Court Sides with Humanists Who Want to Destroy or Tear Off the Arms of WWI Memorial Cross

Abigail Bermudez

In 2014, the American Humanist Association filed a lawsuit, claiming that the WWI memorial in Maryland was unconstitutional. They wanted to change the memorial to make a non-religious symbol. The Memorial is composed of a large cross with a quote from President Woodrow Wilson engraved at the base. It has stood for more than a hundred years in honor of 49 men from Bladensburg who sacrificed their lives during the war. The appeals court decided in their favor stating that the memorial is “an excessive entanglement between government and religion” and that the “display and maintenance of the Cross violates the Establishment Clause.” Plans are being made to appeal to the Supreme Court.

This case is a good example of the role that the judicial branch plays in our government. The Judicial branch is responsible for interpreting the Constitution properly and deciding how it relates to whichever case comes before them. It is divided into several smaller courts within the states, such as trial courts and appeals courts. The Supreme Court is a Federal court and it is the most powerful. If this case makes it to the Supreme Court, they will receive a final decision, which may serve as a precedent for future cases.

A vast majority of my family has served or is currently serving our country in all branches of the military, so anything in relation to veterans is important to me, especially this story. Our Nation was founded and fought for by men with Christian values and beliefs, and those values and beliefs remained prominent for centuries. It’s not impossible to say that the 49 men from Bladensburg believed the same way, so to destroy a memorial that was erected in honor of those men and the very things that they fought for is beyond disrespectful. I don’t believe that we have the right to destroy a memorial that has stood for so long just because it is in the shape of a non-violent religious symbol. Freedom of religion is vitally important, but people need to remember that those freedoms belong to everyone, not just themselves. We live in a nation that is incredibly diverse and it is impossible to escape the symbols of other religions because they are everywhere. So, we need to learn not to take offense unless necessary.

What Do You Think?

What are the advantages and disadvantages of having the President chosen by the people rather than the legislature.

An important advantage of having the president chosen by the people rather than the legislature is that the voice of the people is heard and adhered to. The people are able to choose the person who governs them. However, a disadvantage to this would be that an uneducated or inappropriate decision may be made. A majority could also override the decision of the minority. Having the president chosen by legislature would avoid this.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s