There was no constitutional violation with the cross, but they are now in violation of the free exercise clause.
With that history, they could easily have won a lawsuit.
I suppose they’ll NOW change the city name: SAINT Clara???
I think it should be AUNTY Clara
>>and that the constitution is now being complied with
I wish they treated the 2nd Amendment like that. They’d insist that every American own a tank.
An iconic piece.
The constitution does not guarantee freedom from religion (or offense)
“We are happy that the city divested itself of this religious symbol, and that the constitution is now being complied with,”
************************************
The Constitution does not require the eradication of our heritage and our history.
If the cross could be donated why not the land also, just around the base of the cross
If they want to speak of separation of church and state- let us start suing for separation from climate change as practiced by many state funded colleges
Even history itself is under attack by the haters of all things Christian.
Pic of the 'offending' Cross. Can I sue to have the markers for the old Pony Express route pulled down? They abused horses after all......why celibate animal actuality? The list of other 'offensive items' could be endless. (Thinking like a liberal whacker can hurt, so be careful)
What's next? Pope John Paul II arguably was critical in freeing more people (all of Eastern Europe and Russia, hundreds of millions of people) from a more repressive system (gulag era Soviet Communism) than King's mere 20 million American blacks freed from Jim Crow.
Can we erect a John Paul II statue on the Mall?
I’m offended by the mosques can we remove them?? Especially those tall prayer towers!!
So this iconic memento of history has to come down but that piece of crap artwork is still hanging in Congress? Gimme a break.
“We are happy that the city divested itself of this religious symbol, and that the constitution is now being complied with,” said Rebecca Markert, attorney for Freedom From Religion Foundation.”
Once again, that mistaken preposition; it’s freedom OF belief, not freedom FROM belief. But this sort of affair makes special people like Rebecca who want to stand out for their specialness happy. Too bad my town gave in to a small group of legal thugs and yeah SC city council, that’s exactly what you did.
What are they going to do next, demand that all cross-shaped headstones be removed from Arlington? (Oh geez, I better not give them any ideas.)
When I was in high school, we were taught that separation of church and state simply meant that there was no official religion of the country, that all people were free to practice the religion of their choice. How we got from there to the bias against any religion (although Christians and Jews are the primary target) is a sordid story of liberalism, minority rights, and legal expenses or the threat thereof. I don’t know that we can ever revert back to the former attitude toward religion but pray that we will.
“’We are happy that the city divested itself of this religious symbol, and that the constitution is now being complied with,’ said Rebecca Markert, attorney for Freedom From Religion Foundation.”
Leftists consistently say and do the exact opposite of what they insist they say and do.
This violates the Constitution - but the Profane Court betrayed the nation long ago to embrace this inverted illogic.
Freedom OF Religion, not Freedom FROM Religion.
Gaia must not violate the separation of church and state; either.
Rebecca dear, you and your clients really lost in the end.
Only the Federal government was bound by the Establishment clause. States and local governments were legally free to established religion. The Constitution would not have been ratified if disestablishment were a prerequisite. It wasn’t until the misapplication of the 14th Amendment became prevalent that anyone would have even considered such an un-American idea.
Simply because, Antidisestablishment.
