Page 10 of 24 FirstFirst ... 8910111220 ... LastLast
Results 91 to 100 of 237

Thread: U.S. judge orders landmark California cross taken down

  1. #91
    Sage


    Thoreau72's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 11:27 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    20,305

    Re: U.S. judge orders landmark California cross taken down

    Quote Originally Posted by TurtleDude View Post
    its a much ado about nothing. The people whining have stupid grievances that extend far past faux indignation over a cross
    I agree that it's much ado about nothing.

    But it seems that if we are going to tell ourselves that we live under the rule of law, well then, we need to live under the rule of law.

    As so many wise men have observed over the centuries, it's best to render unto Caesar what is his. The unholy marriage of state and church is bad news for the citizens.

  2. #92
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Canada, Costa Rica
    Last Seen
    05-16-16 @ 09:45 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    31,645

    Re: U.S. judge orders landmark California cross taken down

    Quote Originally Posted by Deuce View Post
    You'll have strong feelings when it's Islamic symbols instead of yours.
    Will I? Are you trying to hijack the thread?

  3. #93
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Canada, Costa Rica
    Last Seen
    05-16-16 @ 09:45 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    31,645

    Re: U.S. judge orders landmark California cross taken down

    Quote Originally Posted by Henry David View Post
    I agree that it's much ado about nothing.

    But it seems that if we are going to tell ourselves that we live under the rule of law, well then, we need to live under the rule of law.

    As so many wise men have observed over the centuries, it's best to render unto Caesar what is his. The unholy marriage of state and church is bad news for the citizens.
    I don't think there is any 'marriage' here and certainly no government promotion. Sometimes a cross is just a cross.

  4. #94
    Sage


    Thoreau72's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 11:27 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    20,305

    Re: U.S. judge orders landmark California cross taken down

    Quote Originally Posted by Grant View Post
    I don't think there is any 'marriage' here and certainly no government promotion. Sometimes a cross is just a cross.
    Strict neutrality.

  5. #95
    Outer space potato man

    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 11:29 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    51,849

    Re: U.S. judge orders landmark California cross taken down

    Quote Originally Posted by TurtleDude View Post
    this country was founded by Islamists?
    I'm really not sure how you concluded this from my post. Please elaborate.
    He touched her over her bra and underpants, she says, and guided her hand to touch him over his underwear
    Quote Originally Posted by Lutherf View Post
    We’ll say what? Something like “nothing happened” ... Yeah, we might say something like that.

  6. #96
    Sage
    apdst's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Bagdad, La.
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 10:38 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    76,520

    Re: U.S. judge orders landmark California cross taken down

    Quote Originally Posted by Henry David View Post
    I agree that it's much ado about nothing.

    But it seems that if we are going to tell ourselves that we live under the rule of law, well then, we need to live under the rule of law.

    As so many wise men have observed over the centuries, it's best to render unto Caesar what is his. The unholy marriage of state and church is bad news for the citizens.
    In that case, the government should have never taken possession of the property, since the cross was already there at the time.
    Quote Originally Posted by Top Cat View Post
    At least Bill saved his transgressions for grown women. Not suggesting what he did was OK. But he didn't chase 14 year olds.

  7. #97
    Guru
    WorldWatcher's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Last Seen
    12-14-17 @ 07:50 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    3,041

    Re: U.S. judge orders landmark California cross taken down

    Quote Originally Posted by apdst View Post
    In that case, the government should have never taken possession of the property, since the cross was already there at the time.

    Technically speaking it was "a cross" at the time, not "the cross". IIRC there was a wooden cross erected in 1913 (which is one of the reasons why the cross being there as a memorial to WWI, WWII, and Korean War seems odd). Originally the property was private property and deaded to the city when the owner passed. The current cross replaced the original (or a wooden) cross after it fell down in a storm.


    >>>>

  8. #98
    Sage
    apdst's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Bagdad, La.
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 10:38 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    76,520

    Re: U.S. judge orders landmark California cross taken down

    Quote Originally Posted by WorldWatcher View Post
    Technically speaking it was "a cross" at the time, not "the cross". IIRC there was a wooden cross erected in 1913 (which is one of the reasons why the cross being there as a memorial to WWI, WWII, and Korean War seems odd). Originally the property was private property and deaded to the city when the owner passed. The current cross replaced the original (or a wooden) cross after it fell down in a storm.


    >>>>
    The property was seized through eminent domain and the cross was already there at that time.
    Quote Originally Posted by Top Cat View Post
    At least Bill saved his transgressions for grown women. Not suggesting what he did was OK. But he didn't chase 14 year olds.

  9. #99
    Slayer of the DP Newsbot
    danarhea's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Houston, TX
    Last Seen
    Today @ 04:43 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    39,763

    Re: U.S. judge orders landmark California cross taken down

    Quote Originally Posted by Henry David View Post
    I agree that it's much ado about nothing.

    But it seems that if we are going to tell ourselves that we live under the rule of law, well then, we need to live under the rule of law.

    As so many wise men have observed over the centuries, it's best to render unto Caesar what is his. The unholy marriage of state and church is bad news for the citizens.
    Actually, the marriage of church and state is mentioned in the Bible too. It's called "The Beast". Read the book of Revelations.
    The ghost of Jack Kevorkian for President's Physician: 2016

  10. #100
    Guru
    WorldWatcher's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Last Seen
    12-14-17 @ 07:50 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    3,041

    Re: U.S. judge orders landmark California cross taken down

    Quote Originally Posted by apdst View Post
    The property was seized through eminent domain and the cross was already there at that time.
    I know the first cross was erected in 1913 and the City took over the property in 1916, however I could have confused it with the Mt. Helix case where Cyrus Yawkey deeded the property to San Diego County in 1925 before his passing.

    Been a number of years since I've looked into the matter so I just reviewed the decision in Murphy v. Bilbray (which I had in a old folder where I keep reference documents sometimes when involved with debates). The history reviewed in the court documents clearly indicate Mr. Yawkey deeded the property to the county however doesn't say one way or the other for the Mt. Soledad property - only that the city acquired it in 1916.

    So we'll go with the city using eminent domain.


    >>>>

Page 10 of 24 FirstFirst ... 8910111220 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •