• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

U.S. judge orders landmark California cross taken down

Which part of the constitution are you referring to in this claim?

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

This was meant for all religions or those who do not have a religion. Most likely (some statements at least suggest this from something I read) the founding father did not want any religion singled out. Religion was not the same as Christianity (as radio talking head Bryan Fisher said) but religion in the eyes of the founding fathers (at least some of the most important ones) included atheists, Muslims, Jews and other religions.
 
How is it evading the issue? It offers a direct compromise that maintains the historical integrety of the site while removing the dilemma of public ownership.

There should not be a dilemma regarding public ownership of such a monument. This judge overreached IMHO and should never have ordered the removal. These kind of things have to be resolved by changing the laws in the US and not by handing monuments over to private groups.

Why, because you got some bug up your ass against religion? Sorry, chief, the world doesn't cater to your pet peeves

I am sorry, but "the cross should have never been removed" must not mean the same to you as it means to me. I objected to the removal of the cross. So please, do not accuse me of things I did not write or mean.

Actually the issue seems it offers a resolution you don't like

No, it is not a solution. Atheists should fight important battles and not petty ones like this cross issue (on this monument).

I'm not following

A cross (like on a grave) is not a particularly religious item and should not have lead to it's removal from this monument. I do not think the first amendment should be used for removing this cross from this monument.
 
I was not aware this monument was in Japan or in Germany, also I was not aware that this monument was for German and Japanese war dead. This is still an American monument last time and I checked for US victims of war.
Therefore inclusiveness is not an issue.

Atheist trivialize nothing and we also do not make ridiculous remarks about swastika's or the rising sun. This is a monument to all the fallen US service men, no matter if they are Jewish, Muslim (not likely but who knows), native American faith, Christians or no faith.
Right. I feel sure that was the intention.

That some dumb atheist objected to a cross and that a dumb judge agreed with him is not the fault of "Atheists" but of one or a few atheists. Just like there are a whole host of different christians there are a lot of different atheists, some go insane about something stupid like a simple funeral cross but most (most likely) could care less. They are much more bothered with praying at school (through the intercom) than a cross on a monument.

Yes, these are dumb atheists and smarter atheists should speak out about this silliness. It only gives atheism a bad name. Leftists and rightists should do the same.
 
This was meant for all religions or those who do not have a religion. Most likely (some statements at least suggest this from something I read) the founding father did not want any religion singled out. Religion was not the same as Christianity (as radio talking head Bryan Fisher said) but religion in the eyes of the founding fathers (at least some of the most important ones) included atheists, Muslims, Jews and other religions.

Yes, and in the case of the cross in question Congress is clearly not establishing a religion but it does appear to be prohibiting the free expression thereof.
 
:doh
It does no injustice. Whether when it was erected, or now.
Most of those folks who it represents were Christians.

But not all. And there's the rub. The United States military is not an armed branch of Christianity, it is an armed branch of the American government.
 
The only question I have is whether the land the cross is on is owned by the government or a private individual. It does not say in the article. If owned by the government, I can see the decision.... maybe. Was this really an endorsement of religion, or is it similar to a tombstone, which would be a memorial, as opposed to a religious symbol. Of course if the land is owned by a private individual, then what is erected up there is none of the government's damn business.

Your thoughts on this?

EDIT: My bad. The land IS owned by the government, so the first question remains. Is the cross there really an endorsement of a religion or not? I believe it's not, and therefore disagree with the decision.

NOTE: I need to learn to read my own damn links. LOL.
own town
o

I think it's time to turn the tables. They want to ban public display of people's religious and traditions beliefs. How would it look if America banned the display of groups' rights to display those beliefs? Is it OK to ban displays of Menorah's? All displays of religious or traditional displays banned in U.S?
You, as a child, benefited at the wonder of the downtown decorations. Don't deny it to the next generation. It's a tradition Americans have always passed on to the enjoyment of the next generation. If you were deprived, don't pass on your pain to the next generation.
Y
 
There should not be a dilemma regarding public ownership of such a monument. This judge overreached IMHO and should never have ordered the removal. These kind of things have to be resolved by changing the laws in the US and not by handing monuments over to private groups.



I am sorry, but "the cross should have never been removed" must not mean the same to you as it means to me. I objected to the removal of the cross. So please, do not accuse me of things I did not write or mean.



No, it is not a solution. Atheists should fight important battles and not petty ones like this cross issue (on this monument).



A cross (like on a grave) is not a particularly religious item and should not have lead to it's removal from this monument. I do not think the first amendment should be used for removing this cross from this monument.

Ahh, my mistake. I thought you were arguing that it SHOULD be taken down. While I agree that it's a petty issue and that it's historical character should be protected, I also take no issue with transferring it to private ownership
 
The simplest solution would have been to allow the land to be sold to a private group that would maintain the memorial. As I understood it, a few private groups offerred and the atheists blocked the sale.

Atheists are all about removing all signs of religion in the United States, especially the Christian religion. They want everything gone, completely. They would take the cross off your grandmother's gravestone, dig her up and take the cross off her neck if they could get away with it.
 
I was not aware this monument was in Japan or in Germany, also I was not aware that this monument was for German and Japanese war dead. This is still an American monument last time and I checked for US victims of war.

Atheist trivialize nothing and we also do not make ridiculous remarks about swastika's or the rising sun. This is a monument to all the fallen US service men, no matter if they are Jewish, Muslim (not likely but who knows), native American faith, Christians or no faith.

That some dumb atheist objected to a cross and that a dumb judge agreed with him is not the fault of "Atheists" but of one or a few atheists. Just like there are a whole host of different christians there are a lot of different atheists, some go insane about something stupid like a simple funeral cross but most (most likely) could care less. They are much more bothered with praying at school (through the intercom) than a cross on a monument.


Yes, cuz that evil prayer is the cause of all our problems isn't it?
 
Yes, cuz that evil prayer is the cause of all our problems isn't it?

No, and if it is a private school with no government funding they can go ahead and pray. I would even not have an issue with given a moment before class to say a silent and personal prayer. I am objecting to it being done over the intercom/pa system at schools.
 
There is no such thing as freedom from religion and quite frankly I would love to see the outcome of such a case..

I don't even know where atheists get their arguments from - not only that but have a desire to **** on others happiness - weather it's religious content or just having a good time at Christmas...
 
There is no such thing as freedom from religion and quite frankly I would love to see the outcome of such a case..

I don't even know where atheists get their arguments from - not only that but have a desire to **** on others happiness - weather it's religious content or just having a good time at Christmas...
It would be a bleak world without Christmas. In fact atheism itself suggests a form of bleakness.
 
Yes, cuz that evil prayer is the cause of all our problems isn't it?

Yes, who can really measure the harm that "Do unto others as you would have them do unto you" has done. Or the 23rd Psalm.
 
It would be a bleak world without Christmas. In fact atheism itself suggests a form of bleakness.


One of the "Al Shraptons" of atheism is from my general area and we just ignore him and his bitch daughter (who he brainwashes to be his replacement)...

He has way more success at the national level but I think it's funny that the towns around him just ignore him... He doesn't even try anymore - he goes picking fights where he can find them or people will accept his stupidity.
 
One of the "Al Shraptons" of atheism is from my general area and we just ignore him and his bitch daughter (who he brainwashes to be his replacement)...

He has way more success at the national level but I think it's funny that the towns around him just ignore him... He doesn't even try anymore - he goes picking fights where he can find them or people will accept his stupidity.

With all the craziness they're coming up with they're certainly becoming easier to ignore.
 
Atheists are all about removing all signs of religion in the United States, especially the Christian religion. They want everything gone, completely. They would take the cross off your grandmother's gravestone, dig her up and take the cross off her neck if they could get away with it.

That's my official title at the Atheist Union for the Assault of Good Christian People - "Graverobbing Cross Nabber".
 
It would be a bleak world without Christmas. In fact atheism itself suggests a form of bleakness.

The world would be a better place without religion and the religious types. Much safer, kinder, wealthier.
 
The world would be a better place without religion and the religious types. Much safer, kinder, wealthier.

Do you have any examples to support that claim? The only officially atheistic countries I know of were Communist, or 'Progressives' as many called themselves, and they didn't do so well.
 
Do you have any examples to support that claim? The only officially atheistic countries I know of were Communist, or 'Progressives' as many called themselves, and they didn't do so well.

Religiosity and intelligence - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

There is a negative correlation between IQ and religion. The higher your iq the less likely you are to be religious. The worst countries in the world are the most severely religious. The best countries are the least religious.

There is a positive correlation between IQ and many things such as crime, violence, generosity, wealth, etc.

Almost all geniuses are atheist as well as most of the greatest thinkers in history.

Overall atheist are far superior to religious folk in most areas, but many are too stupid to realize this.
 
Religiosity and intelligence - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

There is a negative correlation between IQ and religion. The higher your iq the less likely you are to be religious. The worst countries in the world are the most severely religious. The best countries are the least religious.

There is a positive correlation between IQ and many things such as crime, violence, generosity, wealth, etc.

Almost all geniuses are atheist as well as most of the greatest thinkers in history.

Overall atheist are far superior to religious folk in most areas, but many are too stupid to realize this.

So all the Communists were geniuses, or had very high I.Q.s anyway. Still didn't seem to do all that well despite this superiority.

You also seem to lump all religions together as though each is the same as the next. This is absurd.
 
So all the Communists were geniuses, or had very high I.Q.s anyway. Still didn't seem to do all that well despite this superiority.

You also seem to lump all religions together as though each is the same as the next. This is absurd.

Commies are genius atheists? Wha? Not sure what you're talking about.

Religion in Russia - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

13% Atheist in Soviet Russia
 
Can't believe it was ordered to be taken down. This memorial means a lot to all of us here in San Diego. If atheists would fight against real battles of infringement of their rights and not war memorials, I would be the first to help them. In this case though, they are being blatant assholes.
 
Isn't it your argument that atheists are smarter than religious folk? I can only point to officially atheist countries to provide some evidence for your claim.



Then they must be less intelligent then they were when the Communists were completely in charge. Religion in the Soviet Union - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Interesting I never read much about that. Forcing atheism at the government level is pretty messed up, certainly not the work of intelligent people. Of course it may have just been a bid to break the influence of religion so the state held total power and control, totalitarianism.
 
Interesting I never read much about that. Forcing atheism at the government level is pretty messed up, certainly not the work of intelligent people. Of course it may have just been a bid to break the influence of religion so the state held total power and control, totalitarianism.

And yet, after all those decades of trying to stifle religion, through murder, theft and destruction, it seems to have made a comeback. Perhaps there is more to this religion deal than we think.
 
Back
Top Bottom