ACLU Wants Cross Removed from Cemetary Plot

[Arnold_Philips]

Is it for someone's grave? From what I gather, it's just for show.

 

[grace-2]

Do you feel the aclu should have the right to interfere in the selection of grave markers?



So far, my question goes unanswered.

well, you can errect a statue of Martin Luther! (also one of my favorite people)
We have bible verses on our sons modest tomb stone. I can't see if you paid for the plot and the stone why not.

 

[philosopherthales]

Has there ever been a case where the aclu forced a Buddhist, Muslim, or any other non-Christian to remove a religious symbol from a privately owned cemetery plot?

Hmm, searching around a little. Will continue but this is what I found so far

http://www.markdroberts.com/htmfiles/resources/crosscontroversy.htm

In the middle is the Roman goddess Pomona(the goddess of orchard and garden) and there is a cross that is in the right, middle square. The ACLU wanted the cross removed.

Note: I am getting this information from a christian orientated site.

 

[tollytee]

Standards for cemetery displays, including size, placement, etc. fall within the purview of responsibility of the owner/site manager of the cemetery, not the ACLU.

What she said......so there on you!

 

[angela 2]

Standards for cemetery displays, including size, placement, etc. fall within the purview of responsibility of the owner/site manager of the cemetery, not the ACLU.

The ACLU has no authority whatsoever to remove religious symbols from personal gravesites. Selection of gravestones and religious symbols is the choice of family members, not government, and definitely not the ACLU.

Read your link. Does it say anyone is buried on this plot? And BTW, the government owns the cemetery according to the article.

 

[UberLutheran]

http://www.snopes.com/politics/religion/cemetery.asp

[font=Trebuchet MS,Book Antiqua,Bookman Old Style,Arial]Over the years, the
American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) (and other related groups) have opposed the display of religious monuments and symbols on state-owned or state-maintained property. Some recent examples of these objects of contention include an 8-foot iron cross in California's Mojave National Preserve, a monument to the Ten Commandments in Alabama's state judicial building, an illuminated cross in a southern California city park, and a steel-beam cross proposed for inclusion in a World Trade Center memorial.

The issue involved is whether such displays violate the first amendment's "establishment clause" prohibition against the government's making any "law respecting an establishment of religion." Civil liberties groups have generally maintained that symbols which serve purely religious purposes (rather than historical or other secular purposes) or represent one particular religion to the exclusion of others violate the establishment clause when they are displayed on property which is owned by the state or maintained with public (i.e., tax-derived) funds. Hence the opposition to the Mojave cross (which was displayed on federally-owned parkland), the Ten Commandments monument in Alabama (which was sneaked into a state judicial building overnight by a judge as an expression of his religious beliefs), and the proposed WTC memorial (which would represent all victims of the WTC tragedy with a specifically Christian symbol).

However, displays associated with or derived from religious sources do not always represent unconstitutional endorsements of religion. The U.S. Supreme Court building is adorned with depictions of Moses, for example, because those depictions represent Moses in a historical context (as a great lawgiver) rather than a purely religious context. Court decisions about which displays fall within permissible non-religious contexts and which do not have been complicated and often confusing or seemingly contradictory — in the case of County of Allegheny v. ACLU Greater Pittsburgh Chapter (1989), the Supreme Court held that the holiday-season display of a crèche in downtown Pittsburgh was unconstitutional, but a menorah display on the adjacent block was not; in the case of Capitol Sq. Review Bd. v. Pinette (1995), the Supreme Court held that the Ku Klux Klan's attempts to place a cross in Ohio's Capitol Square during the Christmas season should have been allowed.

The implication in the message quoted above — that the ACLU's opposition to religious displays on state property extends to their advocating the removal of headstones and burial markers from federal cemeteries in the U.S. (even though the message is usually accompanied by a photograph of a European cemetery where American World War II servicemen are interred) — is another example of one group's exaggerating their opponent's position in order to mobilize support through political outrage (much like the recent rumor claiming that France had demanded the removal of buried American servicemen from French soil). Gravestones in public cemeteries are not deemed to constitute a government endorsement of religion because they individually represent the private religious beliefs of the persons buried there, and those symbols are chosen by family members of the deceased and not the government. Accordingly, the ACLU has stated that it is not seeking to have cross-shaped headstones (or headstones bearing any other religious symbols) removed from the federal cemeteries wherein many of our honored veterans are interred:
[/font]

[font=Trebuchet MS,Book Antiqua,Bookman Old Style,Arial] Thank you for the question about the ACLU's position on religious symbols on personal gravestones in cemeteries, whether private or public.

The right of each and every American to practice his or her own religion, or no religion at all, is among the most fundamental of the freedoms guaranteed by the Bill of Rights. The Constitution's framers understood very well that religious liberty can flourish only if the government leaves religion alone. The free exercise clause of the First Amendment guarantees the right to practice one's religion free of government interference.

The ACLU will continue working to ensure that religious liberty is protected by keeping the government out of the religion business.

The ACLU is not pursuing, nor has it ever pursued, the removal of religious symbols from personal gravestones. Personal gravestones are the choice of the family members, not the choice of the government. The ACLU celebrates this freedom to choose the religious symbol of your choice.

You can find more about the ACLU's position on religious liberty here.

We realize that there is incorrect information about the ACLU position going around the Internet, and thank you for the opportunity to clarify that falsehood.​

When I contacted the ACLU, I found there was no such action taken by the ACLU against any private cemeteries.

Looks like once again, someone fed the media a fake story, and the media didn't bother to check sources...

[/font]​

 

[UberLutheran]

Do you feel the aclu should have the right to interfere in the selection of grave markers?



So far, my question goes unanswered.

But, to summarize: we've all been had. This is a fake story which was passed on as "news".

 

[Arnold_Philips]

Collective D'oh, everyone.

 

[starchild]

But, to summarize: we've all been had. This is a fake story which was passed on as "news".

Too bad...

I mean, it would have been cool if someone, ACLU or whoever, could teach whoever has that eyesore displayed that bigger isn't always better... But hey, at least it's not in my neighborhood.

 

[Paula]

When I contacted the ACLU, I found there was no such action taken by the ACLU against any private cemeteries.

Note: The Elk Township cemetery is not a private cemetery.

Looks like once again, someone fed the media a fake story, and the media didn't bother to check sources...

Based on the above, I wouldn't jump to conclusions just yet. Sent an e-mail over to Ohio ACLU and will post their response if and when I get one.

 

[Paula]

Read your link. Does it say anyone is buried on this plot?

Yes. Please read the article.

And BTW, the government owns the cemetery according to the article.

True, but you can still have religious markers on any gravesite regardless of whether the cemetery is private or government owned.

 

[starchild]

Actually, it's easy to assume someone is buried there (Cy), but it's pretty vague about that:

The plot the cross is on was donated to the late Cy Karns, who helped put it there.

Karns' son Steve vowed to keep the cross in the cemetery.

So, unless Cy put it there, and they Slipped him Under the Monument to bury him...

I think that's still unanswered.

 

[Iconoclast77]

I think that if the situation had been real, and the since the cross wasn't someone's tombstone, just a momument they decided to prop up their, it was almost declaring it a Christian graveyard. Since it was (hypothetically) a government owned graveyard, it seemed the people could have given a bit more respect to the people laying in that graveyard (and their families), who did not subscribe to the Chrisian faith.

The ACLU isn't anti-christian, they only oppose religious symbols when on government property, because they are an organization (supported by millions) who believe strongly in the seperation of church and state. It might seem like the ACLU are picking on you Christians, but you have to remember, you are the majority. If the majority of this country was Jewish, and they had the Star of David on government grounds, the ACLU wouldn't be hunting down Christians, would they?

 

[Paula]

Actually, it's easy to assume someone is buried there (Cy), but it's pretty vague about that. So, unless Cy put it there, and they Slipped him Under the Monument to bury him...

I think that's still unanswered.

Not really. Markers can be placed on graves before burial takes place. It's commonly done.

 

[starchild]

Not really. Markers can be placed on graves before burial takes place. It's commonly done.

Huh. They didn't do that for mom... So, someone really wants to be buried with that Christo-kitsch monstrosity?

 

[Heiroglyph]

O father who art in heaven please bring an end to the ACLU organistion which is attacking our personal freedoms. Let them know only defeat in their strivings. Let them be confused and confounded at every turn. Father I ask you in Jesus name to cut off their funding support and take away their tax exempt status.

 

[Paula]

O father who art in heaven please bring an end to the ACLU organistion which is attacking our personal freedoms. Let them know only defeat in their strivings. Let them be confused and confounded at every turn. Father I ask you in Jesus name to cut off their funding support and take away their tax exempt status.

A loud, resounding amen!

 

[Heiroglyph]

Huh. They didn't do that for mom... So, someone really wants to be buried with that Christo-kitsch monstrosity?

You can buy your own and do it. My father is alive and already has his tombstone in place . Only the year of death is blank, to be filled in later.
He even puts flowers on it and took pictures to see what it'll look like when he is gone, assuming we put flowers there.

 

[Harpuia]

O father who art in heaven please bring an end to the ACLU organistion which is attacking our personal freedoms. Let them know only defeat in their strivings. Let them be confused and confounded at every turn. Father I ask you in Jesus name to cut off their funding support and take away their tax exempt status.

There are some Christians who would disagree with you on that prayer.

 

[wowbagger]

I thought it was strange to find only one link in Google news. I was trying to find out if Gov't monies were used in any way to keep/maintain the cross. That is the usual gripe of the ACLU, and rightly so. If private money is used, I don't see why they cannot keep it as long as its big size and general ugliness are OK with the cemetery managers.

It does seem unusual to have a plot without plans for anyone to inter there. I wonder why they allowed it since the guy it was donated for isn't buried there. But that is not a matter for the ACLU AFAICS.