Letter to the Editor: Alaska AG’s support of Christian cross case unacceptable

As a local humanist, I find it wholly unacceptable that Alaska Attorney General Kevin G. Clarkson has signed onto an amicus brief in support of the massive Christian cross in Bladensburg, Maryland.

This case is currently in front of the U.S. Supreme Court and has the potential to redefine how the country interprets religious liberty and the Establishment Clause. AG Clarkson had the opportunity to support an initiative to honor every service member and fallen veteran, regardless of their religious faith. Instead they are endorsing the Maryland government’s unconstitutional promotion of the Christian faith.

The 40-foot-tall Latin cross was intentionally designed to resemble the Christian Cavalry Cross. It’s publicly owned and maintained with taxpayer funds. In fact, the local government has already spent more than $117,000 in maintenance of the religious symbol and has earmarked an additional $100,000 for refurbishment and repairs.

More than that, this cross has carried Christian meaning since its very inception. In 1919, ground was broken for the cross on public land owned by the Town of Bladensburg. The project was initiated by the Good Roads League to memorialize World War I veterans. Their intent was to create a “mammoth cross, a likeness of the Cross of Calvary, as described in the Bible.”

Donors signed a pledge stating that they “trust[ed] in God, the Supreme Ruler of the universe.” However, given the unveiling of a secular World War I memorial at the county courthouse around that time, many local citizens did not support the sectarian memorial.

In 1922, the original committee abandoned their efforts. The cross sat unfinished and quickly became an eyesore. The town gave the local American Legion post the “care” of the land for the “completion” of the cross. The Legion held memorial services around the unfinished cross, at which a Christian pastor led prayer and those in attendance sang the Christian hymn “Nearer My God to Thee.”

The cross was officially dedicated in 1925 at an elaborate ceremony featuring government officials and Christian clergy exclusively. The keynote speaker, Maryland Representative Stephen Gambrill, proclaimed: “by the token of this cross, symbolic of Calvary, let us keep fresh the memory of our boys who died for a righteous cause.”

A Roman Catholic priest and a Baptist minister delivered Christian prayers. No other religions were represented. Frank Mountford, leading evangelist, held three “Sunday services” at the cross in 1931. In 1935, the State Roads Commission claimed it owned the land, and in 1956 the circuit court ruled that the State of Maryland was the rightful owner of the property.

In 1960, the Maryland National Park and Planning Commission, a bi-county agency of Prince George’s and Montgomery counties, acquired the cross from the State Roads Commission for the purposes of “the future repair and maintenance of the monument.”

In 1985, the commission spent $100,000 in taxpayer dollars on substantial renovations to the cross, followed by a grandiose rededication ceremony that was co-hosted by the Town of Bladensburg to rededicate the cross to veterans of “all wars.” The commission invited a priest, Father Chimiak, to deliver prayers, and later sent a letter thanking him “for his contributions to our programs and trust we may assimilate this relationship again.”

In the intervening years, the cross has continued to serve as a purported tribute to “veterans of all wars” rather than the 49 men named on the plaque who died in World War I.

A cross is wholly unacceptable on public land and it is unable to fairly represent and honor veterans of all wars. Veterans of all faiths and none have served and died for our Constitution. The amicus brief that AG Clarkson signed onto fails to recognize the very rights for which those courageous veterans fought.

— Carrie Henson, president Last Frontier Freethinkers, Soldotna

More in Opinion

Opinion: The buck stops at the top

Shared mistakes of Dunleavy and Biden.

A sign welcomes people to Kenai United Methodist Church on Monday, Sept. 6, 2021 in Kenai, Alaska. (Ashlyn O’Hara/Peninsula Clarion)
It’s time for a federal law against LGBTQ discrimination

When my wife and I decided to move to Alaska, we wondered if we would be welcome in our new neighborhood.

Terri Spigelmyer. (Photo provided)
Pay It Forward: Instilling volunteerism in the next generation

We hope to have instilled in our children empathy, cultural awareness, long-term planning and the selflessness of helping others

Hal Shepherd in an undated photo taken near Homer, Alaska. (Photo courtesy of Hal Shepherd.)
Point of View: Election integrity or right-wing power grab?

Dr. King would be appalled at what is happening today

Nancy HIllstrand. (Photo provided)
Point of View: Trail Lakes is the sockeye salmon hero, not Tutka Bay

Tutka hatchery produces a pink salmon monoculture desecrating Kachemak Bay State Park and Critical Habitat Area as a feed lot

A map of Kachemak Bay State Park shows proposed land additions A, B and C in House Bill 52 and the Tutka Bay Lagoon Hatchery. (Map courtesy of Alaska State Parks)
Opinion: Rep. Vance’s bill is anti-fishermen

House Bill 52 burdens 98.5% of Cook Inlet fishermen.

A sign designates a vote center during the recent municipal election. The center offered a spot for voters to drop off ballots or fill a ballot out in person. (Ben Hohenstatt / Juneau Empire File)
Opinion: The failure of mail-in voting

The argument that mail-in balloting increases voter participation never impressed me

A resident casts their vote in the regular municipal election Tuesday, Oct. 6, 2020 at the Kenai Peninsula Fairgrounds in Ninilchik, Alaska. (Photo by Megan Pacer/Homer News)
Alaska Voices: Break the cycle of failure, debt in 2022

Today, all Americans are coerced, embarrassed or otherwise influenced into one of two old political parties

Charlie Franz.
Point of View: Election integrity is not anti-democratic

The federalization of elections by the Freedom to Vote Act infringes on the constitutional right of states to regulate elections.

Most Read