Monuments, Schmonuments

[Michael McConnell]

I don't think *anyone* is honored *just* for their religious role,
certainly not Brigham Young and probably not even Billy Graham.
Trying to distinguish is not judicially manageable, and would lead to
divisive (and pointless) litigation and biased results. Moreover, I
do not see why it is necessary, either as a matter of constitutional
law or of cultural civility and respect. Depending on the context,
purely religious figures, if there are any such things, can be
honored by public displays. In a recent National Park Service display
at Seneca Falls, Mary Baker Eddy was one of 15 19th century women who
were the subjects of laudatory displays. That seems to me entirely
appropriate. People ought to get used to the fact that this is a
pluralistic and multi-cultural society, and that religion is part of
it. There is not and should not be a hegemonic secular "canon" of
public monuments. It does not insult persons of other faiths (or no
faith) to honor an important figure from a religion, any more than it
insults persons of other ethnicities to honor ethnic festivals like
Mexican Independence Day or St. Patrick's Day.
-- Michael McConnell (U of Utah)