Families of Fallen Utah Highway Patrol Troopers Fight Atheist Group Over Roadside Cross Memorials

[shain from kane]

Friday, November 16, 2007

By Melissa Underwood
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,311956,00.html


Memorial in honor of Trooper William John Antoniewicz, who was killed in 1974 after he was shot during a traffic stop.

If a national atheist organization has its way, a series of 12-foot-tall memorial crosses that adorn Utah's highways will be taken down.

But not if the families of the people those crosses honor — state Highway Patrol troopers killed in the line of duty — have anything to say about it.

American Atheists Inc. has filed a federal lawsuit, arguing that the 13 white, steel crosses represent the death of Jesus Christ and therefore violate the First Amendment to the Constitution, which prohibits government establishment of religion.

But the families of the fallen heroes say otherwise. They say the crosses, which bear the names and badge numbers of the troopers, were built strictly as memorials.

------------------------
The Utah Highway Patrol Association defends the crosses, which have the Highway Patrol logo on them and have been erected on government land. It says they are secular symbols that both honor the troopers and remind speeding drivers to slow down.
--------------------------
The New Jersey-based American Atheists filed suit in 2005, arguing that the crosses symbolize Christianity and break state and federal laws against roadside memorials.

"They know very well that the cross is a Christian symbol," said Dave Silverman, spokesman for the group. "They are breaking the law by putting up memorials for fallen heroes."

The atheists support putting up memorials for fallen heroes, but oppose using a religious symbol to do so, Silverman said.

The crosses are not there to make a religious statement, but to serve as a memorial to the fallen officers, Pierson said.

------------------------
"There's nothing unconstitutional here because the memorials cost taxpayers nothing," he said.

But Brian Barnard, a lawyer representing American Atheists, said the memorial is a Roman cross, which symbolizes Christianity.

"The use of those crosses constitutes and endorses Christianity," Barnard said. "Although it's an acknowledgement of the death of these troopers, it is also an endorsement of Christianity."

Barnard said the highway association downplays the significance of the cross, claiming it is a secular symbol.

[Swamp Rat]

1. A simple solution would be for the family to purchase the small plot of land

where they intend to put their memorial.

[Speck Tater]

2. As an atheist myself, I think that...

fundamentalist atheists are every bit as bad as fundamentalist Christians. Those kooks give the whole atheist community a black eye.

[nadinbrzezinski]

3. Bingo, thanks for saying that

I salute you

[Drunken Irishman]

8. Your icon is Cthulhu, right?

I hear that Cloverfield movie might have that as the monster.

[damntexdem]

9. And there is the precedent of grave stones at national cemeteries.

[MindPilot]

12. No that's not a precedent; this is a completely different situation.

A grave is essentially private property and the marker is dedicated to the individual buried beneath it.

These "memorials" are undeniably symbols of a specific religion and are on public land which constitutes a de facto endorsement of religion.

[LanternWaste]

15. The graves aren't public property?

The graves aren't public property? I was under the impression they were... :shrug:

Maybe the cemetery itself is public (as Arlington Ntl) and the specific grave sites are owned by the families?

[MindPilot]

17. It is public land, yes. But the deceased has, shall we say, "squatters rights?"

Obviously the family nor the deceased actually hold a deed to the land, but there is no doubt that the grave site is being used exclusively by the deceased. There is also no question when one looks at a grave marker, whatever is on the marker, or the form the marker takes, is intended for the deceased.

So for the purposes of these kinds of cases, a grave site is considered private property.

[LanternWaste]

21. Are you stating that as a ...

Are you stating that as a legal opinion or a layman's opinion? In other words, this is a decision that's already been through the system?

(Just curious-- not being snarky or leading at all :) )

[MindPilot]

28. Let's say I have been very, very close to at least one

cross-on-public-land case. I am not a lawyer, but I've sat through enough hearings on the subject that sometimes I feel like I could pass the bar. :D

Much of how the courts view these things is based on the reasonable man test. "What would a reasonable person think/feel/assume/derive/infer looking at a particular thing?" AFAIK no one has ever litigated a symbol on a grave marker or a marker itself so I think--as a non-lawyer--the reasonableness test, rather than an actual decision applies here.

[maxsolomon]

18. you're joking, right?

by "fundamentalist atheist", do you mean one who cares enough to speak up & defend all of us from the christian majority's unconstitutional sense of privilege?

as a treehugging buddhist quantum physicist, i appreciate their defence of the separation of church & state.

[LanternWaste]

23. Maybe this fits the 'fundamentalist atheist' mold as the poster intended...?

Maybe the example of Madalyn O'Hair fits the posters criteria...?

A son converts to Christianity, his mother publicly states, "One could call this a postnatal abortion on the part of a mother, I guess; I repudiate him entirely and completely for now and all times...He is beyond human forgiveness."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Madalyn_Murray_O%27Hair

...not only raised the ire of religious believers, but also of many atheists. It was not uncommon for her to kick out of American Atheists members who did not conform to her vision of what atheists should be like.
http://atheism.about.com/library/glossary/general/bldef_ohairmm.htm

"What's the matter with hating? It's treated as a leper among the emotions. Why in the hell should we go on exuding sweetness and light?
http://www.rotten.com/library/bio/misc/madalyn-murray-ohair/


C'mon-- all beliefs, philosophies, faiths, non-faiths, business, neighborhoods, etc will have a group of bad apples. No philosophy is immune from the damages that one person call cast if he/she's determined enough to.

[MindPilot]

31. Speaking as someone who has been on the receiving end of that vitriol

I would tend to agree.

Of course now we have a new whack job giving all of us a bad name, Chris "Western Jihad" Hitchens.

[LanternWaste]

32. Leaving in ten minutes, but...

Leaving in ten minutes, but will check back tomorrow...

You knew her? Was she really as... rude as she was made out to be? I assumed half was urban legend and half was only half-truth.

[MindPilot]

34. Yes I knew her and no it is not exaggeration.

I had several first-hand experiences and personal encounters; she was every bit as rude, vulgar and mean as you've heard, probably even more so. To be fair, she was diabetic and I think a lot of her craziness was a result of that not being treated properly.

[immoderate]

33. Are you saying that anyone who thinks that 12 foot steel crosses

placed along public highways are inappropriate, has the same views as Madelyn O'Hare? If they don't, are they then NOT fundamentalists? :shrug:

Are those who don't want warrantless wire tapping then Constitutional fundamentalists, because they want to follow the Constitution? Or do you use the word fundamentalist only when you want to insult people?

--IMM

[maxsolomon]

35. seriously, madelyn murray o'hair?

her heyday as a provacateur was 30 years ago & she's been gone into the mists of history for a long time now.

how about an example from THIS DECADE?

[LittleClarkie]

19. Do you think they are fundamentalist atheists because they used to be

fundamentalist Christians? I've seen similarities in even how they approach religion. I've been confronted and asked to answer for an atheist's interpretation of the Bible. And if I don't accept that person's interpretation, I'm "cherrypicking" and not following true Christianity. I get enough of that from fundamentalist Christians, thank you very much. I don't need it from a fundamentalist atheist too.

I remember in one discussion on alt.atheism on Usenet about roadside memorials, the discussion turned toward road safety. I asked the person in question if he/she would care as much if the memorial had, say, a teddy bear, and not a cross.

The consensus on that group seemed to be the same as yours. Some atheists give atheism a bad name. Just as some Christians give Christianity a bad name.

[Bluebear]

25. Kooks?? These are TWELVE FOOT crosses!

The people putting them up couldn't be content with something less showy, could they?

[Bill McBlueState]

27. "fundamentalist" doesn't really make sense for atheists

In Christianity, fundamentalism is a movement that proclaims strict adherence to what they say are the fundamentals of the religion. Things like biblical literalism.

It's not clear what the fundamentals of atheism would be. Atheists tend not to agree about very much. It's not like there are atheist bishops or preachers that decide what all atheists should believe. There aren't atheist scriptures that one could use to create a list of fundamentals.

So I don't really understand how there could be atheist fundamentalists if the word "fundamentalist" is to have any meaning.

[cosmik debris]

30. It has no real meaning

It is just an insult used by unkind people to denigrate those with whom they disagree.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

4. Sounds Parlockian.

[Zookeeper]

5. I'm an atheist, but my guess is that the troopers were not....

so, as long as the symbols of other religions and atheist/humanist symbols are allowed, I think this is a fight that will just create ill-will.

That said, 12ft memorials along a highway are rather extreme.

[Clark2008]

14. That's what I was going to say.

I have no problem with families wanting to purchase markers for the fallen to be placed on the side of the road, but 12 feet tall markers? Geez Louise!

It looks like the 12-foot tall markers would be a safety hazard.

Around here, people are allowed to put up their own markers - small wreaths and flowers and little crosses or Stars of David. As long as it doesn't obstruct traffic or cause a safety hazard.

[LanternWaste]

24. 12' is more a monument than it is a memorial...

That's what I'm thinking. 12' is more a monument than it is a memorial...

A bit on the excessive side in my opinion.

[shain from kane]

29. "...remind speeding drivers to slow down." Wouldn't a simple stop sign, or warning sign, be enough?

A billboard in the vicinity with a picture of the policeman and applicable dates saying, "Slow down." or "Killed on duty near this location on mm/dd/yy."

[Drunken Irishman]

6. While the cross is obviously tied to Christianity, it's not originally a Christian symbol.

Hell, it traces back to the stone age and the Celts. Oddly enough, in Utah, the cross is not even linked to the most dominant religion, Mormonism. So I actually do agree with the highway association's downplaying of this. You won't find many crosses on Mormon graves or in Mormon churches, so I can see them believing it's far more secular than it is religious.

[MindPilot]

10. So if the cross insignificant as a religious symbol

why is it so important that the memorial be a cross?

I think the whole idea of roadside memorials is a bit ghoulish anyway.

[Drunken Irishman]

11. I don't know...

I'd wager most of those dead are Mormons, who do not believe in the cross as say, Catholics would. I'm guessing this is just an association with a memorial, since the cross traditionally is seen as a grave-style marker.

Hell when we were kids and an animal would die, when we would bury it, we'd put sticks together in the look of the cross not because it was a religious symbol, but because of its ties to a burial plot.

[kestrel91316]

7. Crosses paid by a private funder: fine. Memorials with the

state hwy patrol (agency of gov't) symbol: fine.

Crosses with state government agency symbol: most definitely NOT fine.

What part of the separation of CHURCH and STATE don't these people get?? Seriously.

What's really weird is that it's UT. The Mormons, while they acknowledge Christ, are NOT into displaying the cross.

[onager]

13. Everyone knows the cross is a secular symbol

Just like the Star Of David and the crescent moon.

:rofl:

I can't BELIEVE these knobs are trying to get away with that argument.

Proud Fundamentalist Atheist here, currently living in a country that's 95% Muslim. And yes, the "dominant religion" here has the same overweening sense of entitlement and privilege as Xians do in America.

[MindPilot]

16. Here in California, Caltrans just puts up a small sign.

"Officer Robert B Friendly Memorial Freeway"

The person is recognized for their sacrifice and the government isn't shoving religion on everyone.

However I've often wondered why CHP officers get memorials where they die, but other cops don't. Like if a cop is killed during a bank robbery, there isn't a plaque on the door designating it as the "Officer Joe Martin Memorial Branch of the Bank of America"

[Bluebear]

26. That's very tasteful and ultimately more people see their name.

[cosmik debris]

20. How many holes do you want in the wall of separation?

And how big do these holes need to be to satisfy the christian theocrats?

[Disturbed]

22. If those were Star Of David and the Crescent Moon there

would be a great uproar from the RWing Fundies.