Controversial Lawsuit against Utah Highway Patrol

[Ted]

http://deseretnews.com/dn/view/0,1249,635165645,00.html

Crosses honoring troopers protested

Atheists' suit says Utah markers unconstitutional

By Geoffrey Fattah
Deseret Morning News

A Texas-based atheist group has filed a federal lawsuit against the Utah Highway Patrol and the Utah Department of Transportation, demanding that crosses erected in honor of fallen UHP troopers be removed from highways on the principle of separation of church and state.

In the suit filed in U.S. District court Thursday, American Atheists Inc., a nonprofit Texas corporation with main offices based out of New Jersey, says several of the 12-foot steel crosses memorializing troopers killed in the line of duty are located on public land in violation of the establishment clause of the First Amendment.

"It is the government endorsement of religion and of one particular religion," said Mike Rivers, Utah director of American Atheists and one of the plaintiffs. Two other Utah members, Stephen Clark and Richard Andrews, have also joined the suit.

News of the suit spread quickly through the UHP community and among friends and family of fallen troopers. "Generally speaking, the crosses are to memorialize these officers who have given the ultimate sacrifice to the state," UHP spokesman Jeff Nigbur said. Nigbur said a large number of the crosses are located on private property near public highways.

As for the religious symbolism, Nigbur said, the cross symbol was chosen as a general symbol to memorialize the fallen.

"We chose the cross because the cross is the international sign of peace, and it has no religious significance in it," Nigbur said.

"I think that's less than honest," said Salt Lake civil rights attorney Brian Barnard, who represents the atheists.

Barnard said the cross is a symbol of Christianity. He has no objection to memorializing fallen troopers, but Barnard said there has to be a better, non-denominational way to do it.

"I don't think there's any question that these troopers should be honored. They have given the ultimate sacrifice," Barnard said. "They can be honored in a way that doesn't emphasize religion."

As for being on private property, several crosses located by Barnard are actually on government land and he has copies of permits issued by the Utah Department of Transportation that allow the crosses.

UDOT spokesman Tom Hudachko said his department has yet to fully review the suit and did not want to comment on pending litigation.

Todd Royce, former president of the Utah Highway Patrol Association, which helps place the memorial crosses, calls the suit a little late.

"This was years in the working," Royce said. "Some of these crosses have been up for seven or eight years. When we put them up, nobody opposed them."

Lori Lucas-Foster said even replacing the crosses for another symbol at this point would be like tampering with a gravesite. The daughter of a fallen UHP trooper, Lucas-Foster said although her family is traditionally Catholic, they are not very religious.

"To us the symbol is not about religion or a symbol of Christianity. To us, it's a memorial marker for the life that my dad sacrificed for the whole community," she said.

Her father's cross stands off southbound I-15 in Layton. Tom Rettberg was a longtime UHP pilot whose helicopter crashed in Woods Cross on Feb. 11, 2000, while he attempted an emergency maneuver as part of training.

Lucas-Foster and Royce both point out that crosses are used to mark graves at government memorial sites, such as Arlington National Cemetery.

In a statement, Clark said the cross stands for Christianity to the casual observer.

"To so blatantly tie the UHP to religion and to overwhelm the commemoration with a harrowing symbol exclusive to one religion unquestionably violates the doctrine of the separation of church" and state, Clark said.

American Atheists are asking for damages of $1 but seek the removal of all crosses on government property and a ruling that the UHP logo on the crosses is unconstitutional.

E-mail: gfattah@desnews.com

 

[WayOutWest]

"We chose the cross because the cross is the international sign of peace, and it has no religious significance in it," Nigbur said.

That is one of the biggest loads of crap I've read in a long time.  Do I really need to point out that the cross is FAR from a symbol of peace?

Anyway....

I think the lawsuit is BS.  It's not like the space the cross is occupying is of any significant value, I have no problem as a tax payer with the maintenance costs of keeping those symbols in shape.  My only comment would be that the appropriate symbol be errected if a Jewish, Muslim, etc... officer fell in the line of duty.

If they are using a cross regardless of the officers religion or families wishes THEN I would have a problem.

[rickortreat]

I don't understand why they need to memorialize these fallen officers with crosses.  Why not stars, or some emblem of the Utah Police?

The suit is more of a nuissance, but I can understand why people driving down the highway might not want to see a bunch of crosses by the roadside.  Some black people might think the KKK was warning them to get out!

I am somewhat bothered by attempts by the religious to place their favorite symbols on public land.  It is a clear violation of the consitution.  If these people would stop insisiting on it, it wouldn't be a problem, but they do.

It really should stop, people should have enough respect for others beliefs not to subject them to this, free speech aside, you can't turn away from looking at the road.  

Ted, I assume the Mormans use crosses, is this correct?

[Reality]

Do I really need to point out that the cross is FAR from a symbol of peace?

Or that Jesus did not die on a cross but rather an upright stake.

Cross was used in oodles of pagan worship that greatly predates Christ on Earth.

What were the historical origins of Christendom’s cross?

“Various objects, dating from periods long anterior to the Christian era, have been found, marked with crosses of different designs, in almost every part of the old world. India, Syria, Persia and Egypt have all yielded numberless examples . . . The use of the cross as a religious symbol in pre-Christian times and among non-Christian peoples may probably be regarded as almost universal, and in very many cases it was connected with some form of nature worship.”—Encyclopædia Britannica (1946), Vol. 6, p. 753.

“The shape of the [two-beamed cross] had its origin in ancient Chaldea, and was used as the symbol of the god Tammuz (being in the shape of the mystic Tau, the initial of his name) in that country and in adjacent lands, including Egypt. By the middle of the 3rd cent. A.D. the churches had either departed from, or had travestied, certain doctrines of the Christian faith. In order to increase the prestige of the apostate ecclesiastical system pagans were received into the churches apart from regeneration by faith, and were permitted largely to retain their pagan signs and symbols. Hence the Tau or T, in its most frequent form, with the cross-piece lowered, was adopted to stand for the cross of Christ.”—An Expository Dictionary of New Testament Words (London, 1962), W. E. Vine, p. 256.

“It is strange, yet unquestionably a fact, that in ages long before the birth of Christ, and since then in lands untouched by the teaching of the Church, the Cross has been used as a sacred symbol. . . . The Greek Bacchus, the Tyrian Tammuz, the Chaldean Bel, and the Norse Odin, were all symbolised to their votaries by a cruciform device.”—The Cross in Ritual, Architecture, and Art (London, 1900), G. S. Tyack, p. 1.

“The cross in the form of the ‘Crux Ansata’ . . . was carried in the hands of the Egyptian priests and Pontiff kings as the symbol of their authority as priests of the Sun god and was called ‘the Sign of Life.’”—The Worship of the Dead (London, 1904), Colonel J. Garnier, p. 226.

“Various figures of crosses are found everywhere on Egyptian monuments and tombs, and are considered by many authorities as symbolical either of the phallus [a representation of the male sex organ] or of coition. . . . In Egyptian tombs the crux ansata [cross with a circle or handle on top] is found side by side with the phallus.”—A Short History of Sex-Worship (London, 1940), H. Cutner, pp. 16, 17; see also The Non-Christian Cross, p. 183.

“These crosses were used as symbols of the Babylonian sun-god, [See book], and are first seen on a coin of Julius Cæsar, 100-44 B.C., and then on a coin struck by Cæsar’s heir (Augustus), 20 B.C. On the coins of Constantine the most frequent symbol is [See book]; but the same symbol is used without the surrounding circle, and with the four equal arms vertical and horizontal; and this was the symbol specially venerated as the ‘Solar Wheel’. It should be stated that Constantine was a sun-god worshipper, and would not enter the ‘Church’ till some quarter of a century after the legend of his having seen such a cross in the heavens.”—The Companion Bible, Appendix No. 162; see also The Non-Christian Cross, pp. 133-141.

Why do accurate depictions show Jesus on a stake with hands over his head instead of on the traditional cross?
The Greek word rendered “cross” in many modern Bible versions (“torture stake” in NW) is stau·ros´. In classical Greek, this word meant merely an upright stake, or pale. Later it also came to be used for an execution stake having a crosspiece. The Imperial Bible-Dictionary acknowledges this, saying: “The Greek word for cross, [stau·ros´], properly signified a stake, an upright pole, or piece of paling, on which anything might be hung, or which might be used in impaling [fencing in] a piece of ground. . . . Even amongst the Romans the crux (from which our cross is derived) appears to have been originally an upright pole.”—Edited by P. Fairbairn (London, 1874), Vol. I, p. 376.

Was that the case in connection with the execution of God’s Son? It is noteworthy that the Bible also uses the word xy´lon to identify the device used. A Greek-English Lexicon, by Liddell and Scott, defines this as meaning: “Wood cut and ready for use, firewood, timber, etc. . . . piece of wood, log, beam, post . . . cudgel, club . . . stake on which criminals were impaled . . . of live wood, tree.” It also says “in NT, of the cross,” and cites Acts 5:30 and 10:39 as examples. (Oxford, 1968, pp. 1191, 1192) However, in those verses KJ, RS, JB, and Dy translate xy´lon as “tree.” (Compare this rendering with Galatians 3:13; Deuteronomy 21:22, 23.)

The book The Non-Christian Cross, by J. D. Parsons (London, 1896), says: “There is not a single sentence in any of the numerous writings forming the New Testament, which, in the original Greek, bears even indirect evidence to the effect that the stauros used in the case of Jesus was other than an ordinary stauros; much less to the effect that it consisted, not of one piece of timber, but of two pieces nailed together in the form of a cross. . . . It is not a little misleading upon the part of our teachers to translate the word stauros as ‘cross’ when rendering the Greek documents of the Church into our native tongue, and to support that action by putting ‘cross’ in our lexicons as the meaning of stauros without carefully explaining that that was at any rate not the primary meaning of the word in the days of the Apostles, did not become its primary signification till long afterwards, and became so then, if at all, only because, despite the absence of corroborative evidence, it was for some reason or other assumed that the particular stauros upon which Jesus was executed had that particular shape.”—Pp. 23, 24; see also The Companion Bible (London, 1885), Appendix No. 162.

Thus the weight of the evidence indicates that Jesus died on an upright stake and not on the traditional cross.

 

[WayOutWest]

Reality,

You have to keep in mind that christianity would meld pagen rituals and symbols in order to boost it's membership and power.

Christmas hijacked the winter solstace.
Easter hijacked some spring fertility celebration and the Sunday came from some sun god celebration, hence Easter Sunday.

So the evolution of christianity was just as much from convienience as much as it was from belief/faith.

[Reality]

Reality,

You have to keep in mind that christianity would meld pagen rituals and symbols in order to boost it's membership and power.

Christmas hijacked the winter solstace.
Easter hijacked some spring fertility celebration and the Sunday came from some sun god celebration, hence Easter Sunday.

So the evolution of christianity was just as much from convienience as much as it was from belief/faith.

Absolutely.

A true Christian would have the same view of the pagan meld celebrations as Christ did.  Thus act accordingly.  

Otherwise "Christian" is in name only.

Example Christ truly being born no where near the date Dec 25th.  Powermeld as you mentioned so a politician could increase #s by adding the sun worshippers at the soltice time.  

[Joe Vancil]

Perhaps we need to crucify a few atheists so that the cross isn't just a symbol of Christianity.

You know, when I want to waste my time, I generally watch sports, post on bulletin boards, play sports or games, watch television....

These folks are in SERIOUS need of a new hobby.

This is the kind of thing that can get the average American absolutely *STEAMED* at such groups.

For those who don't realize, when you push the majority too far, our country gives the majority the ability to push back.  All it takes is a Constitutional amendment spelling out what "separation of Church and State" is supposed to mean, and these folks have no leg to stand on.  And it's the first step down a bad slippery slope.

You'd have think they'd have learned from what happened when the gay lobby tried to establish homosexual marriage via the courts.  Now, there are CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENTS defining marriage.

I have no problem with the idea of letting the family choose whatever kind of marker - or none, if they so choose - they want to symbolize the life of the troopers who died in the line of duty.  In fact, most (reasonable) people wouldn't.

But groups like this - DO.  Better to disrespect the troopers than to allow a state to recognize that a person believes in something.

These are people with superiority complexes.  It isn't about anything more than trying to tell themselves that they're more "enlightened" than the general public.

This is the kind of thing that really ticks me off.  It's the kind of confrontational approach that will make me say, "Fine;  you want to be that way, then I'll start supporting organized prayer in schools.  If you want things to complain about, I'll make sure to put PLENTY of them out there for you - because the one thing you can't control is MY VOTE."

I try to give people the benefit of the doubt, but it's people like this who make me question the wisdom of trying to walk the line between being religious and being respectful of those who believe differently than me.  I mean, if they're willing to force their beliefs (interpretation of the Constitution with regards to separation of Church and State) on me, why should I feel bad about forcing some of MY beliefs on them?

In all my years as a voter, I've never voted "straight party."  In fact, I think a box to vote "straight party" ought to be illegal.  Yet, when I see efforts like this one, I wish there were a box to vote "straight Christian."  I would NEVER EVEN THINK of doing such a thing, were it not for people like this.

Get on with your lives, folks.  You've got nothing to look forward to after this existence, so don't waste your time bugging me!

 

[Ted]

Two points: (Forgive the profanity)

1. Rick, Mormons do not use crosses. They believe Jesus Christ saves us by grace after all we can do. They just don't use the symbol.

2. The plaintiffs named in this suit are A-HOLES.

Now let me explain point number 2. I don't say that because I oppose every effort to ensure a separate church and state. I don't oppose every such efforts. I support it. I live in Utah. I am a member of a dominant religion. If my church came out and started telling me I had to vote "this way" or I'd be out, I'd be out. Luckily, my church has promised it would never say that.

Here's my question to the plaintiffs. With all of the egregious examples of national endorsement of religion, why go after these sixteen crosses? If you're so committed to the constitution and so offended by these crosses that you "have to drive miles out of the way to avoid seeing the offensive crosses" (direct quote from the complaint), why not go after the "In God We Trust" on the money YOU HAVE TO USE EVERY DAY?! Why not go after the representations of Moses and Abraham and the Ten Commandments INSIDE the Supreme Court of the United States?!

I know the answer to my questions. I know why you don't go after those examples and why you decide to go after symbols memorializing people who died serving you. People who have families that miss them.

I know why. It's because you're A-HOLES.

I'm with Joe. Be sure you know exactly what you're starting, because we are willing to finish it. Are you going to go after the crosses at Normandy Beach and Arlington National Cemetery too? C'mon, A-HOLES. I dare you.

[Ted]

Just a side note:

People here in Utah (of all Christian congregations and even a few Muslims and Jews, yes, there are quite a few of them here) are responding by holding a rally in support of the UHP tonight. Organizers are going to be selling crosses bearing the names of the fallen UHP troopers for display on private property. Organizers have received requests for nearly five thousand crosses. Early estimates indicate rally attendance in the tens of thousands.

[rickortreat]

Ah, so the Mormons don't use crosses.  Makes me wonder why the UHP does.

If you Christians don't like the idea of separation of church and state, you can allways go somewhere else.  There are plenty of countries that embrace state religion that I'm sure you'd be happy with.

The line between Church and State has been trampled on quite a bit lately, and frankly I've had more than enough of it.

You don't like abortion, fine don't have one, but let others make their own choice.

You want to see crosses, fine, errect them on your land, not PUBLIC land.

This is NOT a christian nation, it NEVER was.  The founders were determined to achieve religious freedom, and left Europe so they could worship as they wished.  Many of them were not members of normal Christian sects, and they did not agree with each other.  They wanted no state religion so they would not be compelled in any way.

If you really want the separtation delinieated, be very carefull of what you wish for.  The constitution is not friendly to religion, it's something that one should do on their own time.

There was an article in the Phila Daily News the other day.  Thanks to a law on the books, (A very bad law, and an unconstitutional one in my estimation) enables kids to leave school during it's open hours to attend religious training.  It turns out some of these kids are skipping math class to attend bible study.

When I was a kid, I went to school on Saturday to get my religious training.  Frankly, in some ways I think math is closer to God than the crap you learn in religious training!  The ability to think logically is not a right, and it is not a gift.  It is something you learn and develop and it helps you to think more clearly, and through it we now have leverage over the world.  This came about by people helping themsleves and not "petitioning the Lord with prayer."

YOU CANNOT PETITION THE LORD WITH PRAYER!!!!  

[rickortreat]

Or that Jesus did not die on a cross but rather an upright stake.

Cross was used in oodles of pagan worship that greatly predates Christ on Earth.

What were the historical origins of Christendom’s cross?

“Various objects, dating from periods long anterior to the Christian era, have been found, marked with crosses of different designs, in almost every part of the old world. India, Syria, Persia and Egypt have all yielded numberless examples . . . The use of the cross as a religious symbol in pre-Christian times and among non-Christian peoples may probably be regarded as almost universal, and in very many cases it was connected with some form of nature worship.”—Encyclopædia Britannica (1946), Vol. 6, p. 753.

“The shape of the [two-beamed cross] had its origin in ancient Chaldea, and was used as the symbol of the god Tammuz (being in the shape of the mystic Tau, the initial of his name) in that country and in adjacent lands, including Egypt. By the middle of the 3rd cent. A.D. the churches had either departed from, or had travestied, certain doctrines of the Christian faith. In order to increase the prestige of the apostate ecclesiastical system pagans were received into the churches apart from regeneration by faith, and were permitted largely to retain their pagan signs and symbols. Hence the Tau or T, in its most frequent form, with the cross-piece lowered, was adopted to stand for the cross of Christ.”—An Expository Dictionary of New Testament Words (London, 1962), W. E. Vine, p. 256......

Yet, we know that the Romans did crucify many "enemies of the state" (Citizens were never killed in this way)  It is highly likely that Jesus was crucified, reguardless of what you've posted.

In any case, it is clear that today, the world associates the cross with Christianity and Catholicism.  It is definitely a religios symbol now.

[Ted]

Ah, so the Mormons don't use crosses.  Makes me wonder why the UHP does.

Rick,
You're so funny. Such a simplistic view. "Makes me wonder why the UHP does."
Seriously? Maybe they use the cross to symbolize their independence from the local dominant religion.

If you don't like George Bush, you can always go somewhere else, too. We all know you can afford it. What with the way you've been kicking butt in the markets over the past couple of years. But then again, you may not like money cuz it says "God" on it.

As for crosses:

When I'm driving along a highway and I see a nice plain stone monument, I think, "Hmm, what's that?" When I see a cross, I think, "Oh man, somebody died there." Not, "Yes! Another sign of the Lord's dominance, all unbelievers shall BURN!"

The intolerance is just as bad on the atheists' side as it is on guys like Jerry Falwell's side.

[Ted]

Rick, what about the crosses in Arlington?

[Joe Vancil]

rickortreat,

If you really want the separtation delinieated, be very carefull of what you wish for. The constitution is not friendly to religion, it's something that one should do on their own time.

I think you miss my point.

The Constitution can be *MADE* friendly to religion.  Push the line too far, and it *WILL* be - the same way that many states did with homosexual marriage.

The founding fathers wanted RELIGIOUS FREEDOM.  They wanted the FREEDOM TO LIVE AS THEY CHOSE.  They wanted NO ONE TELLING THEM WHAT THEY COULDN'T DO.

Now you tell me - who's telling who what they can't do - the people putting up crosses as memorials, or the people telling them to take them down?

 

[WayOutWest]

rickortreat,

If you really want the separtation delinieated, be very carefull of what you wish for. The constitution is not friendly to religion, it's something that one should do on their own time.

I think you miss my point.

The Constitution can be *MADE* friendly to religion.  Push the line too far, and it *WILL* be - the same way that many states did with homosexual marriage.

The founding fathers wanted RELIGIOUS FREEDOM.  They wanted the FREEDOM TO LIVE AS THEY CHOSE.  They wanted NO ONE TELLING THEM WHAT THEY COULDN'T DO.

Now you tell me - who's telling who what they can't do - the people putting up crosses as memorials, or the people telling them to take them down?

Joe,

Maybe in Lala land.  You have to keep in mind the middle class has not been pushed YET.  Try to enforce a religion in a way the burdens the middle class and you will be handed your ase, i.e. the board that got elected out after allowing the joke known as ID into classrooms.  You want to see the US get out of Iraq, institute a draft that sends middle class kids off to war.  The war in Iraq will be over quicker than a FEMA director's career.

Religion has been the cause of the greatests evils ever inflicted on the human race, I hope it doesn't happen again.  You have to understand and ACCECPT the REALITY of religion and GOD, it's a tool for evil moreso than good.  Do you think the collective Arab world didn't sit up at the mention of the word "crusade" that was uttered by that piece of shyte G. W. Bush?  The "crusades" are not a distant history lesson like the civil war is to us, it's more like the holocaust is to present day jews, very fresh very raw memory.

It makes me sick and angry to see the religious right trying, and to a certain extent suceeding, to push their evil agenda upon us.  Very taliban like if you ask me, lucky for the US we have a strong middle class that steps up to the plate when you need them.  It would be all to easy to get the poor to ralley behind a religious or revolutionary cause as has been the case in history.

Don't get me wrong, I know the TRUE teachings of the various religions are righteous at the core, I wouldn't allow my children to learn them if I didn't truely believe that, but the REAL world practice of religion today and throughout history has been mostly evil.