A secular symbol of what? Roman torture devices?

 Yes ! that was a very good perspective,thank-you. I dig reading Jacoby's books also. 

Personally, we have better things to devote our energy to. And isn't the memorial on private property anyway? Paid for by private funds?

The word is 'crucifixion', not 'T-bone-ification'.

The Christian cross is not the same symbol, it has an extended lower part, making it look like a lowercase t, rather than like the typical + shape of other crosses.

The bullshit "secular" argument by the Christians who want it there are laughable. They even try to point out that there are other displays to other religions there as well. BUT why is it this cross is the biggest and most prominent? Inclusive? Hardly, it is the same back of the bus attitude. Otherwise there would be an equal size display of the Jewish and Muslim and even atom symbol.

The simple solution is to get this cross off the property and take it to the private church a block away and have it displayed on that property.

It is the World Trade Center, not the Christian trade center.

I am sick of Christians, not all, but the ones who insist on treating any memorial, not just this one, as if Christians are the only ones who suffer in the world.

That attack affected not just Christians and not even just Americans. Over 80 nationalities and all the world's religions had dead represented. It should not be a monument to one religion, but a reminder to humanity of what humans should not do to each other.

This display is just as a bad to me as when some Jews today still milk the holocaust in Israel when even most of their citizens when polled disagree with the settlements.

"I'm the only label that knows what suffering is".

No, be it the holocaust, 9/11, slavery, genocide of Native Americans, human history has always been plagued with human suffering. I am tired of labels being used as an excuse to claim the virtue of the oppressed.

Human suffering is human suffering and gang tagging this memorial with religious symbols is arrogant and divisive when done like this. "Christian suffering is more important than other suffering".

We are all humans. Any display needs to be neutral and or inclusive and not lopsided, otherwise keep it all out and just stick to the names of the dead.

p { margin-bottom: 0.08in; }

OK Brian, anyone who would deny public impact represents insanity on roller skates. That and to the extent that public money is involved, there are rules that must be followed.

However, a couple of bits of metal that ended up looking something similar to a cross were originally purchased by some prick millionaire who got rich on the deal. I am not exactly clear on how the title tracks and google fails to enlighten on that matter. The insurance contract was held by Larry “Christ Killer” Silverstein and some of the land has no traceable title.

Still, while every opinion deserves a place in public discourse, this does not grant every opinion automatic and identical validity.

Another item that is likely to go in the museum is a bronze statue of the fire fighters who raised the flag the next day. However, there has been debate over the actual image. Umm, it is a famous photograph and akin the the flag raising at Iwo Jima. That and NYC firemen are mostly wops and mics.

Yet there is a contingent that wants the statue to be “a symbol of American inclusiveness” and to display a spic, a chink and a nigger. Not that there were any in the photo, just that we can create a statue which happens to be a lie. Do we even need to have that conversation?

We have lots of fish to fry, to say this is not important, is I think a bad thing to ignore. We all agree here that religion mixing with politics is dangerous and divisive. While freedom of religion SHOULD be protected, allowing Christians to use public funding to maintain religious memorials on national memorial sites is wink and nod to the favoritism our government unconstitutionally gives Christianity.

All I am asking is to go with the neutrality the First Amendment demands. In this case, as with many, I see them having only TWO choices. You let it all in AT EQUAL SIZE AND DISPLAY, or you keep it all out. The fact that the cross is the biggest religious display on that site is promoting the same back of the bus "separate but equal" second class status. It is bad enough that anyone of any label in this country still thinks that way, but it is an INSULT to all citizens who died that day to pretend it is not an attempt to display a pecking order.

So unless these assholes are willing to let Jews and Muslims and even atheists to have an equal size display, they are nothing but hypocrites and liers who don't give two shits about the Statue of Liberty that says "Bring me your tired huddled masses"

Somehow these selfish pricks take that as "Bring me your tired huddled Christians".

I'm sick of this shit. By having the biggest display on that site they are taking a human tragedy and selfishly saying that those who are not Christians suffered less. If they cared, which they don''t, they would make an inclusive display, not just a giant cross to assert their dominance on a murder crime scene where people of all labels died. They are shitting on the memories of non-Christians who died as well.

It is important because this selfish display is a reflection of those in this country who think that our politics and our constitution was ripped out of the bible. It IS important to address this because it is a reflection of our politics.

Rick Perry's prayer rally and Bachman's "Joke"(wink and nod to the right) are why things like the 9/11 cross is important. They are the ones who support a monopoly on public display and they are the ones who use religion to distract the public from the fleecing of America.

As long as religion is useful to politicians, to say that public displays of religion funded by the tax payers is not important is to allow them to continue to piss on a bush like a lion marking it's territory.

Government neutrality is of the utmost importance. Especially with religion.

But the cross was a piece of metal left over from the 9/11 rubble that happened to be cross-shaped, no one built it, so I think of it as just a monument. It's not the same as a religious group having built a cross and then campaigned to have it placed there.

Even a big rock would be more humane than crucifixion.

Proof or it did not happen.

What I think should happen is contracting an artist to sculpt out of wreckage likenesses of uniformed firefighters, cops, and other emergency responders. Those people gave their lives (or at least risked their lives) trying to save people at the scene. That'd be the best possible monument.

Lets face it, there are lots of christian things which have crossed over into secular culture. Sure the cross probably isn't one of them but I am open to it becoming recognised as a non religious symbol as forgivness or mercy or whatever. We have lots of symbols for lots of things, recognising the cross as a non religious symbol is just another natural step pushing religion to the outskirts of society. Although people would have to accept it as non religious first and not just trying to use trickery to keep a religious symbol up.