American Atheist Group Wants 'Unconstitutional' Ground Zero Cross Removed from 9/11 Memorial and Museum (VIDEOS)

After the petition to remove the Ground Zero Cross from the National 9/11 Memorial and Museum was not successful, the American Atheist group became furious, claiming the cross is "unconstitutional."

The American Atheist previously said in their lawsuit that many members of their organization suffered "dyspepsia [upset stomach], symptoms of depression, headaches, anxiety, and mental pain and anguish," as a "direct and proximate result of the unconstitutional existence of the cross," according to an ACLJ report in 2011.

The Ground Zero Cross was discovered in the wreckage after the 9-11 World Center attack on the Twin Towers 13 years ago. In addition, the Atheist group also had this to say on the matter, "[The Ground Zero] cross constitutes an unlawful attempt to promote a specific religion on government land," according to the lawsuit filed by atheist organization, "[It] promotes Christianity [and] constitutes discrimination against non-Christians."

The National September 11 Memorial & Museum issued the following statement regarding the issue, "There is no legal authority for the proposition that a museum is prohibited from displaying an item with historical, cultural or artistic significance merely because that item also has religious significance," according to National September 11 Memorial & Museum's court filings.

Now, the federal appeals court is giving the American Atheists organization up until July 14 to give evidence to prove their claims in order to decide whether or not the case will be dropped completely.

"We're thrilled that the court picked up on this issue," said Becket Fund for Religious Liberty's lawyer Eric Baxter, according to the Fox News website, "Courts should not allow people to sue just because they claim to get 'dyspepsia' over a historical artifact displayed in a museum."

Baxter further expressed his views regarding the recent decision concerning the Ground Zero Cross.

"Taking personal offense is not an injury that warrants invoking the power of the courts to shut down everything you disagree with," said Baxter. "The Constitution is not a personal tool for censoring everyone's beliefs but your own."