Google +LinkedInPinterestYouTubeInstagramTwitterFacebook

With regard to the Mt. Soledad Memorial, can a Latin cross represent a secular message?

No. Quite clearly a cross is exclusively a religious symbol and is unconstitutional.
9% (89 votes)
No. Although inclusion of a cross might be constitutional, the primary message of this one is religious.
5% (50 votes)
Yes. I agree with Justice Kennedy: It can be “a symbol often used to honor and respect…"
19% (195 votes)
Yes. This cross is a veterans memorial, end of story.
68% (702 votes)
Total votes: 1036

 

View more polls

 

jkeeney419

January 6, 2011 - 1:37pm

A cross is a religiou symbol and no one can deny it. Thank god our for fathers had enough sense to write the seperation of religion and our goverment into the constitution. If you don't believe me I say unto you two words MIDDLE EAST.

NN1976

January 6, 2011 - 1:53pm

Why is a symbol that has been a landmark in San Diego for nearly a century now unconstitutional? OK, it is on federal land. Wasn't it on federal land a long time ago? Whether or not it is a religious symbol or a war memorial is not the issue that concerns me. What concerns me is the systematic organized effort to take Christianity out of the USA. Why? Who are these people? Even if this cross is moved, they will persist until everyone gives up - which is what they want us to do. Why are there no investigations into what is happening in our country regards the slow but relentless destruction of Christianity?

Skooter

February 3, 2011 - 4:16pm

There is a big difference between public/federal property and private property. Nobody is trying to "destroy Christianity" or "take Christianity out of the USA"... they simply want the Constitution to be respected by not allowing the government to endorse any particular religion. Unless people try to tell you that you can't have a religious symbol on PRIVATE property, your rights are not being violated.

gemartin

January 6, 2011 - 2:37pm

@jkeeney419 - Your comment ironically says “thank god our fathers had enough sense to write the separation (sic) of religion and our government (sic) into the constitution.” Please read the First Amendment. The interpretation that “separation of church and state” is language in the Constitution of the United States is a a convolution to suit someone's purposes. Nowhere does it say anything about government must be a secular, nonspiritual entity.

It says in the First Amendment "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof ....",& Article VI specifies that "no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States." There has been a steady movement by a vocal and active MINORITY to remove all Christian symbols, images, and signs from Federal properties, as if the presence of these was specifying by federal law the establishment of religion. Not so.

acutshall

January 6, 2011 - 2:42pm

The US constitution in the infamous "separation of church and state" ensures that the government will not sponsor or promote one religion over another. That said, this country was also founded on freedom OF religion, not freedom FROM religion!!

Christianity is not the only target here -- all religion is targeted. The cross at Mt. Soledad is a monument for all the Christians who are buried there. It is NOT a religious endorsement! This is no different than the various religious symbols on the markers at Arlington. Those symbols represent the individual's religion and does not indicate any government endorsement.

The founding fathers were very religious men who wanted to ensure that everyone had the opportunity to follow the dictates of their heart and soul without impediment of the government. By allowing the government to squash any religious association at all, we are allowing the government to support and encourage only one religion -- atheism.

logic101

January 8, 2011 - 11:36am

If atheism is a religion:

"Bald" is a hair color and "Not collecting stamps" is a hobby.

The "markers" on those veteran's graves at Arlington represent that individual's religion. They are not there for the sake of being there.

gemartin

January 6, 2011 - 2:46pm

I am not a Christian, but I am an American and I resent this intrusion into our freedom to express ourselves with appropriate symbols of honor. I absolutely disagree with the ruling as it is a stretch at best that there is some kind of unconstitutional act by having the cross at Mt. Soledad. I view that cross, which is not a new symbol at that site, is a way to indicate that the site is a special place to honor those that have served this nation. So what if it is religious symbol? Are there those that would prefer to see it replaced by a flashing neon sign that said "War Dead Honored Here."

I thank our forefathers for establishing a government where we can openly disagree with our highest court. In this case, I believe the court has bowed to political correctness as it is now being expressed, rather than to the constitutionality of the presence of a religious symbol on federal land.

ronkriel

January 6, 2011 - 2:54pm

First, the Hispanic influence in the south-west is of historical record. Most Hispanics are Catholic and they brought their beliefs with them into this area. This is a matter of cultural expression. Second, you guys who deal with everything as being the "end of story" kill me. Third, our country is a Christian country, founded on Christian principles. The supposed separation of church and state was intended to prevent institutions like the Church of England from running the Government. Yes, we have citizens of every religious stripe including those who do not believe in any religion. So what? That's just how a free country should be. Have you heard anything from Israeli Christians attacking the Star of David? Christians throughout the world respect those religious symbols that predominate in their countries. Religious tolerance applies equally well to the display of Christian symbols in this country as it does to the display of other faiths' symbols.

Ron Kriel
CAPT USN (Ret.)

billinsandiego

January 6, 2011 - 5:41pm

The most recent cross (1954) was dedicated to "Jesus Christ, Our Lord and Saviour," not to veterans. Only when the court first decided it was religious symbol on public land did a local Christian group establish a placard (1989)commenmorating the site as a tribute to those who served. The place was used, except for a couple of instances, as a site of Christian worship, most commonly every Easter.

sunny AZ

January 8, 2011 - 11:20am

billinsandiego is Absolutely correct. When I first heard of this, I too was disturbed by it but I dug a little deeper. If any of you look into this issue before spouting off, you will find that this became a veteran memorial only after the courts ordered it removed years ago. It is a religious site established in a time when narrow minded people calling themselves Christians were anything but. The ploy to skirt the court order by making it a memorial was taken further by giving the property to the govt hoping then their "in your face" symbol would be allowed. This cross has been abused. Veterans are being USED, not honored. Veterans were an after thought and I'm angered by THAT. This is not the same battle as the cross in the desert. Tear this down and build a true memorial to all those who gave and those who give to keep us free.

Tim Foor

January 6, 2011 - 7:35pm

Yes, that's right.
Once again, the Judicial System has F'd another circumstance up.
Since it's been there for, what could be deemed almost Eternity. Dosen't that place it into a classification of Actions Being Condoned ? Sure seems like to me.
Why all the ruckus ? Leave it be !
Heck, We're letting Muslims, now be written into the US Constitution & Bill of Rights. The Founding Forefathers are "Rumbling" in their Graves. I'm quite certain.

In New Albany, Ohio: There is a Christian Radio station (WCVO)with a Cross, lit up, upon a High Tower. That can be seen for about 10 miles away. Billionaire Les Wexner, whom is Jewish, despites it. Has tried to purchase the station and destroy the cross & tower. No other Official Complaints, otherwise.

Don't Sweat the Small Stuff, Legionnaires !
It'll get Finally decided upon @ the US Supreme Court.

Sumaya Rodriguez

January 6, 2011 - 11:05pm

This just proved the Power of the Cross is still as strong as ever, that it should irate others so.

The Message of the Cross -one of Grace, Peace, Good Will towards ALL men, Salvation and the Gospel of Jesus Christ- is still speaking to the Jewish people even after 2,000 years and not just a couple of decades.

In the end we are Americans: take down the "stone" and show true love to our Jewish brothers by "turning the other cheek" and remain in good standing. For even if they take my Cross, they can't take its Message of love from my lips.

And for those of you who aren't into the Bible I say, "Suck it up" and get over it; it's time to come together and build a new American Memorial!

I say this because the alternative is war among veteran brothers -as they still have in the Middle East, even after 4,000 years- and that is unacceptable, guys.

We are Americans not Middle Easterners: we went to court and the Law decided.

Now let there be peace among men.

Sumaya Rodriguez

January 6, 2011 - 11:38pm

"The 20-year legal fight over the cross..."

You mean to tell me that United States Veteran Brothers where fighting EACH OTHER in AMERICA over STONE for 20 YEARS?!?!

What do you think this is Iraq?!

TEAR IT DOWN!!!!

Ken Weathers

January 7, 2011 - 9:12am

American Legion should buy the land from the Govt. and maintain it.

oilersailor1

January 7, 2011 - 10:08am

C'mon folks...Does not the U.S. military have an Army Distinguished Service Cross, the Navy Cross, the Air Force Cross, and the Distinguished Flying Cross? Are not those given by a secular organization (The U.S. government)to a member of that secular organization? I know of no religious connotation in conjunction with those awards.

DC3's comment above is spot-on. Taking that a step further...shall we grind off the cross, the Star of David, and any other religious symbol off of every headstone at every federally maintained veterans cemetary in the U.S.??? This is absurd. The Ninth Circuit Court should be abolished (it's been done before!!!)

rommel88

January 7, 2011 - 8:14pm

Yes, Yes, Yes, 100% correct. Not only should the court be abolished, but all records should be destroyed as if it never existed. It is an abomination, a disgrace to our Great Country and especially the Constitution. The individuals that serve on this court, are and have worn horse blinders for a long long time. They disgrace all that have worn the uniform, to protect this country and individuals such as they that languish in this court.

Add new comment

Filtered HTML

  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.
  • Allowed HTML tags: <a> <em> <strong> <cite> <blockquote> <code> <ul> <ol> <li> <dl> <dt> <dd> <p>
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.

Plain text

  • No HTML tags allowed.
  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.
By submitting this form, you accept the Mollom privacy policy.

Tell us what you think