It wasn't until 1989 and it became convenient to use veterans and fallen military that first events were held on the site and plagues began to be mounted. I was stationed in San Diego in the early 80's and made the trip up to the Cross. I used to fly out of Naval Air Station Miramar during training flights for VAW-110 and flew over it many, many times. Nice place, but there was nothing there but a road and the Cross - nothing.
I don't have anything against the Cross, I wish the City in 1954 had turned the plot of land over to the Mt. Soledad Association so that the property rested in private hands and the Cross could be erected - then their wouldn't have been an issue. But the idea that it was erected in 1954 and dedicated as a "War Memorial" is pretty obviously a ruse resulting form the 1989 case. The association, in cahoots with the City, latched on to the idea of starting to call it a "War Memorial" simply as a legal maneuver to foil the case. They used veterans as a convenient shield. And as a military retiree, that does not make me happy.
I don't know what the "best" solution is, that will be argued by better minds then mine. All I know is the public shouldn't swallow "hook-line-n-sinker" the story line about the Cross being erected to honor war veterans. The City and the Mt. Soledad association ignored us for 35-years until we became a means to an end in the legal troubles they had lost.
It should have been considered a historical landmark and left in place. Re-writing history to meet political correctness and ideology of the time is always a mistake.
“Mr. Speaker, I once again find myself compelled to vote against the annual budget resolution for a very simple reason: it makes government bigger.” ― Ron Paul
Timid men prefer the calm of despotism to the tempestuous sea of Liberty. – Thomas Jefferson
Unfortunately, many people have the Taliban mentality that lead to them destroying the ancient Buddhist statute carved into a mountain.
The judge is Taliban and the Taliban wanted an historic religious monument destroyed on behalf of the current religion of government, which is atheism. So the Taliban judge agreed with the Taliban minded minority and erased an historic religious monument. Court.-ordered and imposed ignorance.
A cross has been at that site for a century.
Would the relatives of those buried there have a legitimate suit demanding the remains of their deceased be removed from an atheist cemetery if buried after the cross was there? What right does the government have to change the rules and statement of a cemetery? Eternal life is the core of Christianity.
What about changing the names on the headstones of people named after a Biblical character? Should that be ordered to since it "offends" intolerant people demanding their own ideology, atheism, be declared the national religion and even the deceased retroactively be declared atheists by federal law?
Disturbing a grave site and altering for popularism and trendy logic on ideology is serious business to many people.
Any body buried there was buried there by request. No body was buried there against the wises of the deceased and/or deceased's relatives. They chose to be buried at a cemetery with a symbol of Christianity. A federal judge has now ruled the U.S. Constitution retroactively denies them a Christian final resting place and must instead have an atheist final resting place.
I hope the Obama administration takes this on up to the Supreme Court to decide if atheism is the official government and constitutionally required ideology of the federal government, including retroactively.
The Supreme Court also should decide if the Declaration of Independence should be ordered removed from all government facilities and the text of it banned from all public school text books. It also contradicts atheism ideology.
Last edited by joko104; 12-16-13 at 01:16 AM.
The cross was put up a long time ago as a war memorial and your attitude is that is not allowed because it is in the shape of a cross. You want to deny the majority this symbol because you do not like it.
I am Jewish and I have no problems with a cross as a memorial.
If you think the atheists that died should have a memorial, get them together and make one, but you want to destroy instead of create.
Life has become so easy that people go out and look for stuff to get into.
If you are for taking down this cross, not you John but anybody that wants to answer, what do you suggest putting in its place, or do the dead not deserve any kind of memorial in that spot?