Championship Subdivision Football | FCS Football | Stadiums | Blogs | Forums

Is this violation of the separation of church and state? Or are the complainers just douchebags?

Cross with veterans memorial prompts complaint in Iowa

A figure meant to memorialize fallen veterans in Knoxville has piqued the interest of a national advocacy group that says its aim is to preserve the Constitution’s separation of church and state.

The monument depicts a silhouette of a soldier kneeling at the gravesite of a fallen comrade. The cross at the head of the grave has caused concerns because it's located in a city park.

Ian Smith, staff attorney at Americans United for Separation of Church and State, said his organization received a tip from somebody seeking to get the monument removed from government property. After an investigation, Smith said, the group believes the monument is an establishment of religion prohibited by the First Amendment, specifically because the Latin cross is the “pre-eminent symbol of Christianity.”

The organization has asked the city of Knoxville to remove the symbol immediately.

“The separation of church and state is vital for religious freedom,” Smith said. “When the government puts its authority behind a particular religion, it stifles other religious expression."

Brian Hatch, mayor of central Iowa town, said the city has received the letter from Americans United for Separation of Church and State is investigating options.

While the monument is on city property, it was not placed there by city staff, Hatch said. The AMVETS Post 63 in Knoxville is responsible for the donation, which sits close to the Freedom Rock — a tribute to area veterans in Young's Park, he said.

“It only makes sense to go there,” Hatch said of the silhouette. “The whole entire area there is only for one purpose, and that’s to honor veterans.”

A resident complained to city staff about a month ago, Hatch said, but officials decided not to make changes.

“We did not see any religious tie to this monument whatsoever. We just thought it was a tribute to a fallen soldier,” Hatch said. “So we didn’t do anything about it, and we were OK with that.”

Hatch said no action will be taken until the City Council has a chance to meet.

Americans United for Separation of Church and State said it’s prepared to take legal action if the city refuses to remove the monument.



http://www.desmoinesregister.com/story/ ... /32068741/

Picture of the memorial and the park.




On a related note the rock is part of the Freedom Rock Tour project in Iowa. The artist does some pretty cool stuff.

http://www.thefreedomrock.com/freedom-rock-tour-pics/

The fact it's a veterans memorial has nothing to do with the issue. It's city property so it needs to come down. Yes, that's a little douchey, but so is the insistence that one religion's iconography be on display in the public square.

Freedom of expression by AMVETS Post 63.

We have National Cemeteries, under the jurisdiction of the Department of the Army. Head stones have a symbol of the soldiers religious affiliation, not exclusive to Christians. Nation of freedoms not restrictions.

Nothing in that art display does anything to advocate for or throw government support or endorsement for a specific religion, especially to the exclusion of any other faith, so it should stay. The Constitution has never been about eliminating all instances of religious expression, that's simply an erroneous reading by those who don't understand it or who really want to eliminate religion.

On the same note, really, there's a painted rock and that silhoutte display? I'm not sure where they have that stuff, but from an artistic point of view the art was kinda crappy. I'd take it down just because I don't think it's very good.

GannonFan wrote:Nothing in that art display does anything to advocate for or throw government support or endorsement for a specific religion, especially to the exclusion of any other faith, so it should stay. The Constitution has never been about eliminating all instances of religious expression, that's simply an erroneous reading by those who don't understand it or who really want to eliminate religion.

On the same note, really, there's a painted rock and that silhoutte display? I'm not sure where they have that stuff, but from an artistic point of view the art was kinda crappy. I'd take it down just because I don't think it's very good.

You're right.

The First Amendment has two provisions concerning with religion: the free exercise clause and the non-establishment clause.

They work together to protect the individual's right to exercise his or her religion, by providing that government will not inhibit the free exercise of any specific religion, or establish a state religion.

There is no "freedom from religion" guaranteed by the First Amendment. Nonetheless, secularists are increasingly trying to convince judges to read the non-establishment clause as not prohibiting the establishment of any specific religion, but instead prohibiting any government action that prefers "religion," in a generic sense, to non-religion. Of course, the government cannot possibly be "neutral" in such a choice, because the moment it cannot categorically show any preference to religion expression, it has shown a categorical preference to non-religion.

The Latin cross is a generic Christian symbol that does not define or prefer any specific religious denomination. There should be no problem with it, under traditional constitutional analysis.

The cross makes it obvious that it's the grave of a comrade and not just a family member or something.

These Church-and-State fanatics need to get over themselves and find something more productive to do.

Im sure this same organization is arguing that churches should remain tax exempt

because these crusader organizations are always consistent like that

regardless of "who's a bigger douche'" in situations such as these
I think its always a healthy exercise
Because Religions by their nature will push every boundary of intrusion
and seek every benefit and every exemption

Left unchecked is not good...

Laus Deo

JoltinJoe wrote:

GannonFan wrote:Nothing in that art display does anything to advocate for or throw government support or endorsement for a specific religion, especially to the exclusion of any other faith, so it should stay. The Constitution has never been about eliminating all instances of religious expression, that's simply an erroneous reading by those who don't understand it or who really want to eliminate religion.

On the same note, really, there's a painted rock and that silhoutte display? I'm not sure where they have that stuff, but from an artistic point of view the art was kinda crappy. I'd take it down just because I don't think it's very good.

You're right.

The First Amendment has two provisions concerning with religion: the free exercise clause and the non-establishment clause.

They work together to protect the individual's right to exercise his or her religion, by providing that government will not inhibit the free exercise of any specific religion, or establish a state religion.

There is no "freedom from religion" guaranteed by the First Amendment. Nonetheless, secularists are increasingly trying to convince judges to read the non-establishment clause as not prohibiting the establishment of any specific religion, but instead prohibiting any government action that prefers "religion," in a generic sense, to non-religion. Of course, the government cannot possibly be "neutral" in such a choice, because the moment it cannot categorically show any preference to religion expression, it has shown a categorical preference to non-religion.

The Latin cross is a generic Christian symbol that does not define or prefer any specific religious denomination. There should be no problem with it, under traditional constitutional analysis.

Wait! You mean I'm not guaranteed freedom from religion? WTF???

What are those evil secularists like the Reverend Barry Lynn good for anyway?

Where is this organization? I want to separate the air from their tires.

CAA Flagship wrote:Where is this organization? I want to separate the air from their tires.

wait till Islam comes to St. Louis.