Page 7 of 24 FirstFirst ... 5678917 ... LastLast
Results 61 to 70 of 237

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

  1. #61
    Guru
    WorldWatcher's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Last Seen
    11-25-17 @ 10:09 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    3,041

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

    Quote Originally Posted by Grant View Post
    What petty lives some people lead, and then dress it up as though they were performing a public service.

    I know, ignore veteran's for 35 years (1954 to 1989) and then to suddenly try to use them as a shield in a litigation about unlawful use of government property.

    I was a shame.

    It would have been much better if the Mt. Soledad Association had been upfront and just purchased the land themselves in the beginning instead of having the government provide it. The "Easter Cross" on private land would have been no issue at all.


    >>>>

  2. #62
    Noblesse oblige
    Ockham's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    New Jersey
    Last Seen
    01-27-17 @ 07:23 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    23,909
    Blog Entries
    4

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

    Quote Originally Posted by wolfsgirl View Post
    You do realize that the case was brought up by JEWISH veterans not atheists. Right?
    Doesn't matter what group they are...
    “I think if Thomas Jefferson were looking down, the author of the Bill of Rights, on what’s being proposed here, he’d agree with it. He would agree that the First Amendment cannot be absolute.” - Chuck Schumer (D). Yet, Madison and Mason wrote the Bill of Rights, according to Sheila Jackson Lee, 400 years ago. Yup, it's a fact.


  3. #63
    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 WorldWatcher View Post
    I know, ignore veteran's for 35 years (1954 to 1989) and then to suddenly try to use them as a shield in a litigation about unlawful use of government property. I was a shame. It would have been much better if the Mt. Soledad Association had been upfront and just purchased the land themselves in the beginning instead of having the government provide it. The "Easter Cross" on private land would have been no issue at all.>>>
    But instead someone tried to make an issue of it. Think they might ever get a life?

  4. #64
    Bat Chain Puller
    beefheart's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Location
    The burning sands of the desert southwest.
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 11:36 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    19,235

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

    It shouldn't be there, it is government land. No expressions of religion on government property.

    We aren't a theocracy...there are plenty of them in the world if someone wants to live in one.....
    "Those who do not remember the past are condemned to repeat it." George Santayana

  5. #65
    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 beefheart View Post
    It shouldn't be there, it is government land. No expressions of religion on government property.
    Really? Are you quite sure?
    We aren't a theocracy...there are plenty of them in the world if someone wants to live in one.....
    Was there a misunderstanding somewhere?

  6. #66
    Guru
    WorldWatcher's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Last Seen
    11-25-17 @ 10:09 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    3,041

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

    Quote Originally Posted by beefheart View Post
    It shouldn't be there, it is government land. No expressions of religion on government property.
    That's not true. Private citizens are free to express their religion on government property. Happens all the time. People pray on government property. People attend protests on government property and carry signs. The Babtist softwall league will rent picnic space in a park and will have baptisms prior to the chow down.

    You misunderstand what government not respecting the establishment of religion means.

    That is much different then the government being involved in using government property to create a permanent religious promotion.


    >>>>

  7. #67
    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 WorldWatcher View Post
    That's not true. Private citizens are free to express their religion on government property. Happens all the time. People pray on government property. People attend protests on government property and carry signs. The Babtist softwall league will rent picnic space in a park and will have baptisms prior to the chow down.

    You misunderstand what government not respecting the establishment of religion means.

    That is much different then the government being involved in using government property to create a permanent religious promotion.>
    There are also a lot of crosses at Arlington National Cemetery.

  8. #68
    Guru
    WorldWatcher's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Last Seen
    11-25-17 @ 10:09 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    3,041

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

    Quote Originally Posted by Grant View Post
    There are also a lot of crosses at Arlington National Cemetery.
    http://files.schuminweb.com/journal/...emetery-03.jpg
    http://image.shutterstock.com/displa...y-69019126.jpg
    http://i538.photobucket.com/albums/f...ricangrave.jpg
    http://www.pagancentric.org/WordPres...gtonpagans.jpg
    http://i.imgur.com/YsI8u.jpg


    Not quite the same, those were chosen by the indivdiual (or in the absence of a directive, by their next of kin ) to represent the faith of the fallen warriors interned there. The government didn't impose them on the families.

    From the links above you can view not only Christian symbols, but Jewish, Wican, and Atheist symbology.


    >>>>

  9. #69
    Outer space potato man

    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Last Seen
    Today @ 01:19 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    51,709

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

    Quote Originally Posted by Grant View Post
    But you don't have to be a Christian to accept a cross that honors our war dead. That makes the argument about your briefs rather than their deaths.
    Conversely, the dead can be honored with something other than Christian religious symbols. If a giant Islamic symbol were being erected on government land to honor our dead, you'd flip your **** and you know it.
    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.

  10. #70
    King Conspiratard
    Dr. Chuckles's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Last Seen
    02-13-14 @ 03:04 PM
    Lean
    Slightly Conservative
    Posts
    12,895

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

    Quote Originally Posted by Deuce View Post
    Conversely, the dead can be honored with something other than Christian religious symbols. If a giant Islamic symbol were being erected on government land to honor our dead, you'd flip your **** and you know it.
    the cross was present when the govt bought the land. If there was an existing "islamic symbol" on property dating back over a hundred years and was not originally on govt property, it would hard for me to not see it as an existing monument, regardless if the original intent was to express religious ideals, or not

Page 7 of 24 FirstFirst ... 5678917 ... 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
  •