Should the Ground Zero Cross be part of the permanent memorial for th victims of 9/11?

Question

The "Ground Zero Cross" was the large steel cross found in the rubble of the World Trade Center by a construction worker, who came across it 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. 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.

Atheists are threatening to file a lawsuit to prevent the cross from becoming part of any permanent memorial.

Do you think it should go or stay?

Answer 1

As an atheist, I'd have to say it should definitely stay.

On what grounds are the atheists trying to remove the cross?

If it was a piece of the actual debris of the site, and not manufactured by man, then who the frik are the atheists to demand that it not be included just because it happens to match with the symbology of certain religious denominations?

If people want to read symbology into it, that's their own business.

Answer 2

A single atheist group (Amercian Athiests) has voice opposition to the Ground Zero Cross being incorporated into the permanenet redevelopement of the WTC site, if PUBLIC funds are going to be used in that developement.

They've never threatened to sue to have the Cross removed, although it has been suggested that they could sue to prevent public funds being used to pay for a religious memorial.

The groups (very rightly) points out that not all the victims who died were Christian, neither were all the rescue workers, and that a specifically Christian memorial sends the inappropriate message that only Christian fatalities, sacrifices, or acts of bravery are worth memorializing.

However it is not "Atheists" who are objecting, but a specific group--their agenda does not necessarily reflect every atheist's viewpoint. I for one think it's a very powerful image and should be a part of the memorial, but that the memorial overall shouldn't be permitted to become a Christian edifice

Answer 3

Only if they retain the sacred dustpiles as well.
I have heard nothing about this lawsuit but I would bet that there were other bits of wreckage resembling other religions symbols that were not selected.
It is just scrap iron and crosses are often found when the wreckage is straight pieces of Iron.

Do you consider an Iron Cross a Good symbol for America to use in this case?

Answer 4

Take it down. Why can no longer we've a plaque of a few types? Why the choose for any non secular symbols? From the treaty of Tripoli. as a results of fact the government of the USA isn't, in any experience, based on the Christian faith; because it has in itself no character of enmity against the guidelines, faith, or tranquility, of Mussulmen; and, as a results of fact the suggested States never entered into any war, or act of hostility against any Mahometan united states of america, that's asserted by skill of the events, that no pretext springing up from non secular evaluations, shall ever produce an interruption of the team spirit cutting-edge between the two countries.[c51ce410c124a1edb5e4b97fc2af39c51ce410c124a1edb5e4b97fc2af39]

Answer 5

The "Ground Zero Cross" was two beams joined together, not two random beams from two buildings. It would be surprising if they HADN'T found some kind of cross.

I don't mind the cross staying if they surround it with symbols from the faiths of all those who died. That seems the most fair to me.

Answer 6

I think it should stay. Athiests can perhaps put something there too in memory of those lost if they wish....I hope the whole area becomes one big memorial..a memorial park or something. It definitely should not have buildings on it because we must never forget that there are still crushed bodies there..maybe they have just become like sand or something..but they are there..they never were recovered.
Perhaps atheists might like to have input from all the friends and relatives of the deceased..especially the deceased who were never recovered...after all it is a mass grave so to speak.

Answer 7

i think that regardless of religious affiliation or faith, since that is a symbol that was found in the rubble after the event, that makes it a memorial in and of itself, like a souvenir left for us. in essence it's a "natural" formation that was caused by the buildings falling. a cross is an easy shape to make.

i'm sure if a swastika had been found someone would have voiced loud and long that it was a sign from God that jews should get out of the US...but I think in this case, it's just something they found that symbolizes unity and the morals our country was founded on, so it's okay.

Answer 8

Um, no. Actually, you're quite wrong. The ground zero cross was NOT formed from parts from both.

It was formed from Building 1 and fell into Building 6. The fact that the join was still intact, as per construction techniques and not in the haphazard weld that would have occured under intense heat (which by the time the metal from the two buildings touched, would no longer have existed in the metal), is proof that it came from a single building, not parts of both.

There is nothing mystical, magical, or miraculous about the existence of this hunk of meaningless metal.

Answer 9

I think it should stay. After all it is only a part of the proposed memorial. Let the Atheists or others come up with designs that they would also like to see. And shouldn't we consider how those who lost loved ones feel about the memorial?

Answer 10

I don't believe any of the rubble from 9/11 should be kept. It should be completely destroyed with all the rest. Christians have no special claim on 9/11.