Loading...
1. Ten Commandments Monument-= --- - City fKli C y o Kalispell - OFFICE OF THE CITY MANAGER TO: Mayor Fisher and Kalispell City Council FROM: Doug Russell, City Manager DATE: October 22, 2012 SUBJECT: 10 Commandments monument request At a previous meeting a Council member requested a work session topic to discuss a letter provided by Fred Bryant for the City of Kalispell to take possession of the monuments at the County Courthouse and relocate them to Depot Park. Attachments to this memo include the original request, a letter of support, a letter of opposition, and a second letter from Mr. Bryant. www.kalispell.com _u � �. ���� � �� � .pill,x« aft wb« council meetings igd atthis `ime y#would like any answer « �_ mail. v 2 answe by e-mail Fred Bryant ««sue ��_ Road ~9g��«k\(Sd Kalispell, 2»?° «_<\ 22 ;6: 2«««: + « ` �- ©d %48 Ph. \f / ` #euFm Aerie Manager In June of 1950 the Fraternal Order of Eagles Aerie 234 gave the county a monument of the 10 Commandments. For over 50 years that monument stood in front of the court When the courthouse was renovated that monument and others that the Eagles assisted in providing was moved to a corner behind the courthouse. Many peoplehidden. Those monuments represent the basis of most of our laws and the ideals that many of our e ought a.."-d died for. The Eagles feel that it would be much more appropriate for those monuments to be displayed in the Depot Park rather than hidden in some corner. Is there some way that the city and county could work together to bring t that e? It would be nice if this could be accomplishedon or before November. Please contact committee chairman Fred Bryant or president Richard Frisk of Aerie 234. Dick Frisk, Pres. AeriePresident Dick Frisk 234 Kalispell, o 752-7313 Fred Bryant 150 ul Goodrich "#d 10/10/12 To: Kalispell City Mayor and Councilors Cc: Flathead County Commissioners We are writing to express our concerns with and opposition to the recent request and efforts to move the "10 Commandments" monument to City of Kalispell property. Our basis of our opposition is that we believe that having the 10 Commandments monument on public land (especially in a prominent location at Depot Park and in it's current configuration with the other monuments — larger and in the center) clearly communicates to the public that this Christian scripture is the central basis of American law and that the City of Kalispell supports such a notion. This view can be shown to be inaccurate and that it has consequences - some potentially legal. We will address these in order. As far as accuracy, the Fraternal Order of the Eagles appears to be the sole determiner of which historical sources/documents to use in the monument display. As far as we can establish, no historian or other professional in American history was consulted either by the Eagles, Flathead County or the City of Kalispell. We believe that it is a glaring oversight to not have included any reference to Enlightenment sources such as Spinoza, Montesquieu, Descartes, Voltaire, Rousseau, Kant and Newton — all of whom were hugely influential for Thomas Jefferson, Benjamin Franklin, Thomas Paine and James Madison (and many others) in drafting the US Constitution, Bill of Rights and the Declaration of Independence. The ideas of these Enlightenment thinkers were central to the formation of our secular republic and should be included in any display for reasons of historical context and accuracy. Also, we believe that the Constitution and the Bill of Rights are THE cornerstones of U.S. and Montana law and should be at the center of any such display along with Montana's Constitution and the Declaration of Independence. The Magna Carta was also an important document in the history of democracy. We find it much harder to see the justification for the Mayflower compact in such a display (although we are open to new evidence from credible sources) and see absolutely no justification for including a 10 Commandments monument — there is no known reference to the 10 Commandments in US law or founding documents. So, in placing the 10 Commandments monument in a prominent public display on public land, the City of Kalispell is at risk of being perceived (and is perceived by members of FASHA) as taking a "theological" position rather presenting a historically accurate one, and endorsing one religion over another. It certainly has had the effect of leading members of our group to conclude that the invaluable contributions of secular thought is not as valued by our local government as is Christian dogma. The very first article in the Bill of Rights creates the separation of church and state — a fact that exemplifies how important the concept is and was. The Treaty of Tripoli (presented by President John Adams and ratified unanimously by the US Senate in 1797) states, "As the Government of the United States of America is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion,... ". These two examples certainly support exclusion of the 10 Commandments from the display, and for good reason — promotion and endorsement (or even perceived endorsement) of religion by the state has consequences. The founding fathers experienced and foresaw what happens when the state `takes sides' on issues of religion and theology (whether intentional or as perceived by the public at large). It is divisive, promotes parochial thinking, creates class hierarchies and is exclusionary of other faiths or those of no faith. Just imagine the public reaction our group will receive as a result of this letter and that you will receive if you decide to not include the 10 Commandments monument? That is what happens when the state "takes sides" and when that "preference" is removed, the people who feel endorsed or privileged get upset — they do not want to give it up. Many will label us as "militant" atheists or secularists, when the reality is that it is Christian religionists that are consistently assaulting our secular republican form of government all across the country. Atheists are not the ones requesting monuments (or shrines) on public land. As evidence of current public perception, several local newspaper articles have referred, almost exclusively, to the 10 Commandments when reporting on this issue e.g. "Prominent Display Sought for 10 Commandments" (Daily Interlake, Oct. 41h, 2012). These articles indicate to the public that the 10 Commandments scripture and thus Christian theology, is the central issue at play here. However, despite these concerns, we hope you agree that now is the time to show courage, fix the error and draw a bright line that is consistent with our Constitution. Secular Humanism has two principles that are worth stating here 1) "We believe in an open and pluralistic society and that democracy is the best guarantee of protecting human rights from authoritarian elites and repressive majorities", and 2) "We attempt to transcend divisive parochial loyalties based on race, religion, gender, nationality, creed, class, sexual orientation, or ethnicity, and strive to work together for the common good of humanity". The County and City taking sides on religious matters conflicts with the Constitution and undermines freedom of conscience and the goal of a just, humane and pluralistic society. The Founding Fathers knew what they were doing. There are also potential legal consequences which we will pursue if needed. While the City Attorney appears (based on the Daily Interlake article on Oct. 4th) to believe that a display of monuments that include the 10 Commandments would be legal, we believe a case can be made that it is not. In 2005, the US Supreme Court did make two important rulings that are related to this issue. In one case, the court ruled that such displays are legal (Texas) and in another case, ruled that a similar display was illegal (Kentucky). In the majority decision in the Kentucky case, Justice D.H. Souter wrote "... the divisiveness of religion in current public life is inescapable," he wrote. "This is no time to deny the prudence of understanding the [First Amendment] to require the Government to stay neutral on religious belief, which is reserved for the conscience of the individual." In the Texas case, writing also for the majority, Justice S. Breyer wrote, "in a Nation of so many different religious and comparable nonreligious fundamental beliefs, a more contemporary state effort to focus attention upon a religious text is certainly likely to prove divisive in a way that this longstanding, pre-existing monument has not." In our particular case here, given that the 10 Commandments monument was the first monument in place, that it was originally intended to stand alone, that the other monuments were only placed on the heals of the threat of legal action, that it is obviously larger than the other monuments, and that it currently sits in the central position among the other monuments, we believe a case can be made (if needed) that Flathead County and the City of Kalispell lack a secular purpose for a display that includes the 10 Commandments (esp. in their current configuration and sizing) and is actively promoting Christianity. Also, while the 10 Commandments monument is "long-standing and pre- existing" as Justice Breyer wrote, it has not been unchallenged over the years and we believe that it's movement to a prominent location such as Depot Park would be considered a "contemporary state effort" by the courts. A free speech legal challenge may also be made. We believe that it could be argued that it is the Eagles who are being allowed by the County and City to exercise it's free speech rights on public land. If this case could be made, then the city may be required to allow for other form of free speech at the site as well. The City would need to have a clear basis for disallowing other groups to exercise their free speech rights e.g.) Certainly Socrates, Plato and Aristotle had a much larger influence on Western political thought and cultural development long before Judaism. What about David Hume and John Locke? Are there other Christian sects who want a different scripture displayed? What about an English common law manuscript? Who decides and on what grounds? Do/did the Eagles have a religious agenda? (for reference see Pleasant Grove City vs. Summum). In closing, in considering the US Constitution, the consequences of not abiding by it, in keeping with Humanist principles, and desiring to avoid legal action if possible, we strongly oppose the City of Kalispell moving the 10 Commandments monument to Depot Park. (we would also oppose that it be made a part of the current veteran's memorial assuming of course that the Depot Park memorial is for ALL soldiers who gave their lives for our country, not excluding those who were of other faiths or of no faith). We would to see Flathead County or the City of Kalispell decide to return the 10 Commandments monument to its original donor - the Fraternal Order of Eagles and request that the Eagles support a movement of the other monuments as planned. If, that being done, the Eagles decide to not pursue moving any of the monuments to Depot Park, then perhaps that will serve to highlight any possible religious motivations behind their current request to the City Council. We sincerely hope we can avoid legal action and resolve this in an amicable manner. Thank you for your consideration in this matter. Sincerely and respectfully, Ian Cameron, Jesse Ahmann, Kristin Hargrove, Shawn Hargrove, Doug Bonham, Frank Jeniker, Susan Miller, Bob Beck and other members of Flathead Area Secular Humanist Association (FASHA). (406) 261-3195. 150 Goodrich Road Kalispell, MT 59901 755-4248 Theresa White From: MRothf9827@aol.com Sent: Wednesday, October 17, 2012 1:15 PM To: Theresa White Subject: Ten Commandments I am a resident of Flathead County but not Kalispell. I think the issue of the Ten Commandments should remain with the County and the Eagles. The Monuments should not be on public property, especially in Depot Park near the Monument of those who give their lives for our county. The eagle's argument of the Ten Commandment having a place in US law is not valid. It would seem the City would save it's self some grief if it would not accept the Ten Commandments. Ed Rothfuss Lake Blaine Theresa White From: clements.psyche [clements.psyche@gmail.com] Sent: Wednesday, October 17, 2012 1:04 PM To: Theresa White; dlauman@flathead.mt.gov; pholmquist@flathead.mt.gov; cscott@fiathead.mt.gov Subject: NO 10 commandments! Dear Sir or Madam; Please take appropriate measures and make appropriate motions to deny the Eagle's attempts to move the 10 Commandments monument to Depot Park. We further ask that the City of Kalispell or Flathead County act to return the 10 Commandments to its original donor (the Eagles) and ensure its removal from public land. We do not oppose the other current monuments from being remitted to the City of Kalispell or being moved to Depot Park. The Bible, Christianity, nor any part of religion had anything to do with the founding of America or remembering our soldiers, whom are a very diverse group. Do the right thing, and refuse to violate the Separation of Church and State. Do not show preference to Christianity. Keep our shrines about our soldiers. Sincerely, Kaitlyn Clements 1