Supporting Civil Rights for Atheists and the Separation of Church and State

24
Aug
2011

On American Atheists Lawsuit over World Trade Center 9/11 Cross

admin /

This is an excerpt from the upcoming article by National Legal Director Edwin Kagin regarding the WTC Cross Lawsuit.

[...] This cross is an admittedly religious symbol. Those who want it publically displayed in the proposed national shrine have stated that this cross demonstrates to Christians, and everyone else, that god did not abandon us on 9/11. How such a symbol might be viewed, or how it might affect non-believers, has been irrelevant to those who hold it to be a gift of a god: a god that still has us favorably in mind, despite his apparent inability, or unwillingness, to prevent the evil that happened that terrible day.

Those who would have this cross installed in our national memorial and museum want to give the impression to the world that the United States of America is a Christian nation. And they want our government to ratify that unconstitutional conclusion by bringing this Trojan Horse of Christianity inside the gates of the constitutional wall that separates religion from government.

The "cross" as discovered in the rubble of the basement of WTC-6 (not the towers).

Be clear on this please. We are not a Christian nation and we have never been a Christian nation. The Treaty with Tripoli, of 1797, signed by all of the U.S. senators, says, in black letter, “...the Government of the United States of America is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion.” We are a secular nation that has a lot of Christians in it. Christians have the right to be acknowledged and to be heard. So do atheists. The First Amendment says that no law shall be made that relates in any way to the establishment of religion. Using public funds to put onto public land a cruciform structure is government conduct amounting to behavior respecting “the establishment of religion.” What part of “no” don’t they understand?

American Atheists has filed a lawsuit in the state, not federal, court in New York. This was a surprise move to many who think such things always go to Federal court. However, this might not, in these times, be the best strategy. We allege a violation of both federal and New York law in that public funds will be used to establish the Christian religion on public land, by permitting this cross to be placed in the Museum designed by our government to represent all of those who died in what has been come to be known as the 9/11 attack.

Those who died in the attacks did not “sacrifice” themselves, as this implies some act of choice. They were murdered by religious fanatics. Their deaths were not heroic. They were not tragic. They were pathos. The deaths of those who died in rescue attempt were both tragic and heroic. Their sacrifices honor us all.

The idea for this case, and the beginnings of our lawsuit, were conceived and started by the President of American Atheists, Dave Silverman, and the undersigned, while we were serving together this summer at Camp Quest Michigan. Through the miracle of cell phone, we found, and contacted, Danielle Mathey, Esq., an outstanding member of the New York bar, who agreed to serve as local counsel. The Complaint can be read here (PDF).

The outcry from the usual suspects was immediate and noisy. What was not expected was the enormous amount of flak we have received from writers and thinkers who normally would be supportive. But not here. To some, this lawsuit was ill conceived and will be an embarrassing loss to all atheists.

It is respectfully requested of those who would further criticize us that they do themselves and history the favor of actually reading the lawsuit before opining thereon. Ignorance is regrettable, but it can result in a lot of interesting arguments from people who are frequently wrong but never uncertain. If debate is to be had, let it at least be over what the facts are, not over what someone with a blog, and a ready opinion on everything, has misread or misconceived about this case.

[...]

Stay tuned.

Edwin Kagin
National Legal Director
American Atheists, Inc.

Comments

Anonymous's picture
Anonymous (not verified) / Wed, 08/24/2011 - 13:18

What part of “no” don’t they understand?

Well written piece and simply describes this issue. How can you not lose.

I expect nothing as usual and hope dearly that the court understands reality.

Anonymous's picture
Anonymous (not verified) / Fri, 08/26/2011 - 06:57

Their deaths were not tragic??? How can you seriously say that?
As far as heroic, what about flight 93 was it? Isnt that the one where the passengers sacrificed themselves to save others?
What about the workers in the trade center buildings that went back to help others and never made it out? Your claim is insulting to every american.

Anonymous's picture
Anonymous (not verified) / Fri, 08/26/2011 - 09:06

Flight 93 is irrelevant to the WTC lawsuit.

The reference to heroic was specifically about those killed by the impact: those who were murdered. You'll notice immediately afterwards that rescuers are specifically mentioned as being heroic. Reading comprehension is very important.

Anonymous's picture
Anonymous (not verified) / Mon, 08/29/2011 - 07:43

I really hope they win. This has been eating at me since I first heard about it. Any idea how long it will take to go to court? Is there somewhere to follow it?

Anonymous's picture
Anonymous (not verified) / Fri, 09/09/2011 - 15:44

The lawsuit couldn’t be more off the mark. This piece of metal was found among the rubble at ground zero. It was a sign of hope for many of the survivors. It was part of the history of 911, it was photographed ten years ago, and it became a symbol of hope at the time. Displaying the piece of metal will not require anyone to join a religion or not join a religion. The first amendment says, “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.” To bar the displaying of the piece of metal would fall into the category of “prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech. One the great traits of our culture is our tolerance of people with varying points of view. If this piece of metal is important to some of the survivors and it was obviously part of the history it should be displayed. How can it be justified to deny some of the visitors their comfort?

Anonymous's picture
Anonymous (not verified) / Sun, 11/06/2011 - 00:14

One Nation Under God.
Just thought Id point that out..

Pages

Night of the Living Savior
"Night of the Living Savior"
by Robert M. Price
Find this product and more in our online store!

Get our Website Updates!

Do you want the latest AA news as soon as it happens?

Sign Up Icon

Sign up using the link below and be the first in the know! 

Website Update Email List

American Atheists Visa

Apply for the American Atheists Visa Card

and show your support with every purchase you make!

AA Visa.jpeg

 Apply Today!