Can a Cross be secular?

Read More

A federal appeals court in Denver is weighing a lawsuit over Utah's use of crosses for roadside memorials honoring fallen highway patrol troopers, with some judges questioning Utah's declaration that the crosses are nonreligious, secular symbols of death.

A three-judge panel of the 10th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals heard arguments Monday in the case involving what the group American Atheists called "heroic-size" 12-foot-high crosses placed along state highways. A federal judge in Utah ruled in 2007 that the crosses communicate a secular message about the deaths of the troopers and are not an illegal public endorsement of religion. U.S. District Judge David Sam cited the use of religious symbols in military cemeteries.

Utah Assistant Attorney General Thom Roberts defended the use of the privately funded crosses as a way to quickly convey a message to passing motorists that a trooper died there, and said the crosses are not an endorsement of religion.

"The cross can be and often is used as a secular symbol of death," Roberts argued. "If (motorists) understand the history and purpose of the memorial program they'll learn it was designed by Mormon individuals who do not use the cross as a religious symbol."

Texas-based American Atheists argued that the crosses are symbols that convey a government endorsement of religion and shouldn't be on public land. Atheists' attorney Brian Barnard argued that without any context, the crosses could indicate that the trooper who died was a Christian.

"Here these crosses stand alone," Barnard told the judges. "There isn't anything else nearby that says they're not religious in nature."