The local municipal building wasn’t structurally sound, so the town decided to use a church. Nine churches and synagogues are used in the area, but this Catholic church had the audacity to have a crucifix in its “community room” where the polling would take place. Somebody raised a stink, and, for a time, the town considered ordering everybody to cover all religious statues, symbols, etc.
I guess as a Catholic it’s difficult to understand the issue. In my experience, there are two kinds of Catholics (I’ve been them both). One kind votes after carefully considering a politician’s views and how they fit into the Church’s teachings on issues of morality and social responsibility. These voters don’t need a crucifix to remind them how to vote. The other kind of Catholics vote the way they want to vote with little or no regard for morality. They wouldn’t be likely to even notice the crucifix, and, if they did, wouldn’t trouble their minds in the least with silly questions like WWJD.
I suppose the main concern was for non-Catholics who might not be comfortable with overt religious art. I’m curious if these people have every been in an art museum. The National Gallery of Art – federally funded and part of the Smithsonian – has more images of Christ and the saints than any church I’ve ever been in (in America). Religious art is okay in a museum, but is offensive in a church?
I guess the town eventually saw things the way I do, and decided that if anybody were truly uncomfortable with a statue of the crucified Christ staring at you in agony as you pull the lever for “Catholic” twice-divorced, abortion-is-okay-with-me Rudy Guiliani, then they could get an absentee ballot or request a different polling station. Or perhaps the fear that all churches would decide they would rather not help out with the polling convinced them to be reasonable.