19 August 2010 Can I get a star and a crescent?

Federal appeals court says highways' crosses are unconstitutional

By Bill Mears, CNN Senior Producer

August 18, 2010 5:42 p.m. EDT

http://us.cnn.com/2010/US/08/18/utah.highway.crosses/index.html?hpt=C2



The question is,” What is an acceptable highway monument?”

There are others, as well.

“Should there be roadside markers?”

“Should the marker denote the religion of the deceased officer?”

“Would the sponsoring organization allow religious designation for non-Christians?”

“Should there be markers for persons who died in traffic accidents on highway right of ways?”



The Atheist organization in Texas picked a tough target. Most of us are not opposed to memorializing the on-duty deaths of law enforcement officers. I’m not opposed to the use of public right of way for such markers. Then what is an acceptable marker? Is a cross suitable? The cross is commonly used to denote cemeteries, hospitals, and churches on maps. The use of a cross evolved due to the religious nature of the organizations that organized, ran, maintained, and owned those places. As the dominant religion in Europe was Catholic in one form or another, the choice was not surprising. The cross also wound up, in conjunction with the caduceus on ambulances, denoting first aid stations, and in the logo of the International Red Cross. Not surprisingly, nations with other dominant religions use other logos to denote such things. Israel uses a red Magen David. Arab states use a Red Crescent.

Any marker should be easily identified as to purpose. If one wants to memorialize a law officer’s on duty death, I would suggest that a badge or shield is nearly unmistakable in denoting who is being honored. There is no need to display the personal religious faith of these officers unless one is trying to demonstrate numerical superiority in a populace, or to aid in proselyltization. There is also no other real purpose to using a Magen David, Red Crescent, Pentangle, or any other logo designating religious faith. To honor a fallen law officer, the shield or badge is the best choice. Grave markers can display religion in a more appropriate place.

I have to wonder at the percentage of non-Christian state police in Utah. Still, there is no need to display religion on any roadside monument. Objection to the use of crosses does not constitute a “war on Christianity.” In my reasoning, the use of crosses is un-necessary and should never be allowed on public right of way. I would make the same restriction for stars, crescents, pentangles, etc. The 1st Amendment applies in this instance as in any other.

It will be interesting to see how the Supreme Court deals with this case. I think it will ultimately wind up there.

There is also the matter of roadside markers placed by families or by friends at the location of auto accident deaths. I object to these things on several levels. They are essentially litter. They often are found at locations where drivers need to focus their attention upon the task of driving, not upon trying to look at a roadside shrine. Given the national obsession with public mourning that has grown over the last several decades, the amount of litter, in the form of flowers, stuffed animals, posters, and other soon-to-be trash; the size of these min-shrines keeps increasing.

The dead are not there, waiting to hitch-hike to the prom or home from the beach. The appropriate place to mourn them is at home or in a cemetery. Stuffed animals and flowers dropped off by family who miss them or who feel guilty, or by classmates who, too often, knew nothing of them until they died, are suggestive of a drive through funeral. Is that what we’ve become, the land of the “drive through funeral?”

0.87 inches of rain so far today. It arrived in a heavy thunderstorm about 0540-0730, and in a heavier thunderstorm about 1500-1630.

Barbeque sandwiches tonight.