man lay dying after a terrible motorcycle wreck.

A lady who was there first was sitting on the pavement near him as helpless as my self.

She was horrified at what she saw as was I, waiting on emergency personnel to arrive.

I pass the monument to him daily and I never forget that scene and think about how precious this life was to his family. It makes me think.

My point is this: we have an opportunity to be  kind - either by letting someone derive comfort from a tacky symbol, or or by not subjecting those who indeed think it's tacky, to viewing it.  To me, hey, I see tasteless tacky things every day but they don't hurt me. Having to look at something I think is tacky in order to provide comfort to someone who is bereaved is well worth the trade-off. Kindness trumps taste every time, at least in my book.

Originally Posted by CrustyMac:

And you need the cross to remember? 

 

I'm wondering, is it a tacky Styrofoam cross with equally tacky blue flowers?  Please, when I die, don't put up any redneck memorials for me.  And just for the record, I find memorializing your automobile to be equally trashy.

***********************************************************************************************************

I wonder what started that trend of putting "In memory of" on the car/truck windows. It's seems to be dying out like the "baby on board" craze.

You don't see me pulling them up and disposing of them in the local dumpster - which is what I'd like to do.  But let's all agree that they are tacky and narcissistic.  They aren't really about memorializing someone - that is what their grave sight is for.  What they really are about is getting people to pay attention to the survivor that put it there.

Originally Posted by Jennifer:
Originally Posted by CrustyMac:

And you need the cross to remember? 

 

I'm wondering, is it a tacky Styrofoam cross with equally tacky blue flowers?  Please, when I die, don't put up any redneck memorials for me.  And just for the record, I find memorializing your automobile to be equally trashy.

***********************************************************************************************************

I wonder what started that trend of putting "In memory of" on the car/truck windows. It's seems to be dying out like the "baby on board" craze.

________________

Narcissism, or loneliness.  Whichever need it is that would cause you expose others to your grief.

Could be it helps the person who lost a loved one in knowing that was the last place that their loved one was alive and where they ended their life.  If it helps in their grieving and it presents no hindrance to traffic I don't see a problem with it.  Whenever I see one and it's not someone I know then I think that something happened there that caused a horrible accident and I tend to exercise caution myself so they can also serve constructive purposes to drivers to warn that maybe there is a danger there that caused another to have a serious accident. Could be the relatives are putting it there to serve warning to others of a dangerous condition.  Could be any reason but whatever that reason the real purpose is known to those who place them there.

 

I don't buy they are there to pay attention to the survivor either because in the cases I have seen the names on the Cross or item there was the deceased name and the date of their demise.  Not the name of the person who placed it there so why would anyone assume otherwise?  If it possibly helps some friend or family member find or achieve a measure of closure so I don't personally have a problem with it. 

 

As for your statement Crusty, how can you justify assuming it is narcissism given the following definition for Narcissism?  All the objections sounds captious to me.

 

narcissism |ˈnärsəˌsizəm|
noun
excessive or erotic interest in oneself and one's physical appearance.
• Psychology extreme selfishness, with a grandiose view of one's own talents and a craving for admiration, as characterizing a personality type.
See note at egotism .
• Psychoanalysis self-centeredness arising from failure to distinguish the self from external objects, either in very young babies or as a feature of mental disorder.

Add Reply

Post

Untitled Document
×
×
×
×
Link copied to your clipboard.
×