|
|
April 21, 2000/16 Nisan 5760, Vol. 52, No.33
Display of Easter symbol crosses constitutional line
GORDON M. WEINER
Special to Jewish News
Perhaps it's time for Tempe and other cities to re-think their policies on the erection of religious symbols on public property. I say this as one of the two Jewish representatives who approached Mayor Neil Giuliano and received permission to erect a menorah on Tempe butte last December.
My own preference, and that of the clear majority of Jews, would be for no religious symbols to be erected at all. It's time to put Christ back in Christmas, getting him off the streets and buttes and back in the churches and homes of his believers.
The same holds for Jews, Muslims and other religious adherents: Let us display our religious symbolism outside the public arena.
The decision to refuse permission for the Easter cross erection on Tempe butte fits within recent legal parameters established by both the U.S. Supreme Court and Arizona courts. The courts have differentiated between "religious" religious symbols and "secular" religious symbols. While this may represent hair-splitting to some, there is reason behind it: If a symbol has direct theological meaning, then it is deemed to be inappropriate for public funding or display. Thus the Arizona courts ruled against the reinstallation of the cross to Danforth Chapel at Arizona State University in the late 1980s.
The "secular" religious symbols approved for public display are those that celebrate holidays or seasons, religious though they may be, in a non-theological manner. Hence, Christmas trees and Santas are viewed as secular in nature, perhaps because of their pagan origins and subsequent incorporation into Christian celebrations.
There is little, if any, theological meaning ascribed to these symbols. While they do represent a Christian holiday, they do not symbolize fundamental Christian belief. Similarly, the menorah and crescent represent Jewish and Islamic holiday celebrations without fundamentally crossing the theological line.
Thus, the recent refusal by the City of Tempe to allow the erection on Tempe butte of the cross for Easter is well within both legal and logical bounds.
However, there are underlying problems with this segmented approach to religious symbol erection on public property and the use of public or quasi-public funds to do so. Displaying Christmas lights, Santas, trees and stars on public property paid for by public or quasi-public monies means commemorating only Christian holidays on city streets or public buildings. In effect, this directs Jewish, Muslim and other non-Christian taxpayer money to Christian celebratory purposes.
If the various Valley communities wish to decorate their streets and buildings for "secular" religious purposes, they should be inclusive rather than exclusive. The secular religious symbols of their non-Christian citizens should be given equal time and equal exposure. If they are not, the municipalities should get rid of all religious symbolism and decorate in a purely secular manner, or not at all. The current controversy in Tempe over the cross affords the city the opportunity to rethink its position and do the right thing.
Gordon M. Weiner is professor emeritus at Arizona State Univerity and former director of its Jewish studies program. He is a Tempe resident.
|
