Once again there is a bit of a church and state scuttlebutt in Rhode Island. Just when we thought I could relax, drink my coffee milk, and sip my clear Rhode Island chowder, I see that a group in Wisconsin (the Freedom From Religion Foundation) is threatening to sue the city of Woonsocket for a veteran's memorial in front of a fire station that has a cross on it.
I am a very proud supporter of the separation of church and state. I believe in the freedom of religion and freedom for religion. A public memorial on public grounds should not have overt religious symbols. So I agree with the Freedom From Religion Foundation… if the memorial was built today.
This memorial was constructed in 1921 to remember servicemen killed in France in World War I. That was a different time. I am not saying that it is right, but at the same time there is something to historicity that we need to take seriously. The FFRF is taking a hard core, angry, and almost vindictive approach to the place of religion in America which doesn't help. I think we should remove the phrase "under God" from the pledge and the phrase, "in God we trust" from our money but these are things that are currently being made and used. A memorial is not an active symbol.
Beyond that, our collective understanding of the clause of separation has been changing and will continue to change. Right or wrong, in the 1920's many people assumed that a cross was not an offensive symbol and did not question its placement. Today we are at a different place and believe that a cross can be offensive to many people who are not Christians. We need to be aware and have some charity towards our ancestors for what we consider "antiquated" ideas (like gender exclusivity in writing, racism, and making monuments with crosses).
Our country has had a close tie with Christianity in one way or another. I will not say that we are a Christian nation, far from it, nor are we founded on Christian principles… more enlightenment than anything. Yet the Christian church has been connected with the ebb and flow of the nation from the moment of inception. The crosses and other religious symbols on the monuments of the past are a part of our history. Our history should be offensive at times. It should irk us at times, but we cannot erase any reminder or sign of its existence.
If the FFRF wanted to have a positive approach it could look at the memorial in Woonsocket and use it as a reminder to be sure that such a symbol would not be used today.
Otherwise, leave us alone in Rhode Island. We have enough problems as it is giving people bad directions, weird drinks (cabinets?), and flagrantly misusing our "r"s.
3 comments:
I agree this feels wrong. I am all for removing "Under God" from the Pledge of Allegiance, but removing a cross from a memorial feels like removing crosses or Stars of David from a public cemetery. A memorial on public land does not mean the state or public institution endorses a particular religion. It simply displays the belief of the ones being memorilized and those who are remembering. Stand down FFRF.
Post a Comment