CRIME & COURTS

Vet memorial thrusts Iowa town into religious debate

Grant Rodgers
grodgers@dmreg.com
Al Larsen, an Army veteran who served during Vietnam, becomes emotional as he shares his story of a friend who was killed in Vietnam. Larsen, who sculpted a wooden marker of a soldier kneeling at a grave, is among many upset in Knoxville that the marker is under scrutiny due to the cross, a religious symbol, being located on city property. Larsen said the cross isn't intended to be a religious statement, rather a symbol of a soldier's gravesite.

KNOXVILLE, Ia. –Creating black-and-white plywood silhouettes to honor military veterans began as a hobby for Al Larsen.

His memorials — about 20 in all — each picture a soldier kneeling next to a cross. They were simple projects for the 67-year-old Vietnam War veteran and Waterloo native, intended to keep his mind active, something his doctor recommended.

They also were his tribute to Robert Deyo Jr., an Army private and Waterloo friend who was killed in Vietnam at age 20.

But now one of Larsen’s silhouettes, placed in a Knoxville city park in June, has ushered the veteran, his supporters and city leaders into a heated legal and political battle over whether the memorial should be removed for unduly promoting religion.

The crux of the debate lies in the interpretation of 16 words at the heart of the First Amendment: “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof …”

Larsen intended the small Latin cross in each silhouette to mark a grave — like the rows of white crosses at the Normandy American Cemetery in France, where more than 9,000 American World War II troops are buried.

“This is what it means to me,” Larsen said in an interview Wednesday. “It don’t mean no church thing.”

But Americans United for Separation of Church and State says otherwise, arguing that the cross is inseparable from its identity as Christianity’s most revered symbol. And placing it on government property violates the First Amendment’s establishment clause promising separation of church and state.

“You get this a lot,” said Ian Smith, a staff attorney with the Washington, D.C.,-based group. “A lot of times, people will say that, ‘We didn’t mean for this to be religious.’ But … displaying a cross on government property clearly does have the effect of government endorsement of Christianity.”

Americans United sent a letter to the city Aug. 17 asking for the cross to be removed. That prompted a Facebook group calling itself Stop the Insanity to organize a rally this coming Sunday to support the memorial.

The City Council will make a decision on whether to remove the memorial at its Sept. 8 meeting, Mayor Brian Hatch said. He’s watching cautiously as his town becomes another flashpoint in the conflict over the placement of religious symbols in America.

“We obviously didn’t feel there was any issue,” he said of the decision to allow Larsen’s memorial in the city park. “We’re not looking to do anything wrong; we’re not looking to offend anybody. We don’t want to make a bigger deal out of this than what it was.”

Knoxville boasts long military tradition

Knoxville — a town of 7,300 — has a proud military heritage fueling the outpouring of local support for Larsen’s memorial, said the Rev. Ramona Wink of First Presbyterian Church.

For decades before it closed in 2009, Knoxville was home to the Veterans Administration’s psychiatric hospital in the state, and the Department of Veterans Affairs continues to run a clinic in Knoxville. Residents and their families have spent generations with jobs helping veterans, Wink said.

Americans United said its opposition to the memorial was prompted by a complaint it received. Wink said the demand to remove the cross felt like an attack on faith and history.

She hopes the cross stays put. She said that during her Sunday sermon she encouraged parishioners to share their beliefs, while staying “respectful and grateful.”

“I think it hit people from both avenues,” she said. “And certainly for the Christians, I think it hit them in a double dose.”

The silhouette is tied to a flagpole in Knoxville’s Young’s Park near a painted Freedom Rock the local Post 63 of the American Veterans installed last year.

In the wake of the demand letter, the AMVETS post has made an offer to purchase that small section of the park to keep the memorial and cross, said Don Zoutte, the post’s public relations officer.

Larsen teared up at the park Wednesday, talking about Deyo, his friend who was killed Nov. 17, 1967. During the war, Larsen was an Army infantryman who called in coordinates for airstrikes, he said.

Deyo was in his outfit. The day after Deyo was killed, Larsen was struck by a bullet in the leg, he said. “I lost a lot of friends over there,” he said. “I call them my friends because we had to save each other’s lives over there.”

Issue in the courts has divided history

The historical significance of the cross as a grave marker could be a persuasive argument if Knoxville City Council members choose to fight the issue in the courts, said Matt Sharp, a lawyer with the Alliance Defending Freedom.

In a 2005 case, Van Orden v. Perry, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that Texas could keep a 6-foot memorial of the Ten Commandments on its state Capitol grounds.

Chief Justice William Rehnquist wrote that the statue was paid for by the Fraternal Order of the Eagles and that the Ten Commandments influenced the development of America’s legal system.

A similar argument could be made for the cross in Young’s Park, Sharp said.

“It’s not forcing religion on anyone,” he said. “It’s not coercing religion, which is really what the separation of church and state was designed to protect against. … If we’ve reached the point where the simple display of a cross as a cemetery memorial for fallen men and women is toxic, that’s a sad day.”

However, U.S. Supreme Court rulings on First Amendment cases have produced “one of the oddest areas of the law,” said Smith, the staff attorney for Americans United.

‘Lemon test’ used to determine violation

In cases where government and religion blur together, the first go-to measure courts use to determine whether the Constitution has been violated is the so-called “Lemon Test” created in a 1971 Supreme Court ruling, Smith said.

The case, Lemon v. Kurtzman, dealt with whether Rhode Island and Pennsylvania could give money to private religious schools for secular uses such as buying textbooks.

The ruling established a three-part test.

First, a law at issue — or in Knoxville’s case, a memorial — must primarily have a nonreligious purpose.

Second, the law or monument cannot promote or “inhibit” religion.

Third, there can be no “excessive entanglement” between government and religion.

Smith believes the cross in Young’s Park would be deemed unconstitutional. As a symbol, the cross placed alone in the park has the effect of promoting Christianity, he said.

And the fact that a private group placed the symbol on public property might not absolve the city of Knoxville from responsibility, Smith said.

In a 2009 case, Pleasant Grove City v. Summum, the Supreme Court ruled against a religious and philosophical group that hoped to put a memorial in a Utah city park.

Because the city had authority over the park, a permanent memorial — even one paid for by a private religious group — would essentially have the weight of the city’s endorsement, Justice Samuel Alito wrote.

Residents say this is not a political battle

The debate has even made its way into the 2016 presidential race.

Amidst the Iowa caucuses, Republican presidential candidates such as Sen. Ted Cruz have put religious liberty issues at the front of their platforms.

And Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal, another Republican hopeful, specifically referenced the Knoxville dispute in nearby Pella during a Monday stop, calling the controversy an attack on Christian values.

Regardless of what happens next, Knoxville residents said presidential politics should stay out of it.

Campaigns have contacted organizers of Sunday’s rally, asking about attending, said Doug Goff, a Knoxville resident who’s organizing the rally.

While candidates are welcome, Goff said they won’t be invited to formally address the crowd. The fight for Larsen’s cross should be nonpartisan and keep honoring veterans at its forefront, he said.

Zoutte, the AMVETS public relations officer, echoed Goff.

“It’s not a political thing,” he said. “It’s about veterans.”