Cross Fire: The Latest Effort To Save Christian ‘War Memorial’ Should Fail
Let’s say you had a relative who fought and died in World War II and who was an atheist (or a Jew or a Hindu). Let’s say the government told you it was going to honor your relative’s sacrifice to our nation with a 43-foot cross atop a mountain in San Diego. Is this acceptable to you – a cross honoring your deceased, non-Christian veteran?
It’s not to a lot of people. Yet that’s exactly what’s going on at Mt. Soledad in California.
The Mt. Soledad cross was first erected in 1913. Back then, no one tried to pretend that it was a war memorial. It was displayed for clear religious purposes.
Bad weather knocked down two crosses, so in 1954 a concrete replacement (reinforced with steel) was erected. Again, no one tried to claim that the symbol was a war memorial. Backers of the cross said they wanted “to create a park worthy of this magnificent view, and worthy to be a setting for the symbol of Christianity.”
Only after the symbol became the subject of litigation in 1989 did people suddenly start insisting that the cross was intended to be a war memorial.
Since then, this case has had more twists than a spy novel. Cross defenders have desperately tried to latch on to any argument they can, even insisting that the cross – the preeminent symbol of the Christian faith – isn’t really religious. It’s just a secular marker for war dead.
The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals rejected that argument in a January ruling. Writing for the court, Judge M. Margaret McKeown observed, “The use of such a distinctively Christian symbol to honor all veterans sends a strong message of endorsement and exclusion. It suggests that the government is so connected to a particular religion that it treats that religion’s symbolism as its own, as universal.”
Rather than accept the logic of the ruling in Trunk and Jewish War Veterans of the United States of America v. City of San Diego, politicians keep interfering. U.S. Rep. Duncan Hunter (R-Calif.) has over the years introduced several pieces of legislation designed to keep the cross up. Courts keep striking them down, but Hunter won’t stop.
Hunter’s most recent gambit is a bill that he says will allow the cross to stay by declaring that religious symbols are suitable elements for a war memorial.
The bill faced a markup today in the House Committee on Natural Resources and sailed through. Hunter’s proposed legislation, known as the War Memorial Protection Act (H.R. 290), purports to legalize the inclusion of sectarian symbols on war memorials
This is a waste of Congress’ time. Courts, not Congress, will decide the fate of this religious symbol. Hunter’s stunt may please the cultural warriors of the Religious Right, but it doesn’t actually achieve anything.
Rob Boston's Recent Posts
The opinions expressed here by our bloggers, viewers, and posters do not necessarily represent the opinions of the Secular Coalition for America. These views are those of their individual authors alone.
Become a Secular Activist