Go take it off the mountain

May 10, 2008

Guest Post by Morbo

So there’s this 40-foot cross atop a hill in Holmen, Wisc. The problem is, the property is owned by the local government.

Apparently, it’s quite a deal. They light it up every March, and you can see it from miles away. Of course, not everyone is in favor of the government displaying lighted religious symbols. Some old-fashioned people continue to oppose faith-based government and believe maintaining and displaying religious symbols is the job of houses of worship.

Sure enough, a Holmen resident, Eric Barnes, an assistant physics professor at the University of Wisconsin-La Crosse, had the temerity to point out that this isn’t cool — or constitutional.

Local officials were smart enough to realize that this is not worth getting dragged into court over. But they were not smart enough to do the right thing and take down the cross. Instead, they have proposed selling the land. And my guess is that they intend to make sure that whoever buys the land will keep the cross up there.

Here’s where it gets fun: The land is valued at only $100. The local Lions Club has been talking about plunking down the $100 to buy themselves a nice hill. But then two national organizations that promote non-theism, the Freedom From Religion Foundation (FFRF) and the American Humanist Association (AHA), got wind of what was going on and sent in their own offers to buy the land. The AHA offered a cool $1,000. The FFRF topped that with a $1,200 offer.

Municipal officials are saying that they are not required to take the highest offer for the land. But, as Cheryl Gill, an attorney who is advising the town, told the Holmen Courier, turning down a bid that is 12 times higher than what the Lions offered “might be considered an abuse of discretion.”

D’ya think?

This is silly. The town owns the hill and ought to keep it. But it should be a place where everyone feels welcome. There’s an easy solution to this: Donate the cross to a place where it will be more at home. I’m thinking a Christian church.

Late-Breaking Update: Shortly after I wrote this post, I learned that the Holmen Village Board met Thursday night and voted to sell the land to — surprise! — the Lions Club (who have upped their bid to a whopping $600). Is there a church-state lawyer in the house?

These guys are local politicians who typical kow tow to the loudest mob. Doing the right thing is nice, but it is a secondary consideration.

If you wanna get good dose of hillside crosses drive down a north south interstate in GA or AL. There ain’t a shortage of them.

  • You don’t really need a 1st Am. lawyer, you just need an accountant. The city could get $1,200 bucks or it could get $600 bucks. Hmmm.

    Now I suppose you could argue that there’s an issue of discrimination but with the economy going tits up, it’s better to focus on the $$. And of course opponents will use this to pound the shit out of them during the next election. The commercials write themselves.

  • actually, tAiO, an accountant and a church-state lawyer would make a nice pair here.

    because what really just happened is that the state subsidized religion – quite directly, in what amounts to a “gift” valued at $600 (the difference between the price the market had established and the discounted price the state gave the Lions).

  • Really? Is this really that big of a deal? Its a $100 chunk of land and that extra $600 would have covered the city’s paper for a week or something. I know that its pretty popular on the left to bash religion, but sometimes you can go too far in the name of your cause. Just my opinion.

  • This exact same story has been unfolding in San Diego FOR MORE THAN A DECADE. The cross on Mount Soledad. Lawsuits, countersuits, land sales. Do a google search on it. You will be stunned.

  • Jeff – did you ever hear about the cold camel who wanted to get into the warm tent? First it stuck it’s nose in, and when the tent’s occupier didn’t push it back out, the camel pushed in some more of its snout. Since the human occupier hadn’t stopped the intrusion at the beginning, there was no good argument to stop it as it got more intrusive. Pretty soon the camel was in the tent and the human was out in the cold.

    In a country of laws, you don’t make little exceptions for things that don’t seem to matter much, because then those exceptions become part of the system of law.

  • Extremism in the defense of religion is no vice. How very Regugnican of the Holmen city council doin’ whut made our county what it is today.

  • Alright, let someone born and raised in Wisconsin who hates religion and has lived in Texas for 10 years, chime in.

    First, let’s not forget that WI is an hour from Canada. There are a lot of Christians, but compared to Texas, they are practically atheists.

    Second, the town apparently likes their cross and tried to avoid turning this into a circus by selling the land. So they could have either sliced and diced the land making a small tract for the Lions Club to maintain the cross while keeping land prices fair. Or a church with funds could have turned it into a pointless bidding war.

    However this went down, the end result was going to be the same. This is the non-sense that gives non-religious people little credit on matters of real importance. Was the guy offended probably not, and even if he was, the cross was staying. And in case no one else noticed, no church was involved, the buyer of the land was the Lions Club, and as far as I know they don’t have a religious agenda.

    You know, I hear parents talk about choosing their battles, I wish non-religious groups would heed that advise. We have far larger fish to fry.

  • As an atheist, I strongly disagree with ScottW (#11 above)
    This is exactly the type of fight everyone concerned with separation of church and state should be involved in.
    If this is allowed to stand, any city council in the nation can sell off a 10′ by 10′ plot of public land to a religious organization of their choice to put up religious advertising on. Oh yes, the church in question may be required to put up a decorative fence and a tasteful plaque announcing the land is not public property anymore. (Don’t laugh, this has actually happened.) Your favorite city parks become festooned with religious propaganda, and only propaganda the city council aproves of. To comply with the establishment clause, the officials would have to sell off equal sized plots at the same price to any group with the money, and your parks will disappear.
    Don’t worry about looking for a lawyer- Annie Gaylor will have plenty working on this one. (Yes, I’m a FFRF member.)

  • T Hurlbutt.

    Keep going after non-sense and wonder why people snicker when you try and do something meaningful, like keeping prayer out of the classroom. Atheism used to be defined by non belief, but today it seems more like it’s own region defined by it’s anti-god beliefs. No matter the result, go after it in the name of principle.

    I don’t want to see religious anything being supported with my tax dollars either, but quit being so petty. A little tolerance goes a long way. Go after all the funds we distribute to religious organizations to redistribute and you have my support, go after a silly cross that still remains and count me out.

  • Jeff @7,

    It’s not really a “$100 chunk of land” once someone offers $1200 for it.

  • scott, this is not some little cross that is a statement on a personal level – something i might have on my property so immediate passers by know about me that i am christian. this was a cross 4 stories tall. heck, how many buildings in the whole small Rural Wisconsin town are 4 stories? Like the Mt Soledad cross, it could be seen from a distance. there is likely little escaping it from the viewshed. it doesn’t just say “I, occupant of this parcel am a christian,” rather it says “all who fall in the shadow are christian – this is a christian town; be forewarned.” it is exclusionary, and has every intent to be exclusionary. don’t like living at the foot of a christian cross? find another town, heathen. i generally agree with you about picking battles, but this one seems fairly significant to me.

  • Melior – if its valued at $100 then its valued at $100. I was under the impression that the piece of land was appraised at $100, which is more where my point is.

    Stephen1947 – your analogy really doesn’t apply here in my view. Are atheists being pushed out into the cold by this cross? I agree with ScottW, it seems that atheism has become its own religion. Don’t we have the responsibility to protect Christians from atheists as much as vice-versa? It seems equally inappropriate to have atheists impose their beliefs on others. It is a difficult challenge to determine where that line is drawn.

    What would a public display of atheism look like? Are all non-religious symbols atheist?

    Mark – Do you really think that these large crosses are an exclusionary symbol? I highly doubt that these crosses were intended to be exclusionary and I think your view is a bit exaggerated and extreme. I know that Christianity has a dark history and has been used to justify many acts of atrocity, but it has also been used to promote inclusion, especially during the fight for civil rights. In fact, my Christian church has fought heavily to promote the inclusion of people of all ethnicities, nationalities, sexual preference, etc., even to the point of facing exclusion from the larger church community. So I actually take pretty strong offense to your generalizations. In my view, it greatly discredits your arguments.

  • jeff, i note you did not actually address the objective facts at all.

    if you honestly believe that a city erecting, or even subsidizing, a 4-story tall cross doesn’t send a message that “this is a christian town” or you honestly believe that a jew, a muslim, a sikh or an athiest wouldn’t see that as exclusionary (“only christians need apply”) then there is clearly nothing that will convince you otherwise. what other message can a government-sponsored 40-foot corss looming over the town possibly send? That we’re tolerant of hinuds? please.

  • Mark – maybe you should read your post and look for objective facts. There are only two: the cross is four feet tall and it can be seen from a distance. I will agree with you on those facts. The rest is very subjective. If you feel otherwise I feel pretty safe in saying that you don’t know what a fact actually is and should look into employment for FoxNews.

  • I find this whole thing rather amusing. I’ve lived in Holmen since 1999 and barely even noticed the cross / star. I just assumed there was a church up there and didn’t think anything of it until this whole controversy. Even knowing the facts, it still doesn’t bother me being up there. I’m not terribly religious but I’m not going to freak out about a religious symbol. I just don’t get it. Other than the initial complainer, most of the people getting all up in arms about this don’t even live in Holmen. Why do they care so much what we have on our hill?

    Michelle

  • I’ve been in Holmen. I’ve seen the cross. It’s no São Paolo, and seems to be meaningful to the local folks, who take time to maintain the hill, cross and lighting. Makes sense to me that they sold it to a local organization who is likely to invest in the maintenance of the area rather than some out-of-towners who have no investment in the village or the hill. I’m in complete agreement with Michelle, in other words.

  • I’m a La Crosse, WI resident (right next to Holmen), so I am somewhat familiar with what is happening. The Lion’s Club (in La Crosse) was also sold a 10′ X 10′ plot in a La Crosse public park where a statue of the ten commandments stands.
    The main argument in support of keeping the cross is reflected in Michelle’s comments. The same held true with the ten commandments debacle. There are many outside groups coming in and raising a ruckus about something the citizens of the towns never seem to have had a problem with. And, I think that there is merit to that.
    (Personally, I would like to see any religious stuff out of government, and I like CB’s idea of donating it to a church. I don’t have a dog in this fight either way, as I am not a Holmen resident. (The town of Holmen has also been footing the bill for the electricity for the cross, by the way))

  • So essentially only residents of the town should be concerned with upholding the first amendment of the Constitution of the United States Of America? If no one in the town has a problem with it (Eric Barnes does), then the violation should be overlooked? That logic would certainly make for a great country, maybe a few towns can bring back slavery too?

    You people are unbelievable, you think just because 99.9% of Americans can’t see the hill in your town, it doesn’t have an impact on so many of us in this country? Enjoy the MASSIVE amount of religious freedom you DO have here and stop being so close minded with public property.

    Try actually leaving the state for a day, meet a non-christian for the first time in your life. We have 4 heads, 3 tongues and snakes coming out of our hair but we’re not so different!

  • If I were on the Holmen council, I’d sponsor a bill to require acceptance of the highest bid for all future property sales.

    If you can sell one chunk of land at a discount to a favored religious group, why not all of them? They clearly favor religion over non-religion by 600 bucks in this case.
    Makes you wonder if they would have turned down 100 grand.

  • I am a Holmen resident with a dog in this fight. I have been writing about this on my blog. My own views are not likely to be welcome here but I would like to at least set some facts straight. In the first place, though the cross is ’40 foot tall’ the plain fact is that it is part of the super-structure of… a star. During the day, you would never think it is a cross. You would always think it is a star (read: an establishment of the religion of astrology). Furthermore, it is lit up as a cross just during the Easter season. The worrisome electric bill probably totals $20 bucks a year. Nothing to hyperventilate about.

    Indeed, the ‘offense’ is so contrived here as to make many observers merely scoff.

    Also, it is ridiculous to dismiss the council as “Regugnican.” This is a nice knee jerk reaction. Holmen is a pretty liberal town all in all and La Crosse county is as well. You’re welcome to check the election returns. In point of fact, the whole area leans heavily Democratic. La Crosse, as was pointed out above, had also just recently had such a dispute and solved it in the same way, yet it is also fairly liberal.

    You’ll need to search elsewhere for your explanation for their conduct.

    http://www.sntjohnny.com

    • Comments are closed.