Should Cross at Ground Zero be removed to pacify Atheists?

[HairOfTheDog]

The museum's lawyer, Mark Alcott, told the court that rescue workers took comfort in the cross and they prayed to it as a religious object.

“But there is a difference between displaying an artifact of historical significance and saying we want you [the public] to bless it -- museum-goers understand that distinction” he said, according to London's Telegraph newspaper.

The newspaper said Judge Reena Raggi appeared skeptical of the claims by the atheist group.

“There are countless cases of museums including religious artifacts among their exhibits and it’s going to be described in a way that talks about the history of the object, what is the problem here?” she said. “An argument has been made that you are trying to censor history.”

I think the museum's lawyer and the judge have it right and don't think the atheist activists have a chance in hell of getting the cross removed or having their plaque hung in the museum.

It would surprise me if they even expected to win this suit as there is clearly no violation of the separation of church and state doctrine when it comes to this historical display.

I agree with those who see this suit as being more motivated by a desire for media exposure than a valid claim of discrimination.