notto said:
Who's grave is it marking?
As has already been pointed out numerous times on this thread, the plot belongs to Cy Karns:
"The plot the cross is on was donated to the late Cy Karns, who helped put it there."
http://www.nbc4i.com/news/4481346/detail.html
Do other graves have the same access to electricity for lighting at night and a plaque designating it as a war memorial? Who do you think is paying the electric bill for the lighting?....
There are several problems with your argument, including some erroneous assumptions:
First, there are other sources of lighting besides electrical.
Second, included in the purchase price of the plot is a maintenance charge for groundskeeping. Maintenance and refurbishing of the monument is the owner's responsibility.
Third, there is also a general rule that once something belongs to the state, the state cannot legally give it away.
Fourth, considering the variety of monuments in the Elk Township cemetery, its patently absurd to say that one singular monument somehow creates a state religion, or that it violates separation of church and state doctrine.
So to me, the issue is whether the cemetery becomes a public forum where different messages are put. And if it is, then it seems to be very hard to say it's unconstitutional to have a large cross there. On the other hand, if the cross were standing alone on government property, that would be the state preferring a religious message.