BAD FORM
Don’t Cry About the Cross
By Randy Harward, 12-08-05
I don’t know whether I’m atheist, agnostic or a deist, and I feel fine about reserving that decision for later—even if it means I won’t have it figured out by the time my time is up. I do know, however, that I passionately support separation of church and state. Still, there are exceptions.
American Atheists Inc. filed a complaint in U.S. District Court last week complaining about the roadside crosses erected to memorialize fallen state troopers killed in the line of duty. The main bitches:
1. They’re crosses.
2. The crosses are emblazoned with the Utah Highway Patrol symbol.
In her column in today’s Salt Lake Tribune, Holly Mullen says American Atheists Inc. is getting too “prickly� with this latest litigation. I agree (this is one of those exceptions). Atheists can be just as uptight as religious folks—they, too, could better vet their battles. After all, who bristles when they see a cross on the side of the road? Would you really get offended?
I have a pretty visceral reaction, but it’s not offense. My stomach clenches and, for a few moments, I feel this wretched sorrow. That memorial says somebody (citizen or public servant) lost their life, and their loved ones stood heartbroken, in that exact spot—the place my still-breathing ass just passed. Then the sadness evaporates and I feel lucky to be alive. And as I experience those emotions, I don’t once consider the cross at the crux of the memorial.
Granted, a state organization should avoid using religious emblems—and especially not merge them with their own, but in this case a lawsuit is just bad form.
Like this story? Get more! Sign up for our free newsletters.
Comments
Add your comment below
Religion very often prey on the emotional misfortunes of others. By doing this, it negates the application of reason. The author of this article has fallen prey to this age-old method by religion.
Of course, this action, also, shows a blatant disregard to Constitutional law. Expressing one's emotions is not an excuse to criminal behavior. Any agency that was created to uphold the law of the land should know better.
I might add that if this activity was the action of private citizens, I would not be oppose to it, although I do think that it would be in poor taste.
Your audience would benefit from the knowledge there is an alternative to displaying a roadside memorial on public roads or right of ways. The National Memorial Registry http://www.NationalMemorialRegistry.com is Internet based and offers free of any charge, the opportunity for any individual to dedicate a memorial location to a loved one. With the help of our extensive database of mapping software, a person can dedicate a specific address, site, or location in honor of, or to validate, the life of an individual that has an influence on their lives. Every memorial dedication is displayed on our maps for the world to view.
It is a well known fact that that many individuals need to experience the grieving process through the display of a roadside memorial. All too often, local jurisdictions are regulating this practice. Some are limiting the time a memorial can be displayed, others are banning them. Some jurisdictions have regulations regarding the placement of memorials but local enforcement is not done, often by choice to help the grieving family. This same website has a database of information on many of the states, cities, and countries regarding their current and past position, and if available, current legislation regarding the placement of roadside memorials.
Please let your future readers know about this alternative. If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact me.
Kindest regards,