CBS 21 Community

kheist89:

here how about this.... what would've happened if the township went out and placed it there, not because anybody asked them to, but just because they wanted to.... the township has the right to do whatever they want to do with that piece of land and they basically did that.... they chose to allow the Labe family to place a cross at that spot in memory of their son, which is doing whatever the township wants to do with it, which the township has the "right-of-way" to do... so there isnt anything that can be done... the cross is going to be placed back out where it originally stood and thats where it will always stand.  its just how life is and we all have to get used to it.  and no im not a christian (im agnostic) so im not saying this because of that reason.... its the fact that its an accepted thing to do, and now its such a big contraversary.  if a loved one of anybody on this forum died in an accident at my property, and that person wanted to place any other religious symbol in place for rememberance because that goes with there religion, i would also stand behind that person.... its just the cross is such a widely accepted symbol so that is what is normally placed.... what im saying is i wouldnt care if you painted a rock saying "in loving memory of (whoever)" at the scene instead of a cross because its no different than a cross in my eyes.  i understand its hard to look at a cross near your home like that and have to be reminded of somebody dying there everyday.... but i also have to deal with it.... i drive by that exact spot everyday going to and from work so i would also have to deal with that cross, granted maybe not as much as that family would, but i still have to deal with it everyday as well.

If the township placed a religious symbol of any kind anywhere on "their" property or any citizen's property they open themselves up to lawsuits for violating church/state separation.  Plain and simple.

How many times do I have to say that just because something may be perceived by some to be widely accepted, it doesn't make it right.  That is a very weak arguement.

Accepting the "that's just the way life is, get used to it," stance allows people to become oppressed. 

The homeowner needs to call PennDOT and have them remove the memorial.  Here is a little blurb from PennDOT's website at: 

http://www.dot.state.pa.us/Penndot/Districts/district5.nsf/D5%20FAQ?OpenForm&AutoFramed#property

Q.  What is an encroachment?
A.  An encroachment is any object placed without permission within the legal limits of a highway right of way. Some examples include signs, fences, walls, and lights. Objects generally are not permitted in the right of way unless the objects serve an official highway purpose (utility poles and properly placed mailboxes are exceptions) but still require a permit for occupying right of way.
           
   
Q.  What is PennDOT's responsibility regarding right of way encroachments?
A.  PennDOT provides the owner of an encroachment with a written request to remove it. If the encroachment is not removed, PennDOT is authorized to remove it and to collect removal costs from the owner. Also, the state highway law provides a penalty for encroachment violations, upon summary conviction.

My heart goes out to Michael's family and friends. I know what it is like to have lost a family member and  friends in automobile accidents. But the side of the road where their lives were lost aren't where they spent their lives. They are now and forever in our hearts and memories. That is something that no one can take from us.

Going to the township isn't going to solve any problems. If anything, it's just going to make things worse. The township and/or government have the right to put road signs and things of that nature on the right of way land that belongs to the property owner. It's not up to the township to give you permission to put a memorial on someone else's land. Just because the township has right way doesn't mean that everyone has the right to put memorial anywhere they want. The property owners pay the taxes on the land, not the township. I am sure the property owners will take it further if need be. Losing someone is a tradgey, especially when they are taking unexpectedly. But I am on the property owners side on this. Maybe it would be possible to compromise with a significantly smaller memorial? And not to have talked to the property owners before putting a memorial of that size on their property, is almost asking for a fight. The situation could have possibly been avoided.

 

There is no big deal about that cross being in someone's yard. Deb & John lost there son at that spot, there is no reason for them not to be able to put a cross there. And if they think its to big, they're crazy because it is not to big. It's not like there asking anything much , but to put a cross there. I just can't understand why someone would have a problem with that.

That would be your opinion. Check out the comment above mine and what the law states. It's not about what we want. It's about what's right and what the laws are.

kheist89:

You know you see these crosses placed along side of roads every single day, and nobody ever complains about it.... but one person decides they dont want it up because the father of that family was the first on the scene and doesnt want to be reminded of it everyday and now its such a big contraversy..... in my eyes its absolute bogus that they took it down.   grow up and deal with it... people die everyday because of accidents and crosses are just ways for people to remember those lost....

People don't complain about other memorials because they are usually not on or near someone else's property.  Most are on major roads or highways, distant from residential property.

I still don't see why a car crash is such a special situation.  Families lose loved ones via boating accidents, constructions accidents, industrial accidents, house fires, disease, natural disasters and a host of other ways I didn't list. For each person lost, the family grieves.  I would assume they grieve just as strongly as the Labe family.  Yet, we don't put location memorials for those causes.  Clearly location memorials aren't necessary.

Imagine if more people put these up.  They would be everywhere.  Luckily only a small number of people have put them up and generally away from private property.  This has allowed them to skip under the radar.  Some other people getting away with it doesn't make it right.  Imposing your grief on others isn't right.

  I can see why people have a problem with the sign being put up, But I myself a relitive of Michael Labe think that this is a way of healing for our family.  Now if you have a problem with our family putting a cross to remember the life of a young man then you need to stop worrying about us and direct your attention to the Va school shooting.  Cause im pretty darn sure that they have a line of roses and picture placed in front of the school to remember the lives lost that day.  both of theses tragic events crushed the hearts of alot of people so please dont make it worse for the familys involved.

Going east on Rt.30 from York just before you cross the river into Columbia, there is a wooden cross in the center dividing strip between East and West bound. A couple of summers ago while stopped for an accident, I saw Pendot mowing the grass in that area. As the State employee approached the cross, he got off his mower, pulled out the cross, mowed the area and then replaced the cross.  Wow, my tax dollars at work.

Just who should we complain to if roadside memorials really offend us?  How about Pendot chainsaw department?  Why not just encroach on a persons' land with a chainsaw and trim the cross down level with the ground? It will still be there for the grieving family as a stump in the ground but not acting as an eyesore for those that detest roadside crosses.

Dastardly.

Everyone will have their own opinion concerning roadside memorials.  The grieving family wants the memorial, those who don't know the family, don't care about memorials.  When I pass a memorial on the road I am reminded of how fragile life is.  How quickly life can be lost.  As my children grew I used those memorials as a reminder to them to slow down and be careful when driving. 

As for this specific memorial, I do believe that since the family received permission from the Township and the Township had jurisdiction over the property, no one had a right to take it down.  Ripping it down several hours after it was erected was very cold hearted.

 

debby:

Everyone will have their own opinion concerning roadside memorials.  The grieving family wants the memorial, those who don't know the family, don't care about memorials.  When I pass a memorial on the road I am reminded of how fragile life is.  How quickly life can be lost.  As my children grew I used those memorials as a reminder to them to slow down and be careful when driving. 

As for this specific memorial, I do believe that since the family received permission from the Township and the Township had jurisdiction over the property, no one had a right to take it down.  Ripping it down several hours after it was erected was very cold hearted.

 

The township only has jurisdiction for ROAD purposes, not for the erection of religious symbols, and the cross IS a religious symbol.   I really, really hope the landowners sue the township for violation of their private property rights, and perhaps an attorney will work pro bono on this case.

That said, if I was the property owner, I would have handled it a LITTLE bit more diplomatically under the circumstances.

Everyone grieves differently, and in their own way.  Hopefully, they are able to do it in a way that is productive and healthy.  When memorials are not a danger or safety hazard (as most are not), they should be respected.  They can serve as a reminder of many things in life that are precious and also of things that when we "forget" them, we tend to repeat; until we do remember and chose to learn from them.  Those who are not in touch with their own feelings, resent the ones that are, and will act accordingly.  It is also a sign  of uncompassion, disregard and insensitivity.  I would pray that they would take the time to re-examine their ownselves and make changes that would have a positive impact on others.

  

This is specifically in response to the above reply re: the "religious" symbol.  If someone were to erect the virgin "Mary" and utilize their right to pray and "hail" her, and if someone were to step out and place a "budah" statue out there, no one would care or even respond, but once someone places a cross somewhere it suddenly becomes a "religous symbol" open to attack?  How arrogant.  But then again, Jesus did say, that you can mention "god" but when you name the name of Jesus or what he did for us (the cross) then you tread on some toes....because the truth always hurts before it heals.  However, instead of expressing such negative and intense anger and emotions and claiming that someone's rights have been violated, let's look at what this stands for, the reason is has been placed there, and what it actually means.  NO ONE OWNS anything in this world.  You own the house you live in, not any of the land that surrounds it.   It is eminent domain.  SO lets stop "sounding" off on how "WE" are offended or upset, and take into consideration what the family and friends are experinceing, if that is at all possible!

Please see the response to this down below that is in direct reference to this citing of the "religious symbol" and their claims of rights etc...

Lets make sure we are getting our "Political facts" straight.  First of all, the separation of church and state has nothing to do with this situation.  That was specifically placed to address issues of government funding, and in restraining the government into trying to establish a "national/state religion"everyone HAS to follow.  People conveniently like to make every "faith" issue that is made public a "separation of church/state" when it is not even accurately being used.  If they were catholics, methodist, mormons, or even  a "non-religious/faith" person, no one would care or be so angry towards them.  So please, before you decide to "talk/act" like you "think" you know what you are saying, please check your facts and check your attitude.  It will do everyone some good. 

This is NOT a right of way issue..... it is NOT in the way of anything accept your own anger and feelings that some people are not able to separate or deal with themselves.  Please make sure you KNOW the facts, instead of "thinking" you know the facts.  You are giving deceiving advise that is not accurate and are maligning regulations that are not being used for their intended purpose just so you can promote your own agenda.  THINK first, act last.