|
is an anti-Christ riddled abomination. |
|
|
most overturned Appeals in the nation? Another triumphant moment for the ACLU, such diligence! Let's hope common sense prevails in SCOTUS. |
|
... the men and women of that 'lost generation' that did not come home from the W.W. I trenches and those that did and are now gone as well should count in such a discussion.
How would a veteran that participated in the Cross raising in the 1930's, now feel to note that his life and his feelings aren't worth a niche under the Constitutional umbrella?
Ours is a jurisprudence that is called a living one. Seems living is reduced to moments that do not include memory and those that came before.
Pathetic. |
|
|
What's next? Are they gonna sue to replace all the crosses at ARlington because it's a 'national' cemetery? And what are they gonna replace them with....the symbol of atheism, no doubt...the flaccid phallus. |
|
|
symbolic of lost men and woman who fought in defense of liberty. a reminder that freedom comes with a price and people have paid that price dearly. a remembrance of those who died so that others could continue to sleep peacefully under the blanket of freedom. that we have to kowtow to one man and a group of morally bankrupt lawyers is un fathomable. and meanwhile there are parts of michigan where they are attempting to instill sharia law. where is the aclu on that one? |
|
|
So desperate to keep the cross on federal land to make a display of how offended one is that the cross is on federal land... |
|
"How would a veteran that participated in the Cross raising in the 1930's, now feel to note that his life and his feelings aren't worth a niche under the Constitutional umbrella?"
How about those who fought and died to protect America in WWI who WEREN'T CHRISTIAN? This monument, claiming to honor all those who served, rather pointedly rejects their sacrifice. |
|
|
No, it doesn't reject anyone. And slighted veterans and their families are not the ones complaining - it is a self-righteous atheist activist. |
|
|
Those WW1 veterans, thinking their sacrifice would actually be honored. I mean, where's the Cross, Star of David, Moon and Crescent, Mistletoe, Ankh, Black Flag, Celtic Knot, Buddha, Sword, Ganesh and every other possible symbol of every possible belief of every single person who marched over there lined up side by side to make sure every single solitary person had something to show that they, personally, were there? Ah, they just weren't that sophisticated back then, were they? Or that petty. |
|
"No, it doesn't reject anyone."
So a monument in the shape of, say, a crescent moon meant to honor a group of Americans wouldn't be objectionable?
Exeye 3:53 PM: "where's the Cross, Star of David, Moon and Crescent, ..."
There are a great many monuments in the world whose shape has no religious significance at all. |
|
"So a monument in the shape of, say, a crescent moon meant to honor a group of Americans wouldn't be objectionable?"
If it had significance to them, I wouldn't consider it objectionable in any way.
The cemetery at Omaha Beach is filled with crosses and stars of David. I was surprised to find the latter symbol when I visited there - not because I thought only Christians fought but because the cross is a traditional grave marker and I only ever noticed crosses in photographs I've seen. I suspect there are many bodies there of non Jews and Christians. |
|
"If it had significance to them, I wouldn't consider it objectionable in any way."
That's the point. The cross has no significance to the non-christians.
"The cemetery at Omaha Beach is filled with crosses and stars of David."
Those were honoring the specific soldiers buried under them. Would you put a star of david over the grave of a known baptist? |
|
"So the U.S. Supreme Court has stepped in to take over the case."
No, those who lost in the court below took it to the SCOTUS. The SCOTUS does not 'step in' unless asked.
RL, the reason the ninth circuit appears to be the most 'overturned' circuit is because it is also the circuit that hears the most cases. |
|
But the cross hasn't been said to offend the families of veterans.
And do you know that all those soldiers were Christian or Jewish? Not a single atheist in that cemetery?
In this particular case, the cross only remains on federal land because the plaintiff's lawyer demands it. |
|
to erect such things....Buddhists were turned down, that's the genesis of this suit. Are you all ok with Buddhist and Muslim and Sikh and Jewish monuments too? How about one that says "god is dead"? Do you understand why we cannot allow this kind of stuff (though my prediction is that this court will leave it there, 5-4).
"Bembry looked after the cross until his death in 1984 but he had never secured permission from the government to erect it.
The area is under the control of the National Park Service and when, in the 1990s, a local resident applied to put up a Buddhist shrine near the cross he was refused permission.
That led a former ranger with the service, Frank Buono, to file a lawsuit calling for the cross to be taken down. It was subsequently boxed over with plywood by order of a federal judge.
Although a Catholic and a veteran, Mr Buono said he wanted to see "neutrality" and that the cross represented an inappropriate expression of religion in public life. "
|
|
|
Easy solution: allow the government to sell the property, as it has wanted to do. |
|
|
Easy solution: allow the government to sell the property, as it has wanted to do. |
|
The government's response writes itself:
We never gave permission for the cross. Mr Buono wanted to create a religious shrine, which we also declined to give permission for. The cross has been there for decades and we did not want to offend veterans by tearing it down. We sought to do what was best for all parties by selling the land to a private party.
The only thing that prevents this equitable solution is the plaintiff who is offended by the cross. The government never authorized or erected the cross, and sensitive to all interests concerned, the government wishes to effect a solution which offends no one. |
|
|
it should be religion free. But I think the SCOTUS will allow the cross to stand. |
|
....people didn't know the cross was offensive.
They just thought this was a country where almost everybody was Christian, and if they weren't there were plenty of places they could go to practice whatever faith they desired.
The cross has always been a symbol of this freedom....and it is the most appropriate war memorial in that it symbolizes the sacrifices made in defense of religious liberty.
|
|
"as long as it is government land it should be religion free."
Not quite a restatement of the Lemon test. |
|
"But the cross hasn't been said to offend the families of veterans."
Who said anything about families? It's the veterans themselves that the monument honors, and the non-christian veterans that it rejects.
"And do you know that all those soldiers were Christian or Jewish? Not a single atheist in that cemetery?"
There are non-religious headstones and headstones that are specific to atheists. I've seen both at Arlington. |
|
"They just thought this was a country where almost everybody was Christian, and if they weren't there were plenty of places they could go to practice whatever faith they desired."
Pure arrogance.
"The cross ... is the most appropriate war memorial in that it symbolizes the sacrifices made in defense of religious liberty."
WWI was not fought to defend religious liberty. None of our wars have been. |
|
and frankly, don't care what the 'Lemon' test is. That was 'my' test...religion needs to be voided from public life. Period.
Sorry, you can be religious in your own home, your church, your temple, whatever, keep it out of public places. That's what I think. Were I 'king' and could impose my will (I can't even get my wife to give me the sports section first in the a.m. so that's how powerful I am), religion would be poof, gone, from all public buildings, etc. And there would be no tax exemptions either. But I am not king. |
|
|
|
"Were I 'king' and could impose my will (I can't even get my wife to give me the sports section first in the a.m. so that's how powerful I am), religion would be poof, gone, from all public buildings, etc."
Or die trying. |
|
|
Sorry for the McCain post. Wrong blog entry. |
|
|
funny...the cross used to be a symbol of oppression, as in the crusades. This is not a christian country, you best get used to it. |
|
Pure fertilizer.....
All of our wars have been about freedom: freedom to speak your mind....even if you're a pompous jerk such as yourself; freedom to defend yourself and your family; freedom to practice whatever faith you choose.
We have always fought to oppose any government that would restrict the freedom of the people.....the very kind of restriction that will soon be imposed on us all in the name of "tolerance," "political correctness," or "Earth first...."
It is laughable for somebody like you to call ANYBODY arrogant..... |
|
your 'christianity' is fast becoming a minority religion, worldwide. And in some parts of this country as well.
You will find someday that all the arguments you made to allow you to flaunt your religion will be thrown back in your face by the muslim majority.
I don't plan on dying to get rid of the religious symbols. I do plan on laughing while you become what you hate...just like the taliban. |
|
|
It is a cross in the mojave ,in a country founded by christians and nowhere does the constitution use the term seperation of church and state . A cross in the desert does not a theocracy make . |
|
The Indian wars where our ancestors wiped out entire tribes, committed pretty close to genocide in many places, were about 'freedom'? Whose freedom might that be? Are you suggesting that the civil war was really about freedom, and if so, whose? Many times, posters here chide others about saying the CW was to end slavery, claiming it was really about economic issues, hardly issues of freedom. WW1, what American freedoms were really at stake in that war....WW2, we got into the war not to free anyone, just because we got attacked. Korea, what American freedoms were really at stake, same in Vietnam. And don't get me started about the lack of purpose in Iraq or Afghanistan (at least how the Bush administration handled those).
The only war for 'freedom', true freedom, was the Revolutionary War. No one is restricting your freedoms by asking you to actually care about the world you live in...how do you plan to exercise your 'freedom' when there isn't enough potable water to go around? And from where I sit, 'political correctness' supports that cross in the desert because we are so afraid of the religious right in this country.
Your arrogance is thinking your religion is more important than my atheism. |
|
got that cow poo on your hands...makes you spell poorly?
This isn't a country founded by christians, and yes, separation of church and state is right there in the constitution. Frankly, it should be more like separation of state from church. Wanna be the Vatican? Wanna be the Taliban? |
|
Sorry...I only debate people who know what they're talking about.....
|
|
"Who said anything about families? It's the veterans themselves that the monument honors, and the non-christian veterans that it rejects."
It doesn't reject. It honors all veterans. If a Hindu person says he will pray for me, I don't take that as a rejection. It is his way of expressing support.
"There are non-religious headstones and headstones that are specific to atheists. I've seen both at Arlington."
Yes, they exist. But not all cemeteries have them. And it is not a rejection, just a way of honoring. |
|
|
I am so right, and you are so wrong. You cannot stand a real debate. You are a dying breed, thank goodness. |
|
"It doesn't reject. It honors all veterans."
A christian symbol honors non-christians? How, exactly?
Mind you, I've always been dubious about having an instrument used to torture and kill prisoners as your symbol. |
|
"I'm not an attorney and frankly, don't care what the 'Lemon' test is. That was 'my' test...religion needs to be voided from public life. Period."
Though you are not a lawyer, perhaps these words are familiar: "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof"
'Voiding religion from public life' would clearly violate the 1st Amendment's free exercise clause. But you rarely seem overly concerned about the Constitution on which our nation was founded.
What inspired such loathing of religion? |
|
|
thanks for the "head's up!" |
|
"Mind you, I've always been dubious about having an instrument used to torture and kill prisoners as your symbol."
True about that, if Jesus had been killed in modern times, I'm not sure if people would want electric chairs as pendants.
But a cross is erected with good intent, similar to someone of another faith saying they will pray for you, or blessing you based on their religious beliefs. If I lose something and my grandmother wishes to pray to Saint Anthony for me, I appreciate the gesture. If I was buried in a Muslim country, I wouldn't be offended if they marked it with their own religious symbol (I might be in the minority here on that one, but it's my view). |
|
(which would likely only mean we remove the words 'in god we trust' from money, monuments, etc) is not constitutional. Kings are not either.
I loathe all religion. It is, as Marx, among others, said, the opiate of the masses. In my opinion, only fools would read what are little fables and parables in the bible and take them literally. Way too many fools, which is ok so long as they don't try to act on them, as they do when they try to undermine other religions. |
|
Stupid statement, please point out in the constitution where the words seperation of church and state are used .We are far far closer to oppression by the left than we will ever be by christians. The only freedoms you support are gay rights and abortion everything else falls under the realm of govt. supervision to be taxed or regulated .
|
|
....although his grasp of revisionist history is most compelling.....
|
|
"please point out in the constitution where the words seperation of church and state are used"
They probably would have spelled it correctly.
Note that the words "provide funding for the Department of Defense" don't appear in the Constitution either, but we do it. |
|
You have to read two sections together (follow me now...freedom of religion AND establishment clause. You are free to worship as you please, but the government cannot establish a religion. The SCOTUS has held, over the years, that prayers in schools, etc, violate the establishment clause. Hence the separation of church and state. Christians have had their time. It has passed. I support the constitution (unless there were none, and I were king, and then you'd be banned from any religion in public places....but I'm not king and there is one, so you're not under any threat).
It isn't a political ideology, either. I loathe and despise ALL religions. |
|
I think even non-religious people hold views with equal religious zeal. There are liberals who worship ideas science as a religion. Most do so with little real knowledge.
Religion is just another way of understanding the world. For some, science and secular human endeavor is a religion. Most accept purely on faith, lacking scientific or reasoning skills of their own). Religious people are not fundamentally different in their thought processes, their need for an "opiate," than secular persons.
Secularism has a huge blind spot, thinking only that within its myopic view constitutes reality. I see science merely as a method, a tool, for divining the what and how of existence, but it doesn't explain why. Religion does. |
|
|
and my kids, and the grandkid on the way. Not anything else. G'nite. |
|
"They probably would have spelled it correctly."
That was good.
|
|
|
read the whole thing ,the constitution can not prohibit the free practice of your religon . this has been ignored and abused last 50 years or so . the vets that placed that cross were practicing their religon freely other religons may as well. Christian symbols are dominant because most the citizenry is christian. that cross does not mean the US goverment endorses christianity. it's placement means that some of it's citizens do and are exercising their right to honor their fallen comrades in accordance with their beliefs . This where tolerance might be considered appropriate . please quote the section of the constition where the words separation of church and state appear and I will shut up |
|
|
providing for the defense of the country is in the constitution . Why don't you and septic go phuck yourselves yes it is misspelled . |
|
"providing for the defense of the country is in the constitution."
So is the prohibition on establishing a religion.
You're arguing on the one hand that the exact words "separation of church and state" don't appear in the Constitution and therefore it doesn't call for that, and on the other that it's ok that "provide funding for the Department of Defense" also doesn't appear verbatim but is implied in other words.
I realize that logic isn't your strong suit (do you even have one?), but even you must see the contradiction in that. |
|
|
if you could tell us all about your idealogy, your core beliefs, enlighten those of us who are so skewed in our values that we honor freedom, liberty, personal responsibilty and the foundations of this nation. show us the errors of our ways, your way is so much better it should be easy for you. offer us a valid point and we will follow you. /sarc off |
|
"/sarc off"
You forgot the "sarc on" tag at the beginning. Also, if one has to announce that one is being sarcastic, it probably isn't very good sarcasm. |
|
I really hate to rain on everyone's parade in this pivotal issue.
1. Its silly the left has gotten so far down the deranged trail. They won't be happy until everyone can recite the single cell fairy tale from memory, or the big bang that could, or pond scum, a love story of evolution.
2. What is more notorious is that not even Munck knows, or any christian, that our lord was crucifed on a pole, greek work for cross is Stauros. look it up. The cross is first used by the great humanitarian Constantine(sp) 4th century A.D.. The cross as symbolized today in every major denomination finds its root in Egypt, 18th century B.C.
3. If the Christian conservative movement ever hopes to get traction in the political arena, they must have traction with God. How do we expect to succeed, without an accurate knowledge of God and his word. traditions have so replaced truth for so long, that truth has a scant chance of survival. I fully expect the blog to shift to defense of the symbol, but for those that care to know, there is sufficent evidence in any good history of the Roman empire. Acts 10:40, I Peter 2:24 But it contradicts what we have been taught and what we have seen, so that in the end when liberty is waning we are fighting for a symbol, instead of the truth. You will no doudtly say our fore fathers of this nation, followed this cross we now seek to defend. And I will say yes they did, but, but, they had an understanding of the scriptures of which generation does not. Hold your cross up against the evil coming like a priest in a dracula movie. it will not save, only the truth will |
|
if you could kindly keep your post to things you actually know about; like what the dark side of sand looks like or what your colon is processing today cause those are the only things you've seen today.
|
|
|
great that you can correct such a mistake(wow i'm so much better for it). no actual response to the post though. why is that? you have responses for everything else(including correcting on my use of sarcasm.) but you wont tell me how your idealogy and beliefs are better than mine. oh, and before you correct it, i don't use capital letters. |
|
"They won't be happy until everyone can recite the single cell fairy tale from memory, or the big bang that could, or pond scum, a love story of evolution."
Sounds like you're saying we want people to learn science. True.
"2. What is more notorious ..."
I have no idea what point you're trying to make with this paragraph. Do you? |
|
|
offer a valid counterpoint or argument for your idealogy, beliefs, et al. you may make yourself feel good by pointing out minute(that's mInute) mistakes regarding spelling or what have you, but is that it? all you have? make us believe, prove your way is better. |
|
|
Simply that Jesus Christ was crucified on a stake more similar to a pole, than the TRADITIONAL CROSS. |
|
simply that the instrument of The lord jesus Christ death more resembled a telephone pole, than a TRADITIONAL CROSS.
I just figured with your vast scope of history, you could verify that. |
|
"Simply that Jesus Christ was crucified on a stake more similar to a pole, than the TRADITIONAL CROSS."
There appear to be a couple of billion people who disagree with you. Good luck getting all those crucifixes changed.
Wait, this wasn't an aluminum pole, was it? With no tinsel? |
|
"I just figured with your vast scope of history, you could verify that."
The whole thing never happened, mike. You've been lied to your entire life.
I recommend an Airing of Grievances. |
|
|
i will state this now in view of everyone who reads this. you sir are a coward. you hide behind little mistakes that you can pick at while offering nothing substantial in return. you say the crucifixation never happened? prove it. and while your at it defend your idealogy, and global warming. i never wanted to get into this discussion, but you(though not personally, but you and your ilk,) have forced enough on me. i work everyday, though not the glorious job of the enlightened, nonetheless, i earn a paycheck. tell me how my beliefs in capitalism and the constitution are wrong. do it please and end the debate. |
|
|
|
|
the echoes of silence fill a million ears |
|
|
while i've had fun running munck off, the truth is they can't defend their idealogy. where are the statues of those who have died in defense of socialism? where are the stories, songs, and praises of those martyrs? where in the history of the world and humans in particular, has there been but heroes for freedom. be it from slavery, oppression, religion, or what have you. the ideals of freedom and individuals has long plagued the powerful. since the bible it is always the common man who finds it within himself to defend who and what he loves and holds dear. i will also say this, while we are forcefully independant as a people and a nation we do not easily allow suffering among us. because i care for my neighbor does not mean i should take care of him. but will help him at anytime i see that he needs it, not when i'm told he needs it |
|
the constitution does not explicity fund a department of defense . it does explicity grant freedom of religon
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.
the part munk ignores is the prohibiting free exercise thereof . |
|