Separating the Cross from Christianity

The cover story in the most recent addition of Church and State Magazine, the magazine owned and operated by the Americans United for the Separation of Church and State, was titled Cross Purposes: In A Bid to Keep Religious Symbols on Public Land, Anti-Separationist Forces Have Declared the Christian Cross to be Secular. The article focuses on a conflict in San Diego regarding a Veterans’ Memorial. The Memorial is located on public land and is a 43-foot Latin cross. Veterans affiliating with both Christianity and minority religious groups have called the cross a clear violation of the First Amendment. The first lawsuit was brought against the cross in the 1980s, in which both a district and superior court ruled that the cross be removed.

The article’s author, Sandhya Bathija, tackles two main arguments in favor of maintaining the cross as a memorial to veterans. The first claim held by supporters of the cross is that the cross is representative of American patriotism, and therefore secular. I agree with Bathija that this argument is false. The cross cannot be considered secular merely because it is placed on a veteran’s memorial. The memorial is meant to represent all servicemen and women, and as Bathija points out, nearly 1/3 of the military population does not practice Christianity.

I believe the giant cross would fail Justice O’Connor’s Endorsement test as established in the Donnelly case, which states there is a violation of the First Amendment if the symbol sends a message that the government endorses or favors one religion over the others. Bathija’s article interviews non-Christian veterans who feel devalued or excluded by the cross. In addition to offending minority religious groups, many Christians have taken offense to the cross being considered a secular object that may be placed wherever public officials deem appropriate.

The second argument that Bathija tackles is why this cross is any different from the crosses seen on individual soldier’s graves. Supporters of the cross argue that soldiers who have died in battle have always been allowed to place a cross on their grave sites. The cross honors the soldier’s service for the country. They argue that the 43-foot cross is no different. Once again I agree with Bathija, that these two crosses are in fact very different. The crosses on individual graves are placed there to represent one single soldier. Families may choose what religious symbol does or does not go on the grave site. The 43-foot cross is meant to represent all veterans, and these veterans have not been given a personal choice. The Zelman case established that personal choice is an element to determining violation of the First Amendment. Because the veterans cannot choose how they are represented, I believe that the 43-foot cross should be removed from the public land. A cross is inherently Christian and to argue otherwise insults both Christians and non-Christians alike.