Victory for the Cross: What You Should Know about the Latest Supreme Court Decision

Craig HueyChurch, Faith, Government, Supreme Court1 Comment

Christians in America were handed a victory in a recent U.S. Supreme Court ruling.

Or were they?

Let me explain…

The U.S. Supreme Court recently ruled that a 40-foot high concrete World War I memorial cross does not violate the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment … and can therefore remain on public land.

The 7-2 decision in American Legion v. American Humanist Association was consequential in 3 important ways:

  1. It dealt a major blow to atheist and secularist groups that have sought in recent years to have many nationwide symbols and observances declared unconstitutional.
  2. It turned the meaning of the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment on its head.
  3. It turned memorial crosses into secular rather than religious symbols.

Let me explain each of these…

1. If the American Humanist Association and other secular and atheist groups had their way, all references to Christianity would be removed from American history.

Their goal is to change our history by removing the Christian foundations of our nation. One of their tactics for accomplishing their goal is to have Christian monuments ruled unconstitutional and removed.

As Christians, we need to fight strongly against this trend.

Why?

Because foundations are extremely important. In Psalm 11:3, David said, “If the foundations are destroyed, what can the righteous do?”

2. The Establishment Clause of the First Amendment really has nothing to do with a group of private citizens getting together and erecting a cross or other religious symbol on public land.

Here’s what the religious clauses of the First Amendment say:

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof;”

Only Congress can violate this section of the First Amendment. Private citizens can’t violate it. An inanimate concrete cross can’t violate it.

For the Supreme Court to say the cross doesn’t violate the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment is to say that the First Amendment is saying something that clearly it is not saying.

3. The arguments given by Justice Samuel Alito in the Supreme Court’s majority opinion turn the cross of Christ into a secular symbol devoid of any religious significance.

He described the cross as “a prominent community landmark” and that removing it would have a divisive impact, “especially in the local community for which it has taken on particular meaning.”

He rejected the dissenting view that “The Latin cross is the foremost symbol of the Christian faith, embodying the ‘central theological claim of Christianity: that the son of God died on the cross, that he rose from the dead, and that his death and resurrection offer the possibility of eternal life.’”

For the majority on the Court, the cross has been reduced to nothing more than a secular symbol to honor the dead.

What do you think? Email me at [email protected]

Here are the rest of this week’s articles:

One Comment on “Victory for the Cross: What You Should Know about the Latest Supreme Court Decision”

  1. The message of the cross is foolishness for those that want it to be but for those that believe it to be more, it is the power of God. So it can mean more than one thing and should be protected.

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.