Page 13 of 24 FirstFirst ... 3111213141523 ... LastLast
Results 121 to 130 of 237

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

  1. #121
    Sage

    Mason66's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Last Seen
    Today @ 07:10 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    19,444

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

    Quote Originally Posted by Deuce View Post
    Why does a cross represent such a memorial? What's the origin of using a crucifix in memory of something?
    When it was put up that was its intention and everybody knew it.

    Did this cross have a dead Jesus on it? If not it was not a crucifix.

  2. #122
    Sage

    Mason66's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Last Seen
    Today @ 07:10 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    19,444

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

    Quote Originally Posted by Napoleon View Post
    This particular cross has a sordid legal history. In a nutshell, a Christian group lied to the State and the taxpayers, claiming they were building and maintaining a war memorial. They were bilking the State for a war memorial that didn't exist. This cross and the surrounding area were basically being used as an outdoor church and it was always advertised as an "Easter Cross" with no signage, flags, or even plaques indicating that it was a war memorial until they were, rightfully, sued. This place isn't a war memorial, it isn't treated as one, and the tax payers shouldn't have to either pay for it or look at it IMO.
    The taxpayers are now going to pay to take it down.

  3. #123
    Guru
    WorldWatcher's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 05:39 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    3,041

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

    Quote Originally Posted by joko104 View Post
    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.

    You realize...

    (a) there are no veterans buried on Mt. Soledad, and

    (b) the history of the Cross had absolutely nothing to do with veterans until we became a convenient tool to try to forestall a Cross dedicated, not to veterans, but to "Our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ".

    (c) Veteran's cemeteries provide a resting place for all veterans irregardless of faith, the symbology on the marker is chosen by the deceased (or next of kin if there is no directive) and are not imposed by the government. They have symbols for various Christian sects, Muslims, Wiccans, Jews, and even Atheists.


    >>>>

  4. #124
    Sage
    Perotista's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Georgia
    Last Seen
    Today @ 07:19 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    17,928
    Blog Entries
    24

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

    Quote Originally Posted by Paschendale View Post
    Because this country is culturally dominated by one religion that pushes out all the others. Just because something is a tradition doesn't mean it's right.
    You asked for a military symbol, now you have it. Take a trip across Europe and view all the crosses on U.S. military graves there, so it is just not this country. In the Islands of the Pacific during WWII where we left many dead, look there. If one symbol illiterates the burial marker of the the military it is the cross. You can go way back into history, it is the cross that is used more than any other type of grave marker.
    This Reform Party member thinks it is high past time that we start electing Americans to congress and the presidency who put America first and their political party further down the line. But for way too long we have been electing Republicans and Democrats who happen to be Americans instead of Americans who happen to be Republicans and Democrats.

  5. #125
    Sage


    Thoreau72's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Last Seen
    12-08-17 @ 09:10 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    20,267

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

    Quote Originally Posted by joko104 View Post
    All Native American reservations are "federal land." Accordingly you also must believe that all religious symbols and icons of their religions also must be removed including from their ancient burial sites and their houses on such federal land, correct? That a condition of staying on the reservation is to display themselves as atheists - now and historically.
    We don't need "atheism" designated as any federal policy or goal.

    The government being neutral on all matters religious is NOT a statement in favor of atheism. Why is the notion of neutrality so hard to understand?

    To answer your question regarding Native American symbols and icons, no I do not believe they should be removed from burial sites. That seems an absurd question.

  6. #126
    Sage
    j-mac's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    South Carolina
    Last Seen
    12-08-17 @ 03:46 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    30,272

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

    The Mount Soledad cross won’t be coming down anytime soon, says Mt. Soledad Memorial Association

    Press Information | Mt. Soledad Veterans Memorial
    There are many plaques there, honoring vets from the Revolutionary war, to the present conflicts in the ME. This guy Steve Trunk, (whom is furthering the case) is not unlike many other atheists I have had the pleasure, or should I say displeasure to meet in person throughout my life, according to what I read of his statements, and pronouncements. He seems to think it is all about him. As he states on the FFRF website, "The presence of the cross makes me feel as if I’m a second-class citizen." Awwwww, poor wittle baby...Does it hurt your wittle feewings? What a putz!

    There is a letter about what this attack by groups like FFRF, and the "humanists" are up to in this country, and is it any surprise that the 9th Circuit is firmly on their side, as a long seen wildly leftist leaning court. The letter says better what I can not myself, it reads in part:

    "The effort to scrub the public square of religious expression and symbols is a threat to religious freedom, runs contrary to our founding documents, and is unfaithful to our history as a free people. It also represents an incorrect application of the Establishment Clause, found in the First Amendment to the United States Constitution.

    That 2011 opinion also demonstrated that the 2005 Supreme Court decision of Van Orden v. Perry, a "ten commandments" case, has made the illogic of Establishment Clause Jurisprudence even more pronounced in the United States.

    Even the convoluted trail left by the Lemon case and its progeny can now be abandoned by a Court, under the ruse of an "exception" to the Lemon analysis, only to be replaced by Judicial whimsy. In other words, unelected Federal Judges now determine whether we can express ourselves as a people who have a religious heritage.

    Federal Judges now make up their own rules by which they decide, on their own, whether a religious symbol, especially a Christian religious symbol, will be allowed to stand on public land or in a public building. There is not even a pretense that the actual words of the Establishment Clause have any effect in this new world of the judicial oligarchy.

    That 224 page opinion rendered by the 9th Circuit in the Mt Soledad case back in 2011 is one of many examples of why it is absolutely essential that we reclaim the "Separation of Powers" doctrine and rein in Federal Judges and Courts. The recent decision of the lower Federal Court only makes it all more urgent. Are we going to begin tearing down other symbols of our history because they have religious symbols within them?

    The Establishment Clause of the First Amendment to the Bill of Rights is best understood as an anti-establishment clause. It was intended to prohibit the "establishment" of one particular religion - in the sense of a Federal or State sponsored Church which mandated adherence from unwilling citizens. The American founders fled coercive approaches to religion which compelled adherence to a particular sect. Yet, they were not anti-religious.

    They were MOST assuredly NOT against religious symbols or religious expression. Our history is filled with them. Or, more accurately, it once was. Religious symbols are no longer seen as a wonderful sign of the history of the West and the American founding by the new Judicial Oligarchs.

    Rather they are seen as a threat to the increasingly hostile secularist order. When they are allowed they must be demonstrated to have been eviscerated of any religious meaning and somehow thereby rendered "secular" and acceptable.

    This 9th Circuit Court opinion showed hostility toward the Cross: [C]onsidering the entire context of the Memorial, the Memorial today remains a predominantly religious symbol. The history and absolute dominance of the Cross are not mitigated by the belated efforts to add less significant secular elements to the Memorial.

    The fact that the Memorial also commemorates the war dead and serves as a site for secular ceremonies honoring veterans cannot overcome the effect of its decades-long religious history...The Memorial's relatively short history of secular usage does not predominate over its religious functions so as to eliminate the message of endorsement that the Cross conveys."

    Those Judges were particularly offended by the size of the cross noting (W)e cannot overlook the fact that the Cross is forty-three feet tall. It physically dominates the Memorial, towering over the secular symbols placed beneath it, and is so large and placed in such a prominent location that it can be seen from miles away.

    Their disjointed legal opinion finally concluded, [A]fter examining the entirety of the Mount Soledad Memorial in context-having considered its history, its religious and non-religious uses, its sectarian and secular features, the history of war memorials and the dominance of the Cross-we conclude that the Memorial, presently configured and as a whole, primarily conveys a message of government endorsement of religion that violates the Establishment Clause.

    Now, Judge Burns has followed the directives of other Judicial Oligarchs and ordered that a beloved part of our history, a Cross which has long honored the war dead, be torn down. Charles LiMandri, a courageous Catholic Lawyer who represents the Mount Soledad Memorial Association, said he was going to Appeal."

    Religious Cleansing in the USA: Federal Judge Orders Mt. Soledad War Memorial Cross Be Torn Down - U.s. - Catholic Online

    Remember friends, scrubbing the public square of any religious references is among the first things done by Communists in communities, largely because of the threat religion poses to a totalitarian state. Just sayin'
    Americans are so enamored of equality that they would rather be equal in slavery than unequal in freedom.

    Alexis de Tocqueville

  7. #127
    Sage
    j-mac's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    South Carolina
    Last Seen
    12-08-17 @ 03:46 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    30,272

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

    The Mount Soledad cross wonít be coming down anytime soon, says Mt. Soledad Memorial Association

    Press Information | Mt. Soledad Veterans Memorial
    There are many plaques there, honoring vets from the Revolutionary war, to the present conflicts in the ME. This guy Steve Trunk, (whom is furthering the case) is not unlike many other atheists I have had the pleasure, or should I say displeasure to meet in person throughout my life, according to what I read of his statements, and pronouncements. He seems to think it is all about him. As he states on the FFRF website, "The presence of the cross makes me feel as if Iím a second-class citizen." Awwwww, poor wittle baby...Does it hurt your wittle feewings? What a putz!

    There is a letter about what this attack by groups like FFRF, and the "humanists" are up to in this country, and is it any surprise that the 9th Circuit is firmly on their side, as a long seen wildly leftist leaning court. The letter says better what I can not myself, it reads in part:

    "The effort to scrub the public square of religious expression and symbols is a threat to religious freedom, runs contrary to our founding documents, and is unfaithful to our history as a free people. It also represents an incorrect application of the Establishment Clause, found in the First Amendment to the United States Constitution.

    That 2011 opinion also demonstrated that the 2005 Supreme Court decision of Van Orden v. Perry, a "ten commandments" case, has made the illogic of Establishment Clause Jurisprudence even more pronounced in the United States.

    Even the convoluted trail left by the Lemon case and its progeny can now be abandoned by a Court, under the ruse of an "exception" to the Lemon analysis, only to be replaced by Judicial whimsy. In other words, unelected Federal Judges now determine whether we can express ourselves as a people who have a religious heritage.

    Federal Judges now make up their own rules by which they decide, on their own, whether a religious symbol, especially a Christian religious symbol, will be allowed to stand on public land or in a public building. There is not even a pretense that the actual words of the Establishment Clause have any effect in this new world of the judicial oligarchy.

    That 224 page opinion rendered by the 9th Circuit in the Mt Soledad case back in 2011 is one of many examples of why it is absolutely essential that we reclaim the "Separation of Powers" doctrine and rein in Federal Judges and Courts. The recent decision of the lower Federal Court only makes it all more urgent. Are we going to begin tearing down other symbols of our history because they have religious symbols within them?

    The Establishment Clause of the First Amendment to the Bill of Rights is best understood as an anti-establishment clause. It was intended to prohibit the "establishment" of one particular religion - in the sense of a Federal or State sponsored Church which mandated adherence from unwilling citizens. The American founders fled coercive approaches to religion which compelled adherence to a particular sect. Yet, they were not anti-religious.

    They were MOST assuredly NOT against religious symbols or religious expression. Our history is filled with them. Or, more accurately, it once was. Religious symbols are no longer seen as a wonderful sign of the history of the West and the American founding by the new Judicial Oligarchs.

    Rather they are seen as a threat to the increasingly hostile secularist order. When they are allowed they must be demonstrated to have been eviscerated of any religious meaning and somehow thereby rendered "secular" and acceptable.

    This 9th Circuit Court opinion showed hostility toward the Cross: [C]onsidering the entire context of the Memorial, the Memorial today remains a predominantly religious symbol. The history and absolute dominance of the Cross are not mitigated by the belated efforts to add less significant secular elements to the Memorial.

    The fact that the Memorial also commemorates the war dead and serves as a site for secular ceremonies honoring veterans cannot overcome the effect of its decades-long religious history...The Memorial's relatively short history of secular usage does not predominate over its religious functions so as to eliminate the message of endorsement that the Cross conveys."

    Those Judges were particularly offended by the size of the cross noting (W)e cannot overlook the fact that the Cross is forty-three feet tall. It physically dominates the Memorial, towering over the secular symbols placed beneath it, and is so large and placed in such a prominent location that it can be seen from miles away.

    Their disjointed legal opinion finally concluded, [A]fter examining the entirety of the Mount Soledad Memorial in context-having considered its history, its religious and non-religious uses, its sectarian and secular features, the history of war memorials and the dominance of the Cross-we conclude that the Memorial, presently configured and as a whole, primarily conveys a message of government endorsement of religion that violates the Establishment Clause.

    Now, Judge Burns has followed the directives of other Judicial Oligarchs and ordered that a beloved part of our history, a Cross which has long honored the war dead, be torn down. Charles LiMandri, a courageous Catholic Lawyer who represents the Mount Soledad Memorial Association, said he was going to Appeal."

    Religious Cleansing in the USA: Federal Judge Orders Mt. Soledad War Memorial Cross Be Torn Down - U.s. - Catholic Online

    Remember friends, scrubbing the public square of any religious references is among the first things done by Communists in communities, largely because of the threat religion poses to a totalitarian state. Just sayin'
    Americans are so enamored of equality that they would rather be equal in slavery than unequal in freedom.

    Alexis de Tocqueville

  8. #128
    Tavern Bartender
    Constitutionalist
    American's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Virginia
    Last Seen
    Today @ 04:19 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    76,277

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

    Quote Originally Posted by fallujah_baby View Post
    One thing it represented was repression of atheist thought. It's also a huge violation of the separation of church and state. It's got to go. There is a Constitution you know.
    So as long as the cross is there, you can't think?
    "He who does not think himself worth saving from poverty and ignorance by his own efforts, will hardly be thought worth the efforts of anybody else." -- Frederick Douglass, Self-Made Men (1872)
    "Fly-over" country voted, and The Donald is now POTUS.

  9. #129
    Guru
    WorldWatcher's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 05:39 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    3,041

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

    Quote Originally Posted by j-mac View Post
    There are many plaques there, honoring vets from the Revolutionary war, to the present conflicts in the ME.

    And not one of them was there between the 1954 construction and 1989 when the City lost the lawsuit regarding the Mt. Soledad Easter Cross (as it was known prior to the defenders trying to rewrite the history of the Cross).


    >>>>

  10. #130
    Sage
    j-mac's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    South Carolina
    Last Seen
    12-08-17 @ 03:46 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    30,272

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

    Quote Originally Posted by WorldWatcher View Post
    And not one of them was there between the 1954 construction and 1989 when the City lost the lawsuit regarding the Mt. Soledad Easter Cross (as it was known prior to the defenders trying to rewrite the history of the Cross).


    >>>>
    Are they there now, and in place as a war memorial? yes, or no?
    Americans are so enamored of equality that they would rather be equal in slavery than unequal in freedom.

    Alexis de Tocqueville

Page 13 of 24 FirstFirst ... 3111213141523 ... 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
  •