Thanks ACLU: War Memorial To Be Torn Down

If the cross is removed from a memorial to Korean War veterans because it "supposedly" implies that this is a sanctioned religon. Does that mean, and i am not joking about this, the Red cross should remove their cross from all medical related items, should the "cross symbol" be romoved from all addition mathmetics, because it "implies" that math is created by God?
I only say this because this is the demonstrated logic of the ALCU and the people who use them to impose their beliefs on everybody. The cross is a recognized symbol to use to mark a grave, it is used for non islamic medical assistance. Regardless of your religious belief, you should honor the people that it honors and realize that political correctness is something that should be left with the people who have no morals or honor. If you think that the religious beliefs of a majority of the people in this country believe in God, be he male or female, jewish aor islamic, or gaia, please move to a true theocracy. That fun loving place called the middle east. Then complain when u are dragged and tortued because you dont belive itn the national religion. Believe what you want about me,I have seen more then my share of "stupid" people, and if you can't discuss this like a rational person, I will see you in Hell, laughing all the way.

Er, yeah, and the letter T shall be stricken from the alphabet. The red cross symbol is based on the Swiss flag, not the Christian cross. The plus sign also has a hsitory quite divorced of religious connotation.

This is typical intolerance crap. The people who push for this stuff obviuosly are mean spirited little twerps with no lives, and a desire to make things miserable for everyone else.

The guy who filed this stupuid lawsuit should be made to pay all the costs associated with this disgusting occurence.

and - BTW - I am not christian either so there!

Learn a bit of tolerance, people!

Tell that to the Arab nations, where Red Cross uses a crescent instead of a cross to avoid pissing off the locals.

All you ACLU-phobic non-Californians can relax.

The cross is in volation of a state, not federal, ordinance.

The $5k a day fine was imposed by a judge that has been hearing arguments for and against the moving or removing of the Mt. Soledad cross for SEVENTEEN YEARS.

He's imposed the fine to force swift resolution on the issue, one way or another.

And... in my not-at-all humble opinion: it's still a cheap, tawdry eyesore on top of some of the most choice real estate in San Deigo. The thing looks like an amateur high school shop project.

I consider it an embarassment to the Christain faith and to the fallen soldiers it commemorates, and am still strongly for knocking it down.

Oh just stop being babies and move it. We don't have time for this. We need to build a wall to keep the Mexicans out.

Turbo hand ... *Smiles* i dont use this word that much ... but AMEN!!!!! and well said .....

That's it! we can take the cross down and put it on the Mexican border as part of the wall.

Reduce, reuse, recycle.

.... they've been doing that for over 100 years, and started doing it During the Russo-Turkish War from 1876 to 1878, the Ottoman Empire used a Red Crescent instead of the Red Cross because its government believed that the cross would alienate its Muslim soldiers.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_cross#Red_Crescent

However, the Red Cross symbol was originally intended to be a reverse image of the flag of Switzerland, a historically neutral nation.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_Cross_(symbol)

I learned something new today and thought I'd share

(warning necroposting)

Headline news on the San Diego Union-Tribune:

"Reprieve for cross extended"

So no $5,000 a day fines for failure to remove the cross yet.

There is talk of transfering the land to the federal government,
and the U.S. Supreme Court refused to hear the case 3 years
ago, but Justice Kennedy is the one that issued the extended
temporary reprieve. Cross supporters seem rather pleased
with the news.

(Sorry, can't link to the article directly through the SD Trib's
website, I'm sure it'll appear somewhere online more easily
linked to soon.)

It's a STATE park, not federal land. The feds can't take it.

I might believe you meant that if you weren't using the name of a cannibal from a Hollywood film.

Because it is state-owned land, and it's the highest damn point in the area -- meaning that it's a STRATEGIC LOCATION that cannot be allowed to be sold into private hands.

Personally, I want to see the swastika used as a memorial marker so that I can defend it when someone (understandably) wants it taken down.

Think of the fallen soldiers that swastika stands for!

Who said anything about the feds "Taking" the park?



Proposition A:

CITY OF SAN DIEGO Proposition A (This proposition will appear on the ballot in the following form.) Mount Soledad Natural Park Shall the City of San Diego donate to the federal government all of the City's rights, title, and interest in the Mt. Soledad Veterans Memorial property for the federal government's use of the property as a national memorial honoring veterans of the United States Armed Forces?

This proposition requires approval by a 2/3 majority of the voters.

197,125 / 76.0% Yes votes ...... 62,373 / 24.0% No votes


Clearly San Diegians want to GIVE the park away.

I just hope the feds put something more interesting on it when it gets dumped in their lap.

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2006/7/6/9396/92372
...

"ACLU's Defense of Religious Liberty (3/2/2005)":
September 20, 2005: ACLU of New Jersey joins lawsuit supporting second-grader's right to sing "Awesome God" at a talent show.

August 4, 2005: ACLU helps free a New Mexico street preacher from prison.

February 2005: ACLU of Pennsylvania successfully defends the right of an African American Evangelical church to occupy a church building purchased in a predominantly white parish.

December 22, 2004: ACLU of New Jersey successfully defends right of religious expression by jurors.

November 20, 2004: ACLU of Nevada supports free speech rights of evangelists to preach on the sidewalks of the strip in Las Vegas.
November 9, 2004: ACLU of Nevada defends a Mormon student who was suspended after wearing a T-shirt with a religious message to school.

August 11, 2004: ACLU of Nebraska defends church facing eviction by the city of Lincoln.

July 10, 2004: Indiana Civil Liberties Union defends the rights of a Baptist minister to preach his message on public streets.

June 9, 2004: ACLU of Nebraska files a lawsuit on behalf of a Muslim woman barred from a public pool because she refused to wear a swimsuit.

June 3, 2004: Under pressure from the ACLU of Virginia, officials agree not to prohibit baptisms on public property in Falmouth Waterside Park in Stafford County.

May 11, 2004: After ACLU of Michigan intervened on behalf of a Christian Valedictorian, a public high school agrees to stop censoring religious yearbook entries.

March 25, 2004: ACLU of Washington defends an Evangelical minister's right to preach on sidewalks.

February 21, 2003: ACLU of Massachusetts defends students punished for distributing candy canes with religious messages.
July 11, 2002: ACLU supports right of Iowa students to distribute Christian literature at school.

April 17, 2002: In a victory for the Rev. Jerry Falwell and the ACLU of Virginia, a federal judge strikes down a provision of the Virginia Constitution that bans religious organizations from incorporating.

and more...
"ACLU Defends Florida Families Fighting Removal Of Religious Symbols from Cemetery (3/22/1999)"
"ACLU of Pennsylvania Supports Congregation's Fight for Religious Freedom (1/7/2002)"
"ACLU Defends Religious Freedom Of West Virginia Minister (7/20/1999)"
"Dr. Jeremy Gunn, Expert on Religious Freedom, To Lead New ACLU Program on Freedom of Religion and Belief (7/14/2005)"
"ACLU Defends Church's Right to Run "Anti-Santa" Ads in Boston Subways (1/8/2002)"

Strategic location? For what? A 400 foot Jesus that can shoot laser beams out of its eyes to intercept incoming missiles?

Mmmm. Missile intercepting Jesus. Now there is an ameriKan symbol I can rally behind. As long as it's a Non-Denominational Jesus cause supposedly those burn blue in a mushroom cloud. I like blue. I like crosses and puppies too. And McDonalds.

Well, what do you expect me to say? I'm just trying to boost my post count to make myself look smart and my nipples get hard to see myself in print. Or is that just me. *Looks at some post counts..Looks at mine..Looks at thiers again* Flame on talking heads.

that would be soooooon cool!!!!

ACLU needs to get A CLU man.

hey, that fits on a bumpersticker!! y'know i hear an idea simply just doesn't work unless you can fit it into less than six or seven words. it's just scientifically unsound.

they are -designed- to play devil's advocate. it's the -real, founding-father style- american way. don't want that, don't get america. period.

I know we never agree on religion but that is just about the funniest thing you've ever said

Someone is so gonna build one of those in-world.

Sorry, but you're wrong. First Amendment reads: "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion." It doesn't say "Congress shall not establish a religion," it expressly forbids any law that touches upon establishing a religion. Notice? It says "shall make no law respecting..." and not "shall not establish...." The wording of the First Amendment is very broad. It doesn't simply stop Congress from naming a certain sect of Christianity as the official religion of the USA, it clearly and expressly forbids Congress from making any law "respecting an establishment of religion." That is, if you actually care enough to go by the constitution. Which hasn't been the case recently in the USA.

Ahh, yes. What with Conservative Christians controlling the legislative, executive, and judicial branches, I'm sure there'll be a constitutional amendment banning Christianity any day now.