I have a dilemma. You see, in an attempt to clean up their image,the Ku Klux Klan has put in a bid to officially “adopt a highway”near St. Louis, Mo. Andwhile the attempt was rebuffed, and is currently in appellate court,part of me feels they should be able to get involved with theprogram.
I know you’re probably looking at the picture of me and thinking,”How could she?”
Well, there should be some conditions.
The Los Angeles Times reports that U.S. District Judge Stephen N.Limbaugh (uncle to Rush) in St. Louis ruled that the Klan had a freespeech right to participate in the state’s program on an equal basis.
“The Klan believes in racial segregation and white supremacy,” thejudge said, but “the Constitution of the United States protects (its)right to express that ideology as freely as one who’s views societyembraces … (The state) cannot use its regulations to target theKlan’s unfortunate beliefs.”
The judge is right. Our Bill of Rights protects the Klan, andallows members to say whatever they want. I would hope the Klanwouldn’t engage in any criminal activity, especially since itsmotivation is to clean up its image while cleaning up the highway.
Alot of the controversy with this issue is the sign that might beerected by the state should they allow the Klan to adopt a section ofa highway. The Missouri Department of Transportation (DOT) posted itsrules and regulations on the Web Site, www.modot.state.mo.us. Underthe DOT’s “Sign Specifications,” number three reads “The erection ofa sign is not a requirement for participation in the program. Thecommission, at its sole discretion, may refuse to erect a sign.” Butwhile the appeals are pending, the state has been forced to put upseveral signs on Interstate 55 that say: “Adopt-A-Highway. TheKnights of Ku Klux Klan, Realm of Missouri.”
Vandals removed the signs immediately after they were erected.
Taking into consideration what the Klan stands for, the stateshould allow the Klan to have its stretch of highway, but refuse theposting of a sign. By doing this they test the motivations of theKlan by seeing if they’ll stick with the program without thepublicity the sign would bring. I guarantee that whatever stretch ofland the Klan might get, sign or no sign, those that drive iteveryday will know that this highway is the Klan’s. So, if it isserious about adding environmentally friendly to its organization’smission, it’ll accept these terms.
Can you imagine driving down a highway, where upon driving forhours, you see a federal sign that says “This highway has beenadopted by the Knights of the Ku Klux Klan?”
What if you miss that this is an adopt-a-highway sign and suddenlyfear that the sign might have read “City Limits, Knights of the KuKlux Klan, Missouri.” Knights of the KKK could be the name of a city.
That wouldn’t be good, especially since you can’t make U-turns onhighways.
No matter what, if the Klan can abide by the rules set forth bythe state, I say give them their highway to clean. There can be noburning crosses, no late-night clean ups (it’s against the rules tobeautify between dusk and dawn) and no meetings. There can be noKlansman wear.
Missouri’s DOT site also states that “the program is not intendedas a means of providing a public forum for the participants to use inpromoting name recognition or political causes.”
So, don’t give them a sign.
The Klan may explain their urge to adopt-a-highway by reportingthat they want to clean up their image. The reputation of the Klancan only be so improved upon. So, those of you who fear that the Klanmight become a respectable organization because it is allowed toclean up a highway, don’t. Let the Klan embark on doing somethingpositive — with conditions, of course.
A positive aspect of the Klan having a highway to clean-up is thatmembers may spend less time on preaching the hate that fills themdaily.
— Feather Ives is a public administration senior. Send e-mail todaletter2000@hotmail.com.
–This column does not necessarily reflect the opinion of TheDaily Aztec.
