I wonder if Massachusetts also has laws, detailing the separation of Church and State?
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?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>.
WTF?...
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.
God-less kooks.
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.
This sort of thing makes me feel uncomfortable in the presence of any of the jackbooted thugs who carry out the orders of the San Diego city council.
Is this it????
I'd like to see these gerk-offs try to get the cross of the mount in Rio taken away. The Brazilians would cook them in a pot. We are slowly sinking in this old USA and there seems to be no help available.
Such culture destroyers would find themselves resting in the "crater" garbage dump outside San Salvador....like Marxists in the old days.
I woke up early one morning and went out and saw that. It made quite an impression on me at age 11 or 12 or so. We were on a family trip to Disney World, and that I remember St. Augustine and Orlando's Sea World more fondly than I remember Disney World. Not that it was a bad time, but these other things were just as fun, with very few lines for anything.
That's it...
The Cross was / is a war memorial donated to the city. The warriors who died and are remembered with the Cross had a motto:
God - Honor - Country
Too bad the city council members are atheists, or spineless, makes no real difference. The local Roger Hedgecock Radio Show has been trying to save the cross. It does not appear he is giving up yet. Even though we live in the county, we will be donating to the election campaign of those who oppose the atheists (those who are not in jail).
By the way, there are plenty of local hills with atheist statues on them (nothing).
If you elect slime to office don't be surprised when they act slimy.
It was dedicated to War Veteran's back in 1954 I believe...
So not only is it a cross but a city war memorial too...
I live out there for two years while in the Navy. I have been to it.
In San Diego, I'm not sure those are minorities....
well, I'm praying for a host of angels all around that cross. woe to them who mess with it.
Official Seal City of Diego
Bingo.
When California slides into the Pacific, I will have no pity.
In other news, San Diego has begun tearing down all the churches throughout the city.
Man that looks beautiful. A cross and a war memorial. Sad that we are letting it get torn down.
I will start telling everyone I know, trying to spread this so maybae we can save it.
James 2:19
Thou believest that there is one God; thou doest well: the devils also believe, and tremble.
"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..."
I too came to this same conclusion a few years ago, these people know exactly what they are doing -- they are not ignorant.
LOL
The continuing saga of the land of fruits and nuts.
Too bad they didn't have a lawyer with a spine there, who would point out to that moronic judge that separation of church and state ISN'T IN THE CONSTITUTION! The liberals just want you to believe it is.
There is help:
"If my people, who are called by my name, will humble themselves and pray and seek my face and turn from their wicked ways, then will I hear from heaven and will forgive their sin and will heal their land."
II Chronicles 7:14
I believe the site is owned by the Diocese of Saint Augustine. The cross sits on land adjacent to the Shrine of Our Lady of La Leche and a Catholic cemetery, church and religious store.
So that cross will likely be there for a long time.
- Pete
There is no Constitutional violation because there is nothing IN the Constitution that describes or mentions separation of church and state .
Proust said it this way;
"It has been said that the highest praise of God consists in the denial of Him by the atheist, who finds creation so perfect that he can dispense with a creator."
:)
One of my Parish's Priests who is studying at Catholic Univ. told us of his drive down the Ventura Highway. He passed three signs in a row. San Francisco, San Jose and Santa Cruz. His name!
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.