Skip to comments.City of San Diego Orders 29-Foot Cross Removed from Mountainside
Posted on 03/10/2005 5:51:34 AM PST by Crackingham
The Mount Soledad cross must go, the San Diego City Council said yesterday.
The 16-year saga of whether the cross would stay on public land in La Jolla came to an emotional conclusion last night as the council voted 5-3 to reject a last-ditch effort to keep it in place.
The vote capped a six-hour public hearing that attracted 350 people, most of them Christians who urged the council to donate the cross and surrounding land to the federal government so it possibly could remain where it has stood since 1954.
But the cross now must be moved to comply with an injunction forbidding its presence on public land. Federal Judge Gordon Thompson Jr. issued the injunction in 1991, when he ruled that the cross violated the state Constitution's guarantee of separation between church and state. Thompson had left it to the city and the lawyers in the case to resolve the matter.
In the latest court decision in the case, a panel of the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals ruled in 2002 that the constitutional violation still existed when it struck down the city's second attempt to sell the land to a private buyer.
"This is definitely the first page of the final chapter, and I don't expect the final chapter to last another five years," lawyer James McElroy said last night. "I think we are at the end of the line here."
McElroy represents Philip Paulson, one of two atheists who filed the original lawsuit against the city in 1989.
He said attorneys for the city as well as the group that maintains the cross and Paulson will meet soon to finalize plans for when and where to move the cross, which stands 29 feet tall on top of a 5-foot-high base. McElroy said he would call the City Attorney's Office today, and that the cross could be moved within 90 days.
In other news, the city changed its name to just "Diego."
"In other news, the city changed its name to just "Diego.""
LOL, the hypocrisy of it all!
The Nazi win again.
Soon CA slided into the sea.
What are they going to replace it with? A gold hammer and sickle with a red background? Or maybe a crescent moon?
9th Circuit strickes again
Yes, over half the cities in California will need to be renamed, since they refer to Saints.
What a shame. I think that the 'religious community' should swing to the opposit tactic -- ask that the old Spanish missions be removed, that religious sounding cities change their names (San Diego, Los Angeles, Santa Ana, Sacremento, San Franciso, etc.) to something bland, and then ask that any intersection that crosses needs to be redesigned because it is too painful of a reminder of their religion. Force the wacky left into demanding that some things are okay even if 'tainted' with some hint of Christianity.
That may be the post of the day.
That may be the post of the day.
Who do all these atheists hate the site of the cross? Why do they hate the phrase 'Under God'?
I'll tell you why. Deep down in their hearts they KNOW there IS a God. They also KNOW that denying Him is wrong. They hate being wrong. To stop these feelings of guilt at denying their Creator, they want all reminders of their wrong doing removed from their sight in hopes that this will ease their feelings of guilt and shame and wrong doing.
It won't. After they remove all reminders of the loving God they deny, they will STILL feel this guilt and will take aim at something else.
I feel sorry for them.
I think I have the solution. In some municipality, we need to make sure that the letter "t" is banned from all public communications.
And what to do with all the California Missions? I believe they all have crosses on them. Multitudes of crosses!
That is awful. The USA is dotted with crosses on public lands about anywhere there is some elevation to speak of.
The Devil's right hand.
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.