Frankenmuth the latest battleground in religious symbol debate

A standing-room-only crowd that spilled into the hallway and even down the stairs leading to the second floor of Frankenmuth City Hall on Tuesday night witnessed a tense and emotionally charged city council meeting as a local resident asked the council to remove a Lutheran cross from the city shield and a number of other local residents demanded that the cross stay where it is.

There was nothing unusual about the scene that played out; indeed, for those who have followed church/state battles in other communities it might almost have seemed like actors reading from the same script they’ve seen rehearsed a thousand times before. Invariably, the resident who believes that his government’s use of a religious symbol is an unconstitutional endorsement of religion that sends a message of exclusion to those who don’t share that particular faith is in the minority, usually a tiny minority. Lloyd Clarke knew that long before he stepped to the podium to make his request.

Just as invariably, the majority of local residents, especially in a community where nearly everyone at least nominally shares the same religious faith, dismiss such objections as mere whining – or worse. A sizable portion of nearly every community that has gone through similar battles reacts with a great deal of emotion, even anger, and views the request as an attack on their community, their religion and even on themselves personally. Frankenmuth on Tuesday evening played out that same script, the lines almost identical to those heard in front of countless school boards, city councils and county boards of commissioners in similar circumstances.

Continued -

Clarke, a large man who would be quite imposing if not for his soft-spoken and calm, even placid, demeanor, was the first to speak. There was little rhetoric in his speech. He cited two previous cases, one in Missouri where a federal court ruled that a Christian fish symbol on a city seal was an unconstitutional endorsement of religion and one from Los Angeles County, where the county commission voted to remove a cross from their seal at the request of the local ACLU. He was careful to say that while he knows the city council that approved the seal with the cross on it was well-meaning, that decision still sends a message of exclusion to those of a different faith, or none at all, and he asked the council to remove it from the shield.

After Clarke spoke, Arlene-Marie, the director of Michigan Atheists, rose to speak on the subject. She spoke of such battles dividing communities and urged the council not to let it go so far as requiring a court case to be filed. After her, Hal Downs, state director of Americans United for Separation of Church and State, took to the podium. He noted that in matters of church and state, majorities do not rule, the Constitution does. And he cited a nearly identical case in Zion, Ill., where a court ruled against the city. He noted that the city made an identical argument to the one being made in Frankenmuth, that the religious symbol is merely an acknowledgment of the history and tradition of the town, but the court rejected that argument.

The city council, sitting in front of no fewer than three representations of that shield behind them — one on a flag, one on a white plastic hanging and one a beautiful and intricate woodcarving of the shield — listened politely, if tersely. After each of the three speakers Mayor Gary Ruprecht responded only with “your comments have been noted,” a response he would not repeat after any of the residents who spoke against Clarke’s request. In fact, the city council had already made up its mind about the issue and after the first three speakers had their say, the mayor read the following statement:

The city government is firmly committed to protect (sic) our Frankenmuth shield in its entirety. We believe from a historical perspective that our shield accurately reflects the 1845 founding of our community. We have utilized it on a local, national and international basis to reflect the heritage of Frankenmuth for 46 years. Should we be formally challenged, we will vigorously respond and will not waiver (sic) in its defense.

After that statement was read, a number of local residents rose to speak against Clarke’s proposal, and the emotion began to flow. The first woman, saying that she promised her husband she wouldn’t say a word at this meeting but was so overcome that she just had to, spoke passionately if incoherently. She noted that she and her husband are Catholic and when they moved to the community, they were warmly welcomed by the Lutheran majority. But she had some in the room scratching their heads when she said:

“Our boys fighting for your freedom right now, many of them are wearing crosses around their neck. Some of them are Jewish. Maybe they