Skip to comments.Atheist group wants memorial crosses removed
Posted on 12/02/2005 8:53:03 AM PST by West Coast Conservative
A lawsuit filed by the American Atheists in U.S. District Court on Thursday seeks to remove steel crosses that dot roadways throughout Utah and memorialize Utah Highway Patrol troopers who have died in the line of duty.
The suit has drawn harsh reaction from family members of the fallen troopers and promises to be the source of an emotional battle.
The crosses, which stand about 12 feet high and bear the trooper's name and the UHP insignia, were erected starting in 1998 and serve as a memorial for 14 troopers who have died since 1931. About nine of the crosses are on public land and all of them are placed near the spot where the troopers lost their lives.
Plaintiffs Stephen Clark, Michael Rivers and Richard Andrews in conjunction with the American Atheists Inc. also seek to have the UHP symbol removed from the crosses.
"The presence of the UHP logo on a poignant religious symbol is an unconstitutional violation of the United States Constitution. It is government endorsement of religion," said Rivers, Utah director for American Atheists.
The suit names Col. Scott Duncan, superintendent of the UHP; John Njord, executive director of the Utah Department of Transportation; D'Arcy Dixon Pignanelli, executive director of the Department of Administrative Services; and F. Keith Stepan, director of the Division of Facilities Construction and Management Department of Administrative Services.
Rivers said the purpose of the suit is to eliminate religious symbols used by government agencies and placed on government land. American Atheists claim to have a membership of 30 million people. They are not opposed to memorials, just the crosses.
(Excerpt) Read more at sltrib.com ...
How many markers will have to be replaced in military cemetaries if the desired results of this lawsuit are taken to their logical conclusion?
I'm truely amazed at how bored these 'atheist' are...
Arlington is next......
These athiests should sue to get the crosses and stars of David off the markers at Arlington Cemetery, too. [/sarcasm]
I think they need to attack Arlington - that should create a firestorm they can't stop!
You say that as if it's not in their plan.
Why would an atheist care about this? If you don't believe, well, you just don't believe.
Let's post THEIR names and faces on the Internet.
Let's let THEM face the heat and deal with the pain and suffering they are inflicting on their fellow Americans.
Atheists don't believe in Utah Highway Patrol troopers? Hell, we could show them one.
And put up new crosses fifteen feet high.
I'm opposed to Athiests. Wonder if Christians 150 million strong can have them removed!
Why aren't they counter-sued for frivilous lawsuits and fined accordingly. We need to pass a law against such.
Is this true, Stephen Clark, Michael Rivers and Richard Andrews? Really? Swear to God?
BTW, why doesn't the government just sell the three foot square plot of ground to a private foundation ($1)? ... This way the cross will not be on government land and the atheists can concentrate their attention on more important things ... like the Cub Scout and Brownies pledges which are destroying our country.
If an officer's family doesn't want a cross, they shouldn't put up a cross.
If the officer's family DOES want a cross, they should put up a cross.
The people who are offended at seeing crosses should shut up.
They're too stupid and evil to feel guilt. Have you seen that guy Newdow? Bill O'Reilly is right, the man is pathologically neurotic. He can't tell right from wrong and literally out of touch with reality.
Which religion, exactly, is established or endorsed by putting up crosses with the names of Utah Highway Patrol members who have been killed?
Is Christianity a religion? Barth, a seminal reform theologian, says it isnt. There are many denominations which use the cross as a symbol. Among them are Unitarian Universalists who explicitly deny that any kind of theism is a requirement for membership in their organization.
Consequently a cross does not even necessarily represent theism. So a cross does not intrinsically represent a religion. Therefore it does not intrinsically violate the First Amendment.
It MAY offend you, but there is no amendment protecting one against being offended. If there were, I would invoke it against you.
Your action is incoherent.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.