In February the US Supreme Court will hear the case of the Bladensburg Peace Cross, a near-century old war memorial in Maryland that anti-religious groups claim is an illegal endorsement of religion.<\/p>\n
The Cross was ruled “unconstitutional” by the Fourth Circuit, and that is how the case approaches the Supreme Court.<\/p>\n
Many have spoken out in defense of the memorial, which might explain why one group that filed a brief<\/a> in support of the cross went unnoticed.<\/p>\n A group of retired flag officers are asking the Court (PDF<\/a>) to “correct the court of appeals\u2019 stilted view of the First Amendment” and defend the cross.\u00a0 Those officers include:<\/p>\n Nearly all of those officers have had the distinct pleasure of being attacked by Michael “Mikey” Weinstein over the years.\u00a0 They are joined by several other prominent former military commanders.<\/p>\n One of the leading arguments against the Peace Cross is that it is inherently — and only<\/strong> — a religious<\/em> symbol. The critics also claim those defending the cross are painting it as a non-religious symbol, essentially undermining the very meaning of the cross in a disingenuous push to preserve it.<\/p>\n This group of Flag officers accurately notes the cross can have multiple<\/em> meanings based on context, and its use as a memorial (and many other things) is not forbidden merely because of its religious connotation in other contexts.<\/p>\n ADVERTISEMENT<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n\n
\n