Search
Forum Home | Login
terpfan1980
terpfan1980
Join Date 08/2004
+13

In Calif., Cross Site Stirs Discord.. more Church + state

December 6, 2004 10:28:47 AM from JoeUser ForumsJoeUser Forums
From The Washington Post Link here: In Calif., Cross Site Stirs Discord
Church-State Separation Is Issue at Mount Soledad Memorial

By Kimberly Edds
Special to The Washington Post
Monday, December 6, 2004; Page A19
SAN DIEGO -- Perched high atop Mount Soledad in La Jolla, the towering white cross has sat as a memorial to veterans of the Korean War for half a century. It has also become a symbol of a divisive war between the city of San Diego and a local atheist over the issues of separation of church and state, free speech and freedom of religion.
When a ballot measure that would have allowed the city to sell the land was defeated in the November elections, it looked as though the debate was over. The 43-foot cross would be moved.
But two local congressmen have intervened with a proposition they say will keep the cross where it is.
Republican Reps. Randy "Duke" Cunningham and Duncan Hunter want the site -- which now includes more than 1,000 plaques honoring veterans -- named a national war memorial. They added the veterans memorial designation as a rider to a voluminous spending bill approved last month by Congress.
Under the bill, expected to be signed by President Bush soon, the site would become part of the National Park Service but would be maintained by the Mount Soledad Memorial Association, which built the cross as a tribute to veterans in 1954.
"It's a shaky proposition, but if it works, we would be eternally grateful," said William J. Kellogg, president of the memorial association.
Opponents say simply transferring the land to federal hands does not resolve the issue of separation of church and state.
"Crosses belong on churches, not in public parks," said lawyer James McElroy, who is representing atheist Philip Paulson in his efforts to see the cross removed. "It doesn't make any difference if it's on federal land, state land or city land. . . . The government should not be in the business of religion."
...


... more at linked article (well worth reading)

Gotta admire the dedication of the atheists and the ACLU types, but I wish they'd move on to some other causes.

I also really wish that the U.S. Supreme Court would settle some of this issue once and for all.
politics
Locked Post
Search this post
Advanced Search
Subscription Options
Reason for Karma (Optional)
Successfully updated karma reason!
terpfan1980
terpfan1980
Join Date 08/2004
+13
Reply #1 December 6, 2004 11:21:22 AM
from JoeUser ForumsJoeUser Forums
Nor should they be in the business of preventing the free exercise thereof. Why must the majority ALWAYS bow to the will of the few?It gets sickening, it truly does.


There are times when I think it's important to deal with the will of the few, but any more those times are so few and rare. The original (MLK jr style) civil rights issues would be such an area. But again, we've moved on, or should have moved on, from those issues and times.

I agree with the thought though LW. It's just crazy that in the name of not offending one lost soul we have to toss away the will of so many others.
Reason for Karma (Optional)
Successfully updated karma reason!
terpfan1980
Gideon MacLeish
Join Date 06/2004
+1
Reply #2 December 6, 2004 2:38:52 PM
from JoeUser ForumsJoeUser Forums

It disgusts me that the current interpretation of the 1st amendment is that one should not be forced to see religious displays that go against their own beliefs!

Reason for Karma (Optional)
Successfully updated karma reason!
terpfan1980
citahellion
Join Date 05/2003
0
Reply #3 December 6, 2004 3:35:54 PM
from JoeUser ForumsJoeUser Forums
one should not be forced to see religious displays that go against their own beliefs!


Heck, if that's the problem, I've got the perfect solution: poke the guy's eyes out. Now he'll never have to see another cross for as long as he lives.
Reason for Karma (Optional)
Successfully updated karma reason!
terpfan1980
drmiler
Join Date 09/2004
+1
Reply #4 December 6, 2004 7:25:01 PM
from JoeUser ForumsJoeUser Forums
Opponents say simply transferring the land to federal hands does not resolve the issue of separation of church and state.
"Crosses belong on churches, not in public parks," said lawyer James McElroy, who is representing atheist Philip Paulson in his efforts to see the cross removed. "It doesn't make any difference if it's on federal land, state land or city land. . . . The government should not be in the business of religion."
.

But it should solve ALL problems with the transfer. What these idiots don't get is that it becomes a "war memorial" (sort of like the "Arizona" battleship at Pearl) NOT a public "park".
Reason for Karma (Optional)
Successfully updated karma reason!
View all recent posts
Mark all posts as read Delete cookies created by the forum Return to Top
Stardock Forums v        Server Load Time:   Page Render Time:
Stardock Entertainment

Press | Support
Copyright © 2026 Stardock Entertainment. The Political Machine is a trademark of Stardock Entertainment. Steam and the Steam logo are trademarks and/or registered trademarks of Valve Corporation in the U.S. and/or other countries. All rights reserved.