ACLU Sues to Remove Crosses at Military Cemeteries?
Jul 20 2009
BotB Verdict
Average Number of Times Received Daily at MOAA: 4
Summary
A classic bilge article gets a boost from the recent spate of military/religious emails. The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) is a common target of these emails because they invoke deeply held feelings on both sides of the political spectrum. This one in particular has been appearing at an increasing rate as of late and contains two major departures from the truth – one being that the ACLU has filed a suit to have military cross-shaped headstones removed from military cemeteries and the other being that Navy Chaplains can no longer mention Jesus’ name in prayer. We’ll discuss both separately, and explore why this false email has had such a long shelf life (the original incantation started in 2006).
The Most Common Email
I AM HONORED TO DO THIS
Did you know that the ACLU has filed a suit to have all military cross-shaped headstones removed and another suit to end prayer from the military completely. They’re making great progress. The Navy Chaplains can no longer mention Jesus’ name in prayer thanks to the retched ACLU and our new administration.
I’m not breaking this one. If I get it a 1000 times, I’ll forward it a 1000 times!
Let us pray…
Prayer chain for our Military… Don’t break it!
‘Lord, hold our troops in your loving hands Protect them as they protect us Bless them and their families for the selfless acts they perform for us in our time of need. Amen.’
Prayer Request: When you receive this, please stop for a moment and say a prayer for our troops around the world.
There is nothing attached. Just send this to people in your address book. Do not let it stop with you. Of all the gifts you could give a Marine, Soldier, Sailor, Airman, & others deployed in harm’s way, prayer is the very best one.
GOD BLESS YOU FOR PASSING IT ON!
Origins
The 2006 email focused on the ACLU’s attempt to remove an 29 foot cross from public land in Mt. Soledad in San Diego and various other efforts to remove religious symbols from public land. A repackaged version of that story is what appears in the email above.
Cross Shaped Headstones at Military Cemeteries
The first line of the email is just flat out wrong. There has never been a suit filed to remove headstones by the ACLU or any other organization. The only complaint that even comes close was a 2006 request to the Department of Defense to allow a Wiccan symbol to the approved list of gravestone markers. In 2007, DoD acquiesced and the symbol became the 39th available decoration to military headstones. The ACLU stated in a press release:
The ACLU vigorously defends people’s freedom to choose their religion under the Free Exercise Clause of the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. Furthermore, the ACLU would defend the first amendment rights of all veteran Americans and service members to display the religious symbol of their choosing on their grave. Therefore, the vehement attacks on the ACLU claiming that gravestones and markers at federal cemeteries, including Arlington Cemetery, are in danger is patently false and misleading, serving as nothing more than a red-herring to the constitutional issues at stake. These bills only serve to slam shut the courthouse doors to religious minorities by insulating all religious claims from federal litigation and denying just compensation for their claims.
Navy Chaplains and Prayer
The addition of that rumor is another misleading statement. While the ACLU did urge the US Naval Academy to stop mandatory prayer sessions, it has done nothing to challenge voluntary prayer groups or praying in Jusus’ name. This part of the email either refers to that complaint or the general saga of former Navy Chaplain Gordon J. Klingenschmitt.
Fact Check has an excellent summary of each of the statements in the email.
Evaluation and Commentary
Why have we seen a resurgence of this email over the past few months? A new liberal administration, of course, is the primary cause, but the prayer chain at the bottom is enough to keep it going without President Obama being mentioned. Saying a prayer for our troops in harm’s way is never a bad thing, regardless of your beliefs (even atheists can hope that our men and women stay safe). The call to keep it going by praying and sending it to everyone in your address book is of course only going to perpetuate the myths contained in the email. But the last line disturbs me just a bit. There are many other things you can do that and gifts that you could give that could help our service personnel overseas. A short list:
- If you are eligible, help keep troop benefits protected at home by joining MOAA.
- Donate to MOAA’s Scholarship program (you’ll need to register or log in first)
- Sending food and supplies.
- Sending care packages.
- Join groups that support deployed military.
- Send hiking and survival supplies to those stationed overseas
Further Reading/Tools
ACLU Statement (PDF)
PolitiFact Page
FactCheck Page
Snopes Page
Discussion
Posts are not held for moderation so your comment will appear immediately, but may be modified if it violates our Community Standards.
You are correct that the ACLU goes out of its way to say that it does not oppose individual headstones, regardless of religious indication.
You might also point out that the US government/Veterans Administration doesn’t issue cross-shaped headstones in its cemeteries; they’re all square headstones with a small marker engraved on them along with the other information of the deceased.
The only place where such headstones are ubuiquitously used are the famous World War cemeteries in Europe, many of which are, technically, American soil by virtue of grant from the host country.
That said, the ACLU’s decisions to attack cross-shaped items on government-associated property does lend to the misunderstanding. They have objected to the Las Cruces city logo, Soledad cross, and the Mojave cross, as examples.
The ACLU has flatly stated that they object to crosses funded by the government–just not individual headstones.
Thus, the Cross of Sacrifice at Arlington–which is very similar in circumstance to the Soledad cross and is not an individual headstone–may, technically, still be on their list.
Can I/we use your excellent explanation above to rebut the continuing forwarded and false emails on these two issues?
I get really irritated that such inaccurate emails and info gets passed and passed and passed to so many. I personally know about the sad case — but properly adjudicated! — of Navy Chaplain Gordon Klingenschmitt… as I was a senior chaplain in the Mid-Atlantic Region when he was there.
We — as leaders and as Americans — need to challenge graciously and factually such wrong information to help halt and reversed the deepening of emotional partisanship dividing our country!
Let me know: Can I utilize your above info to counter false emails?
Thanks! MAY THE LORD GOD BLESS ALL OF YOU — in my tradition in Jesus’ name — at MOAA as advocates for our nation, our military personnel (active, retired, and reserve), their/our families, and the freedoms (including free speech and factual speech)!
MAY GOD BLESS AMERICA, keeping us free, discussing issues, but united in trust and cooperation for the common good!
Your colleague
and shipmate,
Bill
Please, feel free, Captain Weimer. I would appreciate it.
While the ACLU has not sued to remove religous symbols from headstones, they HAVE sued to remove crosses they find “objectionable” based on a “seperation of church and state” ideology that DOES NOT EXIST!
No Supreme Court has ever ruled that there is a seperation of church and state, and this ideology is nothing more than an attack on religious freedom in this country.
For the ACLU to sue to have what is in THEIR opinion, a religous symbol and not a memorial to the people that have given their lives for this country is nothing but hypocrisy.
And for your organization to even come out with an article that seems to defend the ACLU is a slap in the face of every person or organization that has raised a memorial to our fallen dead.
I would think that if you are an organization of military officers you would condemn ANY attack by the ACLU on memorials to our fallen defenders of freedom instead of just posting something that says the cemetary cross suit is false and then mentioning “in passing” their other attacks.
Roger, the purpose of this article was to debunk these particular claims against the ACLU, not to endorse or condemn their actions on non-military related issues. Our only intention is to seek the truth and this is what we found.
However, I must disagree with your statement that there has never been a Supreme Court ruling regarding the establishment clause. Here are some examples:
McCollum v. Board of Education Dist. 71, 333 U.S. 203 (1948)
Court finds religious instruction in public schools a violation of the establishment clause and therefore unconstitutional.
Burstyn v. Wilson, 72 S. Ct. 777 (1952) – Government may not censor a motion picture because it is offensive to religious beliefs.
Torcaso v. Watkins, 367 U.S. 488 (1961) – Court holds that the state of Maryland cannot require applicants for public office to swear that they believed in the existence of God. The court unanimously rules that a religious test violates the Establishment Clause.
Engel v. Vitale, 82 S. Ct. 1261 (1962) – Any kind of prayer, composed by public school districts, even nondenominational prayer, is unconstitutional government sponsorship of religion.
Epperson v. Arkansas, 89 S. Ct. 266 (1968) – State statue banning teaching of evolution is unconstitutional. A state cannot alter any element in a course of study in order to promote a religious point of view. A state’s attempt to hide behind a nonreligious motivation will not be given credence unless that state can show a secular reason as the foundation for its actions.
Lemon v. Kurtzman, 91 S. Ct. 2105 (1971) – Established the three part test for determining if an action of government violates First Amendment’s separation of church and state:
1) the government action must have a secular purpose;
2) its primary purpose must not be to inhibit or to advance religion;
3) there must be no excessive entanglement between government and religion.
There are more examples, which you can find here.
It is interesting to me that prayer is not allowed in public schools, yet it is allowed in prisons. There would be fewer felons in prison or out, should the government recognize the benefit of allowing the children to be able to pray and learn virtues and benefits of an honest life through their chosen religion. Every kind of club is allowed through freedom of speech…except freedom of religion. What’s wrong with this picture! How can we receive our rights. This has gone on way to long.