Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Roadside crosses for fallen Utah police unconstitutional, court rules
Daily Caller ^ | 08/19/10 | Warren Richey

Posted on 08/19/2010 12:37:23 AM PDT by American Dream 246

A federal appeals court on Wednesday ruled that roadside crosses erected to memorialize fallen Utah Highway Patrol officers violate the First Amendment’s prohibition of government endorsement of religion.




The Denver-based 10th US Circuit Court of Appeals said that the 12-foot-high crosses bearing the name and badge number of deceased officers sent an unconstitutional religious message to motorists on the state’s highways.

“We hold that these memorials have the impermissible effect of conveying to the reasonable observer the message that the state prefers or otherwise endorses a certain religion. They therefore violate the establishment clause of the federal constitution,” the appeals court said in a 35-page decision.

Full story: Roadside crosses for fallen Utah police unconstitutional, court rules – CSMonitor.com

Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2010/08/18/roadside-crosses-for-fallen-utah-police-unconstitutional-court-rules/#ixzz0x2DKEewL


TOPICS:
KEYWORDS: fascism; islam; military; obama; obamareligion; politics; religion

1 posted on 08/19/2010 12:37:25 AM PDT by American Dream 246
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: American Dream 246

Oh well...let’s build them a mosque. I am sure that will not create any problem Crosses..? What an insult to islam. They should have thought about that, indeed.


2 posted on 08/19/2010 12:39:08 AM PDT by American Dream 246 (Open your eyes. Freedom is not a one day fight. Enemies of Freedom are legion.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: American Dream 246

Religion is bad, unless it’s islam.


3 posted on 08/19/2010 12:42:05 AM PDT by Pylon (Tagline: (optional, printed after your name on post):)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: American Dream 246

I wonder if the symbol put on the roadside was based on the religion of the deceased officer?


4 posted on 08/19/2010 12:47:06 AM PDT by JLS (Democrats: People who won't even let you enjoy an unseasonably warm winter day.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: American Dream 246

I wonder if the symbol put on the roadside was based on the religion of the deceased officer?


5 posted on 08/19/2010 12:47:06 AM PDT by JLS (Democrats: People who won't even let you enjoy an unseasonably warm winter day.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: American Dream 246

I’ll be waiting to hear obama call the court out on this. Like I said, I’ll be waiting....zzzzzzz.....waiting....zzzz.


6 posted on 08/19/2010 12:47:07 AM PDT by taxesareforever (Release Staff Sgt. Frank Wuterich and let him and his family get on with their lives.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: American Dream 246

....can I put a Muslim Crescent?


7 posted on 08/19/2010 12:48:21 AM PDT by Tzimisce (No thanks. We have enough government already. - The Tick)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: American Dream 246
If we jailed 100% of the Federal judges we would be doing the right thing 95% of the time. I really am starting to like those odds.
8 posted on 08/19/2010 12:51:56 AM PDT by The Cajun (Mind numbed robot , ditto-head, Hannitized, Levinite)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: American Dream 246

...but lying about your Military service is ok. Got it.


9 posted on 08/19/2010 12:54:15 AM PDT by Republic of Texas (Socialism Always Fails)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: American Dream 246

The liberal war against Christianity increases pace ...


10 posted on 08/19/2010 12:55:32 AM PDT by DontTreadOnMe2009 (So stop treading on me already!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: American Dream 246

Didn’t a Denver judge rule that it’s fine to lie about military medals earned?


11 posted on 08/19/2010 12:58:37 AM PDT by Carley (For those who fought for it, freedom has a flavor the protected will never know.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DontTreadOnMe2009

And it’s not going to stop, so please remember that, and be prepared for it. It will ONLY get worse, they start beheading the faithful for not taking the mark.


12 posted on 08/19/2010 12:59:36 AM PDT by JDW11235 (I think I got it now!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: JLS

“I wonder if the symbol put on the roadside was based on the religion of the deceased officer?”

Given the area, highly unlikely. However, crosses have been used as grave markers for a long, long time.


13 posted on 08/19/2010 1:00:32 AM PDT by JDW11235 (I think I got it now!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: American Dream 246
Another deliberate distortion by the Commies. The first sentence " Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion". This only pertains to the establishment of a national church. Excluding that fact, Congress did not create a law requiring the crosses be placed along any roads when a police officer is killed.
14 posted on 08/19/2010 1:01:27 AM PDT by Man50D (Fair Tax, you earn it, you keep it! www.FairTaxNation.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: taxesareforever; Pylon

The Fed Gov will appease anyone who is not a Chrsitian (and Jews), because Christians (and to an extent Jews, when they’re not being murdered) are tolerant, whereas most other religions in this debate demand subjection to them. It’s like the playground bully, and people are getting really sick of it.


15 posted on 08/19/2010 1:02:52 AM PDT by JDW11235 (I think I got it now!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: JDW11235

“Chrsitian”= Christian


16 posted on 08/19/2010 1:03:19 AM PDT by JDW11235 (I think I got it now!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: American Dream 246

It’s not the federal government putting them up.


17 posted on 08/19/2010 1:09:28 AM PDT by abigailsmybaby ( I'm not going to buy my kids an encyclopedia. Let them walk to school like I did. Yogi Berra)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: abigailsmybaby

“It’s not the federal government putting them up.”

Bingo, which brings up a bigger issue. The Federal Government should own NO land. All states should reclaim their Federally seized land. In addition, this should be determined by the states. The original judge (if I read correctly) threw the case out. The appeals court ruled against, in an attempt, I belive, to bring it back up to the Supremes who have already decided issed, like the Ten Commandments, etc.

It’s political warriors trying to start a religion war with the simultaneous race war their fomenting, to keep us divided. That’s the only strategy that keeps working. I pray it’ll stop, and soon, and we’ll get rid of the political class by being governed by the people, for the people, not just taking from the people, to advance the position of a few hundred/thousand people. Enough of this dictating to/ruling of the citizenry already.


18 posted on 08/19/2010 1:16:18 AM PDT by JDW11235 (I think I got it now!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: American Dream 246

The irresponsibility of the 14th amendment strikes again!


19 posted on 08/19/2010 1:27:26 AM PDT by Monorprise
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: JDW11235

“The Federal Government should own NO land. All states should reclaim their Federally seized land. In addition, this should be determined by the states.”

Agreed Letting the Federal Government Own land is the source of a lot of our problems. The Feds should sell all the land in their ownership, and uses the money to help pay down the debt.
Might as well kill 2 birds with 1 stone even thou one of them birds is really really huge, and I’m not talking about the debt. The federal Government owning land has causes a lot of really huge problems for us.


20 posted on 08/19/2010 1:30:39 AM PDT by Monorprise
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: JDW11235
At least when the fedgov outright owns the land, they're being a little honest. Given the regs enforced by the fedgov, though, they own ALL land in the USA.

Think you own your land? You're wrong. You are just a tenant (serf) of the fedgov oligarchy.

/fedgov results may vary, esp in Texas and Oklahoma

21 posted on 08/19/2010 1:41:29 AM PDT by piytar (Those who never learned that peace and freedom are rare will be taught by reality.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: Monorprise

“The federal Government owning land has causes a lot of really huge problems for us.”

Yep, not to mention if the states started to produce their own energy resources (Utah has a TON), they could create possibly a surplus, or at least get us off of foreign produced energy, thereby hindering the enemies who take our money and use it to build weapons against us.

I sincerely doubt that paying down the debt will ever happen. I’m not one to think that it should either. (In some cases, yes). We give out more in non tangible foreign aid than we ever have incurred, debt wise. I realize that a debt default would probably not work out economically, but heck, it’s likely to happen anyway, everyone hurry and get prepped, become more self sufficient, and self reliant, then let’s get it over with! Enough of the slow death and decay. It’s going to be horrible no matter what, once we finally pay the piper, probably “world war” bad, but there is no fix, it’s just growing like a hurricane over warmer waters.


22 posted on 08/19/2010 1:45:16 AM PDT by JDW11235 (I think I got it now!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: piytar

Understood, and agreed. But that state of affairs WILL NOT be the case forever. But individual property rights are divinely granted (it was omitted in the DOI because of the slavery issue). It’s not something man can take from you, it’s only something you can give away.


23 posted on 08/19/2010 1:47:43 AM PDT by JDW11235 (I think I got it now!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: American Dream 246

Court rules Constitution unconstitutional.


24 posted on 08/19/2010 2:01:51 AM PDT by Vaduz
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: JDW11235

“Yep, not to mention if the states started to produce their own energy resources (Utah has a TON), they could create possibly a surplus, or at least get us off of foreign produced energy, thereby hindering the enemies who take our money and use it to build weapons against us.”
Its more then just the resources and money.

the United States Federal government also assert power over our States and the people in them to apply environmental and otherwise laws on the sole basis that our behavior is somehow tangentially effecting land they own and have asserted jurisdiction over.

In other-word their mere ownership of the land in our state has given them(in the eyes of their own self-appointed courts) undue and unfair power over our states that goes far and beyond denying us access to most of our own State!

I don’t think most Eastern really understand the gravity of the Federal land ownership situation in the west simply because almost all of their states are not owned by the Federal Government and so they don’t live with theses huge problems like we do.

The United States Federal Government was never suppose to permanently own any kind of non-ceded land within any state of the United States.

Indeed when they bought the land the deal was they were suppose to sell this land off and that was mostly working slowly but steadily up until the 1970’s and the end of the Homestead act.

Now the Federal Government not only hordes 40 to 84.5%(such as in Nevada) of the land in our States, they are actually thou eminent domain taking more and more of it!

Here is a map of Federal land % by State in the U.S.:
http://strangemaps.files.wordpress.com/2008/06/map-owns_the_west.jpg

Yes, this is a gigantic problem for western stater!


25 posted on 08/19/2010 2:51:42 AM PDT by Monorprise
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: Monorprise

Bingo! I was born and raised in Nevada, and now live in Utah. Nevada has the Largest portion owned by the FedGov (84.5), and Utah the second largest amount (57.4), so I understand completely. No one back east seems to understand this, and it is an important issue.

You are absolutely correct, the EPA and other agencies further dictate to states what they will and will not do with the land, and they are claiming more and more territory. I suspect it will be given to foreign governments, ala “National Parks nor U.N.” baloney. In Utah, Newly Appointed Gov Herbert (Took Huntsman’s seat when he became an ambassador or whatever he is now) threatened eminent domain on some federally owned lands. I don’t like Herbert, but that move was gutsy. He’s not my favorite candidate, and there’s a special election for his seat this year. I haven’t heard much on who his competition is, but he claims to want to limit/cut government spending on the same fliers where he says that he’ll oppose any cuts to education spending (a hot topic here, to be sure).

For all his bravado, I hope he’ll be kept on track. Utah, in general, seems to be getting serious (not as much as Montana and Oklahoma), but there’s major issues that divide people here, so who knows how we’ll turn out. We need a strong Governor. Huntsman wwas horrible, and Herbert doesn’t seem all that great to me either. In days passed an (R) would get you elected here, but now it’s starting to get murky.


26 posted on 08/19/2010 3:07:16 AM PDT by JDW11235 (I think I got it now!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: American Dream 246

My understanding is that these crosses are paid for and cared for with private contributions then placed on lands paid for by the taxpayers. As long as a Jewish officers family would be allowed to place the Star of David, a Muslim officer allowed to put their Crescent moon, etc there should be NO restrictions.

Having read a good deal of the writings of our founding fathers, I can not believe a single one would agree with this court decision. Even Thomas Jefferson himself would be shocked to learn one sentence of his has been twisted outside its original intent and placed onto the Constitution as a de-facto Constitutional right.


27 posted on 08/19/2010 3:08:43 AM PDT by Brytani (There Is No (D) in November! Go Allen!!! www.allenwestforcongress.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: JDW11235; Monorprise

Whoops, I mistakenly said that Utah was second in the amount of land owned by the fedgov. It’s 3rd, after Alaska, but Second in the lower 48. Sorry!


28 posted on 08/19/2010 3:08:47 AM PDT by JDW11235 (I think I got it now!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: Brytani

Correct. There is NO “Separation of Church and State,” in our law, Federal, let alone state. Only the misinterpretation of one letter to be applied to several hundren million people. But we, as a people have been too busy placating others (read, “Muslims” and “Atheists”) to speak up and say, “Enough is Enough,” but we’re getting to that point, closer every time something like this and the “Happy Holidays” not “Merry Christmas” garbage ensues.


29 posted on 08/19/2010 3:12:11 AM PDT by JDW11235 (I think I got it now!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: JDW11235

I do believe we are reaching a tilting point in the US where the tolerances of the average American has reached the breaking point. We can only hope things have not gone so far we can not bring back common sense.

Can you imagine if somehow Madison, John Jay and Jefferson were brought back to life, circa US 2010?

They’d beg to be placed back into the grave, not wanting to see how in a few short centuries their greatest gift to future generations has been crapped on. I’d like to think they would advise of to shake off the bonds of a gargantuan out-of-control centralized government. Yet, I can’t help think, after looking at the state of our society, the conclusion would be we’re not worthy of freedom.


30 posted on 08/19/2010 3:32:11 AM PDT by Brytani (There Is No (D) in November! Go Allen!!! www.allenwestforcongress.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: Pylon

Exactly my reaction. We are truly living in bizarre, evil times when the President is thrilled at a mosque going up at the site of islamic terrorism, and the courts think a simply grave marker is government endorsement of religion.

And this all before the radical leftist kagan got its hands on the case...


31 posted on 08/19/2010 3:36:11 AM PDT by OilCanDan23
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: OilCanDan23
and the courts think a simply grave marker is government endorsement of religion.

Even you have fallen for it. There is no Constitutional prohibition of government endorsement of religion.

32 posted on 08/19/2010 3:52:37 AM PDT by savedbygrace (Rev 22:20 He which testifieth these things saith, Surely I come quickly. Amen. Even so, come, Lord)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: Brytani

I agree. I think the Founding Fathers would rather help us though. Each generation, for at least the last 5, has sold their posterity down the river for ever increasing laziness, and ever decreasing personal liberty. Jefferson, at least, recognized the need for a mortal combat between liberty and tyranny in his “Tree of Liberty” symbolism (I think it was pretty direct, though).

The FOunding Father’s knew how fleeting liberty is, but they also knew the importance of earning it for yourself. They knew that you can no more pass on Liberty than you can pass on faith. We can create the conditions for either, or encourage the growth of either, but it cannot be lent, given, nor imposed. When people stop caring about what’s going on, they stop battling against tyranny, for the sake of ease.

I think our Founding Fathers knew this, and probably prayed (and may yet pray) for us to do the right thing. I don’t think we’re alone in this battle of eternal principle, I just think we’re learning to realize it’s much bigger. They had to in their time, and we have to in our time. And that gives me hope. I hope it’s peaceful, but know it’s going to happen, one way or another. American’s may think they want security, just as the sinner may want their vice, but in the end, anyone who truly has a desire for some good, or some improvement in their heart, will realize that laying down the bad for the good is a must, and will do it straightway, it’s all just a matter of time, experience, and wisdom.


33 posted on 08/19/2010 3:56:21 AM PDT by JDW11235 (I think I got it now!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: savedbygrace

I don’t think that’s what (s)he meant. But you’re right, too many people feel like there is some form of prohibition on religion. We pray in public meetings and in the legislature for a reason. They may have forgotten why, but the reason is still there!


34 posted on 08/19/2010 3:59:07 AM PDT by JDW11235 (I think I got it now!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: American Dream 246

I don’t really care to see these roadside memorials but not for religious reasons. I just think they are in poor taste. I also hate to see these rolling epitaphs that people put on their cars; “In Loving Memory of John Doe, blah, blah, blah. Once again, it’s poor taste. But it’s their car and their choice.


35 posted on 08/19/2010 4:08:08 AM PDT by caver (Obama: Home of the Whopper)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: JDW11235; OilCanDan23
I don’t think that’s what (s)he meant

I understand. That's why I said he had "fallen for it". The phrase slipped into an otherwise well-phrased post.

36 posted on 08/19/2010 4:09:37 AM PDT by savedbygrace (Rev 22:20 He which testifieth these things saith, Surely I come quickly. Amen. Even so, come, Lord)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: JDW11235

I often get a good laugh at television shows and books all discussing the great “seers” of the past. With 2012 coming up, Nostradamus and the Mayan’s are making some people VERY rich. Truth be told, if even a few of the predictions made ages ago come true, they have nothing on our founders and what they knew could happen and warned us against.

I don’t believe the founders sat in front of a mirror or dowsing rod looking into the future; they simply understood man’s psychology and human history. What they did give us that is so exceptional is a road-map to gain, keep and regain if needed, our liberty.


37 posted on 08/19/2010 4:15:54 AM PDT by Brytani (There Is No (D) in November! Go Allen!!! www.allenwestforcongress.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: JDW11235

The Founders simply wanted to make sure there was no State religion although there is, atheism. They wanted Freedom of Religion not Freedom from Religion.

Pray for America


38 posted on 08/19/2010 4:39:00 AM PDT by bray (A FReeper book http://www.brayincandy.com/id239.html)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: American Dream 246
The Denver-based 10th US Circuit Court of Appeals said that the 12-foot-high crosses bearing the name and badge number of deceased officers sent an unconstitutional religious message to motorists on the state’s highways.

What about these crosses? Are they unconstitutional too?


39 posted on 08/19/2010 4:41:51 AM PDT by mvpel (Michael Pelletier)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: American Dream 246

Then why aren’t crosses on graves in graveyards unconstitutional?
The government can regulate what words that we are allowed to speak, and can jail you for “hate” crimes (thoughtcrime) so how can the extension over private graves be far behind?
Don’t they insult our muslim masters?


40 posted on 08/19/2010 5:41:42 AM PDT by bill1952 (Choice is an illusion created between those with power - and those without)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: American Dream 246
One assumes this has to do with separation of church and state?

If so....simply move the crosses back until they are no longer on "gummint" owned right of way.

Of course, one would have to convince the owner of the private property to allow the crosses to be placed there.

What would one then do with a muslim land owner??

41 posted on 08/19/2010 5:46:43 AM PDT by Logic n' Reason ("Don't piss down my back and tell me it's rainin'")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: American Dream 246

Interesting, in Europe and Asia the same leftists go gaga over roadside shrines as blahblah...cultural landmarks.


42 posted on 08/19/2010 6:06:52 AM PDT by Chickensoup (I am absolutely done. I am a conservative libertarian.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: American Dream 246

I put those crosses up. Me. A private citizen. The court just cr*pped on my Freedom of Speach! Oppression under the Color of Law! Put THAT it your crack pipe & huff it 10th Circus Court.
Yeah, I’m lying. PROTECTED speech!


43 posted on 08/19/2010 6:22:32 AM PDT by rickb308 (Muslims need to check with Native Americans & ask how that whole cowboys & indians thing worked out.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: JDW11235

Were I in Utah politics I’d go ahead with the eminent domain threat, it was not your former governor that made it but rather Your state Legislator which passed a law authorizing the governor to carry out such actions against Federal land.

An article on the matter. As a Utahan I’d focus on supporting and encouraging them efforts. Perhaps to start a controversy to make the case to the rest of the U.S. about the serous issues of Federal land Thief.

As for selling the land to foreign governments I don’t see that as being a problem as the minute the land is out of Federal control they lose the ability to uses the supremacy clause to assert unlimited authority over the land.

We shouldn’t care who has titled to the land as long as its not the Federal Government. Simply because anyone and everyone else would be unquestionably under the authority and jurisdiction of the state.

Technically the Federal Government’s land within the bounties of the State is suppose to be under the same Jurisdiction. But you know the same old corrupt truth about the Federal governments “judgment” about the extent of their own powers.


44 posted on 08/19/2010 1:05:05 PM PDT by Monorprise
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson