A white steel pipe cross that stands off a lone highway route by about 10 miles in the California Mojave Desert has become the subject of a legal case. The legal case regarding the cross will be heard before the U.S. Supreme Court in October, 2009. This is a unique case of Church/State separation in the United States.
The Christian cross has in one form or another been in this location since 1934, and was originally a war memorial to American First World War veterans. (The lonely road is between Los Angeles and Las Vegas.) The cross is now claimed by veteran's organizations and by the individual who privately erected it. It is located on the public parkland, erected without permission.The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) represents the Plaintiff—who is a "practicing Catholic" by his own definition, and a retired Assistant Superintendent of the desert park district. The Plaintiff's argument goes, according to the ACLU: "The [9th Circuit] said this case is really quite simple. Using a sectarian religious symbol is not permissible on federal land." Peter Eliasberg, managing attorney for the ACLU of Southern California, so states the argument in a report by B.A. Robinson of the Ontario Consultants on Religious Tolerance. The government argues the cross is a war memorial.
Attorney Eliasberg states, "…[The Christian cross] doesn't honor Muslim veterans, Jewish veterans, Atheist veterans or Agnostic veterans. It's a preeminent symbol of a [single] religion. If we want to have a war memorial on federal land, the government certainly knows how to do that without using a divisive sectarian religious symbol."
In a telephone interview lasting half an hour from his office in Arizona, the attorney Joe Infranco retorts, "One person's agenda (Mr. Buono's) should not diminish the sacrifices (of) Americans and their families. The
legal theory used in these cases is offended observer." Mr. Infranco argues, "It bothers people that one person's offence causes the destruction of a memorial that millions of veterans want to see maintained."
Mr. Infranco, who has talked about this issue for a long time, says in a verbal headline during the interview: "Two American veteran's organizations, the American Legion, and the Veterans of Foreign Wars (among others)
weighed in against by lone atheist: Frank Buono."
Mr. Buono, says he is a "practicing Catholic," and has not talked to his parish priest or bishop about the subject, Mr. Buono continues in explanation, and adds in argument: "If open and available to all religious symbols, and all religious beliefs, [the memorial would be okay], but the park service originally rejected a request to put a Buddhist symbol there. To me this (Christian cross) was an (act of) endorsement of a specific religious view of tolerating and accepting a trespass on federal land."
Explaining his 10-year cause, Plaintiff Mr. Buono remarks about the use of a cross or religious symbol, in this specific case the white cross of iron pipe: Is this a war memorial by intent? he was asked in the interview: "When a private person erects a religious symbol on federal land, no matter what they call it…in the case of the cross it (is) improper. That it is a war memorial is not relevant to the case."
Continuing by phone, Mr. Buono reports with emphatic emphasis, the federal park service asked Henry Sandoz to remove the cross, (another in a long serious of replacements of the originally erected one by numers of private persons). It was Mary Martin, Superintendent of Mojave National Preserve who asked. Henry Sandoz. Mr. Sandoz refused. "Mr. Sandoz erected the cross that is now there with no permit or authority for the purpose to serve religious purposes for sunrise (services). Henry Sandoz did not remove it."U.S. Congressman Jerry Lewis, Redlands, California sponsored a vote by the U.S. Congress to allow a private purchase of the park property on which the cross stands. Mr.Buono says, this was, "his error." After the private purchase, the American Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals denied the Congressional measure, and the cross remains standing, but covered.
Mr. Buono claims this erection of the cross is an, "illegal act by a private individual which led to the erection of permanent display of a religious symbol on public lands." "What is my concern? It doesn't make me happy (because) I know that what guarantees freedom of religion in America is strict separation of Church/State. Strife occurs elsewhere in the world is in places where religion is not separated from State. The best guarantee by government neutrality towards religion."
Congressman Jerry Lewis (not the actor/comedian) did not respond to an inquiry by email on his measure to save the cross from removal.
Mr. Infranco, the attorney for the Alliance Defense Fund, filed the "Friend of the Court" brief (Amicus), The Solicitor General Office of the U.S. Department of Justice will be the Counsel of Record for the Department of the Interior. Oral arguments before the U.S. Supreme Court are slated for July. Mr. Infranco says he is not aware of any organized American Church position on the issue at this time.
Image (1) Photo by US Geological Survey,
The Mojave Desert Ecosystem encompasses six military bases, four national park units, and considerable BLM lands, as well as land managed by other Federal agencies. The desert is also home to active and abandoned mines, off-road recreation areas, and waste disposal sites. (2) Photo by US Geological Survey, Mojave Desert. (3) Photo by www.courzero.org . The Mojave Desert Cross before and after a federal court ordered it to be covered.
Comments
This Cross is in Mermorial of Fallen US Service Personel, Why Should It be Removed, It should be kept.
please don't tear down the cross- build one just like it across the street from the ACLU
I'm sorry but this makes me mad that there's a possibility that the cross could be torn down...There are crosses everywhere in the U.S...Every where you go your bound to see a cross..So why should we tear down one that was used to remember our fallen soldiers in WW1...
After 75years, no complants, leave the Cross for WW-1 vetrans
I am from WW-2.
The articl states that the cross was put up without permission, on federal land. The cross was erected 75 years ago, before the land was a federal preserve. An update from June 3, 2009 stated that the Supreme Court upheld the legality of the cross and it can stay.
I am ashamed of the ACLU! They should be called the Unamerican Civil Liberties Union. God bless America's heroes. We are the land of the free because of the brave! My country was founded on Christian & Judeo beliefs and I see no reason to change it for a handful of idiots!
Bueno & ACLU are walking a very thin line & Veterans & Americans are not going to take much more. The small groups that have no life, too much time & are the cheapest people should'nt even have a say. But since they do, us good people need to get together & start firing back. We shoul NOT take this any longer. 87% of americans agree-Why are we letting these idiots have any say at all.If they think that way, they are not Americans & therefore do not have freedom of speech!
THIS IS AN ABSOLUTE OUTRAGE. IT IS SO SAD THAT THE SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES WOULD EVEN CONSIDER THIS CASE!
WE THE PEOPLE OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICAN ARE SICK AND TIRED OF THIS TYPE OF CRAP FROM THE ACLU.
Will the ACLU petition to remove or cover up crucifixes and stars of David on headstones at National Cemeteries? They are also on federal lands. Just curious.
Our forefathers gave us the freedom OF religion; not the freedom FROM religion.
Facts:
1) The property was federally owned at the time of the original construction of cross.
2) It was constructed without permission
3) Other faith displays were denied for the same location
4) The small parcel, surrounded by federal land, was carved out and made private land for the VFW with specific covenants regarding maintenance.
5) Personal enjoyment of an item does not supersede our Constitution.
6) There is no statute of limitations on correcting a constitutional oversight...or righting a wrong in general.
Just because it has been there a long time does not justify ignoring the 1st amendment. Just because some people like it does not justify ignoring the 1st amendment. It was wrong to begin with and it is wrong now. It is plain and simple.
@AB: Military cemeteries display many, many different symbols of myriad faiths (even Wiccan) and are the choice of the family...not the federal government. The Mojave Cross and Arlington National Cemetery are tota
Here is a thought for all the christian fundamentalists out there:
I have a simple test for any government sponsored symbol of religion. This might include holiday nativity scenes, the Ten Commandments cast in stone, Christian crosses and the like. Imagine changing the denomination of the religious symbol, to see if anyone is offended. For example, instead of a Christian cross at the site, a group of Muslim veterans installed a neon sign that read “Praise Allah”. Is anyone offended yet? If so, you have crossed the line of separation of church and state. The First Amendment prevents the government from promoting one religion over another. It is that simple.
Is this a cross on a hill or Mermorial of Fallen US Service Personel from ww1 Is there a plack or news article from the 30s to prove it
The man who protests has not read the Torah and does not know that
Moses raised a cross in the desert with a snake on it and whoever
looked at it would be saved from the plague.
Also the temple and tabernacle furniture is arranged according to
the instructions given Moses to arrange them in the form of a Cross. The sacrifice was at the foot end of the cross and the
priests washed their hands next to the entrance to the tabernacle
in the wilderness. This was to be a sign that God would send a
sacrifice to redeem His People from their sins.
Also the cross has long been used as a grave marker to show a
burial place of the dead.
I think this is a real slap in the face. If they wont to take it down they should put something nicer up there. But covering it up seems really mean. And its not like a big cathedral or a huge sign that says "GO JESUS". I bet if you asked someone randomly if they knew about this cross most would say no. Its out in the midle of the desert not hurting anyone.
But isn't walking around with a Dallas Cowboys jersey on also a violation of the separation on church and state, in that their stadium had a hole put in the roof so G-d can watch his team?
If what I heard on the radio is true, the caretaker traded 5 acres of his own land for 1 acre that the memorial is on so it would no longer be on federal land. Even after that, the ACLU kept up the attack.
Additionally, it does not say "seperation of church and state" in the Constitution. Anywhere. Read it. We are free to chose and practice religion. That's it. There is nothing in the constitution that mentions "promoting" religion or keeping seperate from it. The Bill of Rights simply says that we are free to practice religion. It does not protect the state from religion but religion from the state.
Why know is it wrong for the cross to be there? What is next?
We will not be able to put nativity scenes out on the lawn.
This place deserves to stay put. It is now hurting anyone and has not for a long time.
I
Got something to say?
Examiner.com is looking for writers, photographers, and videographers to join the fastest growing group of local insiders. If you are interested in growing your online rep apply to be an Examiner today!