City forced woman to display cross on vehicle

[Alonzo]

A Burbank woman is suing her hometown in federal court for requiring her to display what she believes is a Christian-themed vehicle sticker on her windshield.

Nichole Schultz tried to get an exemption from displaying the sticker because of religious concerns, but the city denied her request, her attorney said, so now the matter is headed to court.

The sticker depicts a soldier with a rifle, kneeling before a gravesite emblazoned with a cross. City officials contend the cross is a generic symbol and was not selected for any religious meaning.

Schultz said the city is violating the Illinois Constitution along with her 1st Amendment rights by making her endorse a particular faith.

The lawsuit, filed Wednesday in Chicago, said that as a result of the "forced Christianization" of her car, she avoids driving it whenever possible. She's not asking for the city to rescind its sticker for everyone, but to make an exception for her.

Schultz is suing Burbank, the City Council, Mayor Harry Klein and City Clerk Pat Roach.

Roach said Thursday that the cross is a grave marker, not a crucifix. She said the city often tries to incorporate a patriotic theme in its stickers and that they usually include an American flag.

Last year, the sticker showed an excavator and said something about "a community at work." No one liked it, Roach said. This year's sticker received a warmer welcome with only two complaints.

Schultz claims Roach told her to "deal with it" when she called to complain about the sticker. The clerk denies ever using those words.

"I probably said something like, `I'm surprised that you don't like it because everybody else does,'" Roach said. "It's been very popular."

Roach said Schultz has the option to cover up a portion of the sticker or to cut out the cross, but Schultz's advocates said they were never offered such a compromise.

Rob Sherman, an atheist activist, wrote the city a letter in July on Schultz's behalf, asking officials to come up with a discreet solution that would keep the matter out of court.

"Let's resolve this matter together and get it over with without litigation and without the negative effects that a battle over a religious issue would cause," he said.

The city never answered, Sherman said.

The law is on Schultz's side, he said, pointing to two cases involving religious-themed vehicle stickers--one in Zion and the other in Rolling Meadows--that were decided in 1991.

Sherman said, too, that there is no way to divorce the cross symbol from its religious roots, saying government officials often try to "accidentally" force people to advertise their religion.

Schultz could not be reached for comment. Her lawyer, Dmitry Feofanov, said he didn't know her religious affiliation and that it doesn't matter. Feofanov has a one-man firm called Chicago Lemon Law, and most of his cases involve car fraud.

"The law is the law," he said. "This country was founded in part because of the idea of religious liberty. This issue was on the table in American public life from the founding of the Republic."

Feofanov said that because the city ignored legal precedent, the only option was to go to court.


http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/chi-0610200164oct20,1,1527740.story?coll=chi-news-hed&ctrack=1&cset=true

[piratemonkey]

Roach said Thursday that the cross is a grave marker, not a crucifix.


I love the contortions Christians go through to try to deny their own symbols... while pushing them on everyone at the same time.

One question: WHO uses crosses for grave markers?

Answer: Christians

[lily]

One question: WHO uses crosses for grave markers?


Arlington National Cemetery for one. Sorry pirate on this one I disagree with you.

As for lawsuits.......I put this one right up there with Chris Rock's mother. Get over it!

[Cobra]

Get over it and yourself.

[Alonzo]

One question: WHO uses crosses for grave markers?


Arlington National Cemetery for one. Sorry pirate on this one I disagree with you.


The difference being the requirment for each individual to display it.

Here's a gravestone from arlington cemetery:

http://img176.imageshack.us/img176/5843/humayunkhangravewt6.jpg

http://www.altmuslim.com/perm.php?id=1463_0_26_0_C

Here's another one:

http://img143.imageshack.us/img143/4457/udaycementrykhandakn0.gif

http://www.nriinternet.com/Section3Who/WhoUSA/uday/070404.htm

No one is forced to be buried there, and those that are may have gravestones representing their religious beliefs.

Here's a longer list of approved markers:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USVA_emblems_for_headstones_and_markers

And it's relatively easy to add more. The last pic is a Khanda, the symbol of the Sikh faith, and that was added simply by request when a sikh soldier died.

[Anti-Racism]

I wouldn't want to put any religious symbol on my car, especially if I disagreed with (not to mention: outright detested) that faith.

Christianity causes conflict and stupidity wherever it goes.

[lily]

The difference being the requirment for each individual to display it.


No one is forced to be buried there, and those that are may have gravestones representing their religious beliefs.


My mistake. You're right..........but I still don't see the big deal. The woman was told she could cut out the cross if it bothered her so much.

[Mayberry]

Some people just don't have anything better to do than stir up hornet's nests.:rolleyes: The City of Corpus Christi has seagulls on their stickers, etc... I hate seagulls. I think I'll call the ACLU and sue.

[piratemonkey]

That's easy for those in the majority to say.

The majority hates seagulls!

[BoogyMan]

Roach said Thursday that the cross is a grave marker, not a crucifix.


I love the contortions Christians go through to try to deny their own symbols... while pushing them on everyone at the same time.

One question:Â*Â*WHO uses crosses for grave markers?

Answer: Christians


Good evening Pirate,

Your disdain for Christianity is well known and taken into account when considering any commentary you might post on the subject. Have you ever been to any of the major military cemetaries? Arlington National Cemetary? The US military semetaries on the beaches of France?

This is a non-story. Zo, is that the actual title of this story or did you jazzz it up for effect?

[Alonzo]

Jazzed it up. The title just involved suing the city. But it's accurate and it's not misleading.

This is a non-story

Make it a crescent and you'd hear a lot more of it.

[BoogyMan]

Jazzed it up. The title just involved suing the city. But it's accurate and it's not misleading.

This is a non-story

Make it a crescent and you'd hear a lot more of it.


I doubt there would be much of a clamour over that. This woman is just looking for her 10 minutes of fame.

[piratemonkey]

Your disdain for Christianity is well known and taken into account when considering any commentary you might post on the subject.Â*Â*


I don't have any more problem with Christianity than any other religion and none of my posts have indicated otherwise.

If you think otherwise, that says more about your perception of persecution than my positions.Â*Â*Telling...


Have you ever been to any of the major military cemetaries?Â*Â*Arlington National Cemetary?Â*Â*The US military semetaries on the beaches of France?

Did you alonzo's post above?Â*Â*This has been discussed and the theory shot down with actual pictures from Arlington.


This is a non-story.Â*Â*Zo, is that the actual title of this story or did you jazzz it up for effect?


It's a non-story for Christians.Â*Â*Live in a country where your belief or lack there of is in the small minority.Â*Â*You'll have a very different perspective.Â*Â*Atheism is one of the last societally sanctioned type of discrimination.

[lily]

BoogyMan Wrote:
Your disdain for Christianity is well known and taken into account when considering any commentary you might post on the subject.Â*Â*

You can take my statement for what it's worth, boogyman.....but piratemonkey does not have disdain for Christianity...far from it. What he does have is a vast knowledge of Religion. It might not agree with your viewpoit, but it's hardly disdain.....it's a difference of opinion.

[BoogyMan]

I don't have any more problem with Christianity than any other religion and none of my posts have indicated otherwise.

If you think otherwise, that says more about your perception of persecution than my positions. Telling...

I love it. You have such a superiority complex you probably cant even see what you are doing, but yes, your previous postings show a huge disdain for anyone who has faith. Its actually quite telling.... bwahahahahahha

Did you alonzo's post above? This has been discussed and the theory shot down with actual pictures from Arlington.

Yes, I have read Zo's post and unfortunately for the two of you a couple of anomalous appearances does not a pattern make. The overwhelming preponderance of headstones in both the examples I presented are simple white stone crosses.

It's a non-story for Christians. Live in a country where your belief or lack there of is in the small minority. You'll have a very different perspective. Atheism is one of the last societally sanctioned type of discrimination.

Discrimination!?!?! Egads.

[piratemonkey]

I love it.Â*Â*You have such a superiority complex you probably cant even see what you are doing, but yes, your previous postings show a huge disdain for anyone who has faith.Â*Â*Its actually quite telling....Â*Â* bwahahahahahha

I am more intelligent than most people. I'm sorry if you can't accept that fact. Believe it or not, there are people in this world smarter than you... and me. I work with people who are smarter than me every day and have no problem admitting it.

And that's not what you said.Â*Â*You said "Christianity."Â*Â*I have an aversion to faith-based thinking.Â*Â*That's true, but for good reason.

Thinking based on faith and not reality can lead anywhere.Â*Â*There are no checks or balances on this type of thought.Â*Â*From a faith perspective, it's just as valid to say "Jesus is god" as "Jews are bad."Â*Â*No proof, evidence or facts are required.


Yes, I have read Zo's post and unfortunately for the two of you a couple of anomalous appearances does not a pattern make.Â*Â*The overwhelming preponderance of headstones in both the examples I presented are simple white stone crosses.

And the "overwhelming prepoderance" of people buried in the places are Christians.

For you to be right, you need to show people of other religions choosing crosses for their headstones.

[cs0564]

Being a Christian is all about religious tolerance! I have no persoanl belief for or against a cross or any other "symbol" that is specifically religious in nature. Since I do not worship ideal symbols I have a hard time understanding why someone would put so much worry into a symbol. Most religions teach the power of believing in something that you cannot see. True faith is believing in something or someone that is not seen by human eyes.

[piratemonkey]

Roach said Thursday that the cross is a grave marker, not a crucifix.


I love the contortions Christians go through to try to deny their own symbols... while pushing them on everyone at the same time.

One question:Â*Â*WHO uses crosses for grave markers?

Answer: Christians


Good evening Pirate,

Your disdain for Christianity is well known and taken into account when considering any commentary you might post on the subject.Â*Â*Have you ever been to any of the major military cemetaries?Â*Â*Arlington National Cemetary?Â*Â*The US military semetaries on the beaches of France?


Interesting article here:
The U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs allows military families to choose any of 38 authorized headstone images. The list includes commonly recognized symbols for Christianity, Buddhism, Islam and Judaism, as well as those for smaller religions such as Sufism Reoriented, Eckiankar and the Japanese faith Seicho-No-Ie.

The Wiccan pentacle, a five-pointed star surrounded by a circle, is not on the list, an omission that the widows say is unconstitutional.

http://www.cnn.com/2006/LAW/11/13/widows.suit.ap/index.html

From the point of view of someone who is religion-free, it's like saying chocolate ice cream is not allowed, but every other kind is just fine.

Can anyone think of a rational reason why this shouldn't be allowed?

[cs0564]

One question:Â*Â*WHO uses crosses for grave markers?


Every US Military Cemetary in the US and abroad to start!

No one is trying to "deny" their symbol. I believe there are only 3 grave markers that are used.

[Alonzo]

Post 5 has some pictures of other symbols (the crescent and khanda), and the complete list is here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USVA_emblems_for_headstones_and_markers

It's much more than 3 symbols.

[cs0564]

I did not realize there were so many.Â*Â*I have been to a number of these in Europe and only remeber three.Â*Â*Most however looked like this one which I believe is in Normandy.

http://www.linkparis.com/images/390-CIMETIERE_US.jpg

[Alonzo]

Many of those may only have a couple of soldiers buried with those symbols. The vast majority of americans fit into christian, muslim, hindu and jew. Some may not be concerned about being buried with a cross, or be aware there's an option (I'm not sure if there's a default choice or if the family must choose the cross) further decreasing the amount of non christian symbols.

[BoogyMan]

The overwhelming preponderance of military cemetaries, however, are filled with the standard white cross headstone. There are many that do not use that stone, but they are by far a minority.

[NortheastCynic]

The state has no compelling reason to force this woman to put this sticker on her car.Â*Â*This isn't a huge issue but I'm just looking at this logically, what is the purpose of the sticker?Â*Â*Does the gov't have a compelling issue in forcing the woman to display the sticker?Â*Â*I don't think it does, and for that reason, I think it should not make the sticker mandatory. In addition I do not believe that any Constitution, state or federal gives any government the power to force its citizens to display a sticker; correct me if I'm wrong.

-NC

[cs0564]

I believe this is either a registration sticker or an inspection sticker. I persoanlly do not see the religious theme though. To me it is more of a soldier theme. Not sure if she would have an issue with that though.

[NortheastCynic]

Yeah, that does make it more complicated. I'm not sure if the sticker really qualifies as an "establishment" of religion, but I don't like it...Still, I don't think this is a Constitutional issue.

-NC

[piratemonkey]

Take it a 1/2 step further.

What if public employees were required to wear shirts with a cross on it?

What's the difference?

[NortheastCynic]

When the cross is taken out of the context of a graveyard, it's meaning changes. I understand where you're coming from Piratemonkey, I really do, but as I said, I'm not sure if the sticker in and of itself is an "establishment" of religion.

-NC

[lily]

I know this has no bearing on where the discussion on this topic has gone in, a very interesting one, I might add. I was curious of just what this vehicular sticker looked like and I came across this article.

Settlement in vehicle sticker squabble

By Jo Napolitano
Tribune staff reporter
Published October 31, 2006, 7:47 PM CST


A Burbank woman who sued the city last month over the requirement that she display what she considers a Christian-themed sticker on her car will no longer have to comply with the ordinance under an out-of-court settlement, her attorney said.

According to a court filing dated Tuesday in which both parties asked that the federal case be dismissed, Nichole Schultz is no longer required to display the sticker, which includes a drawing of a soldier kneeling before a gravesite marked by a cross.

The filing states that if Schultz is ticketed for failing to display her sticker, the city will not pursue a fine.

Schultz's attorney, Dmitry Feofanov, said he expects the dismissal motion to be approved by a judge in the next few days.

City officials have said the grave marker is a generic symbol, not an endorsement of a particular religion, but Schultz, who has declined interviews, said in her lawsuit that Burbank was advocating the "forced Christianization" of her car and that she no longer wanted to drive her vehicle as a result.

Mayor Harry Klein said he was unaware of the latest developments and declined to comment. An attorney representing the city, mayor, clerk and City Council—all named as defendants in the case—could not be reached for comment.

Rob Sherman, an atheist advocate who had taken up Schultz's cause, was happy about the outcome.

"Of course it's a victory in that the city, without saying so, admitted that they were wrong," he said. "They admitted that the design of the sticker was unconstitutional. If they weren't wrong they wouldn't allow her to take the sticker off of her vehicle."

Such cases send a strong message to government officials about the importance of the separation of church and state, he said.

The court will decide if the city must pay Schultz's legal fees.

jnapolitano@tribune.com
Copyright © 2006, Chicago Tribune

[NortheastCynic]

I think Mr. Sherman is giving himself way too much credit. The city let her go on without the sticker because they want to avoid negative publicity, not because they're admitting the sticker is unConstitutional. It's amazing, I'd love nothing more than to be a Constitutional lawyer, but it's rare that I see or hear about one who I like...

-NC

[lily]

I think Mr. Sherman is giving himself way too much credit.

You don't know just how right you are. I just lifted the article from his site......not his bragging.

http://www.robsherman.com/advocacy/061101.htm

It's amazing, I'd love nothing more than to be a Constitutional lawyer, but it's rare that I see or hear about one who I like...

Not to puff up your ego, but I do envy people that actually know the Constitution and can debate it.

[NortheastCynic]

Not to puff up your ego, but I do envy people that actually know the Constitution and can debate it. Hey, there's never anything wrong with puffing up my ego.:D It may be a little premature though, I'm certainly no Constitutional expert...yet...Give me six of seven years, then puff all you want.

Also, you're link isn't coming through correctly.

-NC

[lily]

Sorry, fixed the link.

[cs0564]

I guess my thought is "what's the big deal"?Â*Â*The state is showing a generic picture of a soldier saddened by war and the loss of a comrade.Â*Â*The cross represents death in the photo. Is this picture a religious one or is it just generic?

http://www.remembering.org.uk/soldier_cross.jpg

[NortheastCynic]

I'm with you CS, it'd be hard for the town to get the same message across without the military cross...I suppose they could've used a headstone, but this certainly does not constitute a violation of the Constitution, this is a non-issue.

-NC

[Alonzo]

I guess my thought is "what's the big deal"?Â*Â*The state is showing a generic picture of a soldier saddened by war and the loss of a comrade.Â*Â*The cross represents death in the photo. Is this picture a religious one or is it just generic?

http://www.remembering.org.uk/soldier_cross.jpg


That cross looks religious. If it was thicker it's more blurred, but a thin cross like that definately looks religious.

But the issue is whether its reasonable to view it as a religious symbol. I think it obviously is. Considering the fact that other religious have symbols in use as well, it seems that the military also agrees on some level.

[NortheastCynic]

But the issue is whether its reasonable to view it as a religious symbol.I disagree, I think the issue is whether or not this "respects an establishment of religion". Yes, the cross can be taken as a religious symbol, but it is often used as a generic grave marker as well. As I said, I'm not a huge fan of the sticker, but I don't think it qualifies as "establishing" a religion.

-NC

[lily]

Thanks for finding the picture Cs.......it does make a difference. After seeing it, I have to say it doesn't look religious to me.

[NortheastCynic]

I think you prove the point Lily...The grave-marking means different things to different people. This seems like a non-issue to me.

-NC

[lily]

The sticker depicts a soldier with a rifle, kneeling before a gravesite emblazoned with a cross. City officials contend the cross is a generic symbol and was not selected for any religious meaning.

I don't know how I missed this in the article.