Government Policy: No crosses in Public Parks

[shintao]

Judges rule cross at Calif. park unconstitutional

Federal appeals court says memorial cross at San Diego public park is unconstitutional



A federal appeals court has ruled that a San Diego war memorial cross in a public park is unconstitutional.

The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals issued the 3-0 decision Tuesday in a two-decade dispute over the cross at Mount Soledad.

In its decision, the court says the cross conveys a message of government endorsement of religion that violates the Constitution.

The court, however, says its decision does not mean that no cross can be part of the memorial. It says modifications can be made to make it constitutional but doesn't specify what the changes would be.

Judges rule cross at Calif. park unconstitutional | TPM News Pages

 

[The Infidel]

Judges rule cross at Calif. park unconstitutional

Federal appeals court says memorial cross at San Diego public park is unconstitutional



A federal appeals court has ruled that a San Diego war memorial cross in a public park is unconstitutional.
The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals issued the 3-0 decision Tuesday in a two-decade dispute over the cross at Mount Soledad.

In its decision, the court says the cross conveys a message of government endorsement of religion that violates the Constitution.

The court, however, says its decision does not mean that no cross can be part of the memorial. It says modifications can be made to make it constitutional but doesn't specify what the changes would be.

Judges rule cross at Calif. park unconstitutional | TPM News Pages

Wonder which religion the dickheads behind this decision thought was being established

DAMN, I wish that state would slide into the Pacific!

 

[EriktheRed]

File under "More Crap that Only a Few People Really give a Shit About, but Makes for Good Press to Rile Extremists of Both Sides"

 

[shintao]

Because it is a war memorial, it made me think about Arlington and the million crosses over the graves.

How is there any connection between war & crosses to begin with? If I am buried there do my relatives have the right to refuse a cross on my grave? Where does Arlington bury their atheists??

 

[Avatar4321]

File under "More Crap that Only a Few People Really give a Shit About, but Makes for Good Press to Rile Extremists of Both Sides"

You don't care about your rights being ignored?

I'd bring a cross to a park just to protest.

 

[Vel]

Because it is a war memorial, it made me think about Arlington and the million crosses over each grave.

How is there any connection between war & crosses to begin with? If I am buried there do my relatives have the right to refuse a cross on my grave? Where does Arlington bury their atheists??

Hmm.. I don't recall the grave markers at Arlington being crosses.

 

[gnurat]

So much for the separation of church and state.

 

[SFC Ollie]

Because it is a war memorial, it made me think about Arlington and the million crosses over each grave.

How is there any connection between war & crosses to begin with? If I am buried there do my relatives have the right to refuse a cross on my grave? Where does Arlington bury their atheists??

There are 39 different markers authorized for use in a national cemetery. One of them is even for Atheists. So it's not a problem.

 

[Avatar4321]

The few things Ive seen about this decision makes me think that this decision is a jump through hoops or something. They are saying it's unconstitutional but that it doesn't necessarily have to come down. Makes no sense to me in the reports. Im going to have to check out the decision more when it comes out.

 

[Meister]

Because it is a war memorial, it made me think about Arlington and the million crosses over each grave.

How is there any connection between war & crosses to begin with? If I am buried there do my relatives have the right to refuse a cross on my grave? Where does Arlington bury their atheists??

Hmm.. I don't recall the grave markers at Arlington being crosses.

The crosses are on the headstones;

 

[Dont Taz Me Bro]

This whole lawsuit is just petty and stupid. We have more important things to worry about than the courts being tied up with this crap. Who cares if there is a cross in the park? Who is being hurt by it? It's a waste of time and money. I don't know why people can't just live and let live.

 

[shintao]

Because it is a war memorial, it made me think about Arlington and the million crosses over each grave.

How is there any connection between war & crosses to begin with? If I am buried there do my relatives have the right to refuse a cross on my grave? Where does Arlington bury their atheists??

Hmm.. I don't recall the grave markers at Arlington being crosses.

Hmm, you know this is the first time out of hundreds of times over the years I have looked at arlington and not seen crosses. However the stones do have the crosses, but I suspect each head stone reflects the soldiers religion.

 

[shintao]

The few things Ive seen about this decision makes me think that this decision is a jump through hoops or something. They are saying it's unconstitutional but that it doesn't necessarily have to come down. Makes no sense to me in the reports. Im going to have to check out the decision more when it comes out.

Thanks A. I would like to know why it is unconstitutional myself.

 

[whitehall]

First of all the 9th is the most reversed court of appeals in modern history. The 40 ft. Cross in San Diego is not just "a cross in a park". It is part of a half century old Korean War monument. You can't put up a Christmas tree on public property. You can't have a Manger scene at Christmas on public property. The left wing is out to eliminate every vestage of Christianity in America. It's ironic that they became hysterical over a rumor that the Koran was mishandled at Gitmo.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Yeah? Fuck the 9th Circuit, let them show up and try to remove the crosses themselves

 

[uscitizen]

Has anyone ever seen a crosswalk?

 

[RetiredGySgt]

Because it is a war memorial, it made me think about Arlington and the million crosses over the graves.

How is there any connection between war & crosses to begin with? If I am buried there do my relatives have the right to refuse a cross on my grave? Where does Arlington bury their atheists??

You are a moron. The religion of the dead soldier determined whether a cros or a star of david or a Muslim symbol was placed over their grave in Arlington. But then if you weren't a troll you would already know that.

As for atheists, the Family of the dead request what stone to put on the grave. Just as all the others were decided.

This is a ruling that should be appealed but somehow I doubt Obama's Justice Department will.

 

[editec]

Judges rule cross at Calif. park unconstitutional

Federal appeals court says memorial cross at San Diego public park is unconstitutional



A federal appeals court has ruled that a San Diego war memorial cross in a public park is unconstitutional.

The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals issued the 3-0 decision Tuesday in a two-decade dispute over the cross at Mount Soledad.

In its decision, the court says the cross conveys a message of government endorsement of religion that violates the Constitution.

The court, however, says its decision does not mean that no cross can be part of the memorial. It says modifications can be made to make it constitutional but doesn't specify what the changes would be.

Judges rule cross at Calif. park unconstitutional | TPM News Pages

I guess that just a cross we'll have to bear, then.

 

[SFC Ollie]

First of all the 9th is the most reversed court of appeals in modern history. The 40 ft. Cross in San Diego is not just "a cross in a park". It is part of a half century old Korean War monument. You can't put up a Christmas tree on public property. You can't have a Manger scene at Christmas on public property. The left wing is out to eliminate every vestage of Christianity in America. It's ironic that they became hysterical over a rumor that the Koran was mishandled at Gitmo.

Actually, my little village has a manger scene in front of city hall right now. I think they are scheduled to put it back in the basement next week sometime, Until next Christmas that is.

 

[WorldWatcher]

>

Interesting, haven't seen this case in the news for a number of years. I used to be stationed in San Diego ('79-80') and had occasion to attend religious services conducted at the cross. In addition it was always a major landmark for flying training missions out of Naval Air Station Miramar.

Here are a few facts cleaned from the court documents showing the history of the "War Memorial" (Sorry, it's been a number of years and multiple computers ago so I don't have links, just the PDF's from a backup):

• The first cross was erected in 1913, prior to WWI, WWII, or the Korean War.

• The cross was replaced multiple times between 1913 and 1954

• The Mt. Soledad Association itself said the purpose of the 1954 cross was to replace the previous crosses (The crosses were to commemorate wars that hadn’t occurred yet?)

• The Mt. Soledad Association itself in it’s dedication bulletin noted that the cross was dedicated to ““Our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ” not to war veterans.

• Only one news article between April 17, 1954 and the 1989 lawsuit described the cross as a war memorial. No other references to it as a war memorial were found.

• There is no evidence that the City planed the cross as a war memorial prior to its construction

• Construction and dedication were planned and did occur to allow the dedication to be conducted on Easter Sunday, 1954. Not Memorial Day, not Veterans Day, or any other day to honor veterans.

• Every year between 1954 and 1989, when the lawsuit was filed, the Mt. Soledad Association sponsored religious Easter sunrise services.

• Not once between 1954 and 1989, when the lawsuit was filed, did the Mt. Soledad Assc. or any other organization sponsor ceremony's to honor war dead on Memorial Day.

• Not once between 1954 and 1989, when the lawsuit was filed, did the Mt. Soledad Assc. or any other organization sponsor ceremony's to honor war dead on Veterans Day.

• No plaque or sign was ever in existence at the cross between 1954 and 1989, when the lawsuit was filed, indicating that the cross was a memorial to war dead.

• Regarding the Mt. Soledad Assc. – “Its own bylaws describe its purpose as the promotion of “community interest in the development of the public facilities of the Mt. Soledad park area.” The bylaws make no reference to the commemoration of war dead.”

• Not one plague, not one sign, not one brick in the present "war memorial" wall now surrounding the cross was placed until after the City lost the suit.

• Prior to the lawsuit travel guides, maps, phone directories, and even government publications referred to the cross as the “Soledad Easter Cross”.​

References:
Paulson V. San Diego, Civ. No. 89-020 GT
Murphy v. Bilbray, US District Court, CIV NO 90-0134
Philip K. Paulson v. City of San Diego, 9th Circuit Court of Appeals, No. 00-55406
Jewish War Veterans v. Rumsfeld, US District Court Complaint Dtd 8/24/2006
Paulson v. Abdulnour, Superior Court of California, Dtd 10/7/2005


>>>>