Quantcast Daily Reveille
  • Front Page
  • Classifieds

Pro-life cross display vandalized

Police investigation still pending

Leigh Shelton
Chief Staff Writer

Issue date: 1/25/05 Section: News
  • Print
  • Email
  • Page 1 of 1
DESTRUCTIVE PROTEST: Mary Higdon, a psychology senior and president of Students for Life (below) has lunch on the Parade Ground to watch a small set of red crosses (above) set up by the group Monday. The crosses remain undisturbed after the vandalism and
DESTRUCTIVE PROTEST: Mary Higdon, a psychology senior and president of Students for Life (below) has lunch on the Parade Ground to watch a small set of red crosses (above) set up by the group Monday. The crosses remain undisturbed after the vandalism and
[Click to enlarge]

[Click to enlarge]

Outraged pro-life advocate Mary Higdon sat on the Parade Ground on Monday afternoon to guard the now-defaced tribute to aborted babies. Police recommended she get some kind of security to prevent further vandalism of her exhibit — she said she was all the security she could afford.

Vandals allegedly stole and damaged 3,000 of the 4,000 crosses set up on the Parade Ground this past weekend to protest the anniversary of Roe v. Wade, the court case that legalized abortion 32 years ago. Although police say the investigation is still on-going, cross owners are saying police are not taking the vandalism seriously enough.

Higdon said there are probably about 1,000 crosses left on the grounds.

Shortly after 12 a.m. Monday, an LSUPD officer saw five individuals removing crosses from the Parade Ground.

LSUPD Maj. Ricky Adams said the officer identified them and ordered them to leave. He said the officer did not arrest the individuals, but the investigation is still on-going.

Adams said he anticipates the police department will issue charges of criminal mischief or damaged property later this week.

But Higdon, a psychology senior and president of Students for Life — an anti-abortion campus organization — said Monday was not the first instance of vandalism since the group set up the 4,000 crosses Saturday morning.

Higdon said over the weekend, people stole and burned clusters of crosses, spelled out “pro-choice” in broken crosses, spray painted part of the exhibit and placed hangers — an old symbol of illegal abortion — on the grass.

“This is not a game,” Higdon said, “this is private property.”

The crosses, which were on loan from St. Mary and St. Joseph Family Memorial Foundation, cost $3 a piece to make, Higdon said.

Richard Mahoney, president of the foundation, said they have been lending crosses to Students for Life for 10 years and that vandalism has occurred before, but never like this.

Mahoney is furious, and said that if LSUPD does not handle the situation justly, he has lawyers prepared to file suit.

“Defacing a religious symbol is a hate crime,” Mahoney said.

Mahoney said the vandals damaged more than $9,000 worth of private property, which should be prosecuted as a felony.

But Adams said there is no way of knowing who took what, so the identified individuals probably will be charged with misdemeanor charges.

Mahoney said that if a Jewish or other religious minority group set up an exhibit that vandals defaced, such as the Star of David, the act would not be tolerated.

He said a Christian organization should not have to tolerate it either.

“This is not just a couple of broken crosses,” he said. “This is a symbol of our faith. They spit on Christ, his church and his people.”

But Adams said LSUPD has had similar complaints in past years, and recommended that any time a group put a controversial display like this on the parade grounds, they should get more security.

Higdon said Students for Life should solicit donations for security for the exhibit next year.

The group plans to keep the crosses up until Wednesday.


Page 1 of 1

Article Tools

Viewing Comments 1 - 10 of 24

anonymous868

anonymous868

posted 1/25/05 @ 6:26 AM CST

Once again we see the hate and intolerance of the anti-Christian left.
For years, anti-life protesters have
perpetrated continual violence against pro-life personage and property with little to no media coverage. (Continued…)

26C19FDA-8DB5-41B5-A3A6-A7A7E429D18D

26C19FDA-8DB5-41B5-A3A6-A7A7E429D18D

posted 1/25/05 @ 2:13 PM CST

Randy,

I do not tolerate the actions taken here and it may be true that Pro-choice advocates have been known to do this in the past as you say. However, let me remind you that Pro-lifers have been known in the past to KILL persons that are not of their own. (Continued…)

anonymous868

anonymous868

posted 1/25/05 @ 2:27 PM CST

Randy B., "anti-Christian murderers" have been known to kill doctors who perform abortions. Neither side should be judged by their violent extremists. (Continued…)

anonymous868

anonymous868

posted 1/25/05 @ 3:57 PM CST

This can be what happens when people put up religious symbols on publicly owned property, and the law does nothing.

Question: If they are mourning aborted fetes, why crosses? Surely all those pregnant women aren't christians. (Continued…)

anonymous868

anonymous868

posted 1/25/05 @ 5:57 PM CST

I think the charge of vandalism should be vigorously pursued. However, I think the administration needs to rethink the policy that permits this display. (Continued…)

30CDDAD7-8C28-41AC-AF75-2BA02D8DC8EE

30CDDAD7-8C28-41AC-AF75-2BA02D8DC8EE

posted 1/25/05 @ 9:11 PM CST

Tim,

Persons displaying religious symbols on public property are not guilty of violating the first amendment. If you think about it, no person can be found guilty of violating the first amendment. (Continued…)

anonymous868

anonymous868

posted 1/25/05 @ 9:30 PM CST

Why did you put this in your article:
Mahoney said that if a Jewish or other religious minority group set up an exhibit that vandals defaced, such as the Star of David, the act would not be tolerated. (Continued…)

anonymous868

anonymous868

posted 1/26/05 @ 12:09 AM CST

Tim,

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances. (Continued…)

anonymous868

anonymous868

posted 1/26/05 @ 12:21 AM CST

Glad to see The Reveille covered this.

Josh, student
Baton Rouge
jclayt4@lsu.edu

anonymous868

anonymous868

posted 1/26/05 @ 1:34 AM CST

Tim- Its not unconstitutional; there is no "separation of church and state" clause in the US Constitution. The Constitution states, "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof. (Continued…)

Post a Comment

  • NOTE: Email address will not be published

Type your comment below (html not allowed)

  I understand posting spam or other comments that are unrelated to this article will cause my comment to be flagged for deletion and possibly cause my IP address to be permanently banned from this server.

Advertisement


Advertisement

Poll

Have you ever lied to gain access to Easy Streets?
Submit Vote

View Results

Front Page PDF