How can a memorial, the revered rememberance of past individuals— their lives and actions, be considered the establishment of a religion?
“Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise, thereof.” Honestly, how do the judges make that ruling based on that sentence?
As I understand it, it is considered an endorsement of religion, per liberal criteria, because a cross is on the site.
I heard it suggested that if they chop the arms off the cross , then the atheists would deem the memorial to be acceptable.
Or if the cross were removed, again, the atheists would be ok with it.
So to these activists, any symbol of any religious significance has to be removed.