US

Neighbors Feud Over 25 Ft. Cross: ‘Somebody’s Got to Make a Stand’

A Baldwin, PA man says he’s taking a stand for his faith. Some of his neighbors say he’s just being obnoxious.

The disagreement centers on Carl Behr’s illuminated yard crosses, especially his giant, 25-feet tall one. Neighbors say the lights are blinding and want him to take them town, and the local city council agrees, having issued an order for Behr to remove the crosses on Monday.

But it’s an order Behr ignored and says is an assault on his faith.

“They’re not coming down,” he told KDKA-TV. “Somebody’s gotta make a stand against these people and I’m here to make it.”

“It’s been about the Lord since the beginning and if anyone tries to make me remove them, they will only anger the Lord,” he added:

The council says Behr didn’t apply for a permit, and even if he does, the crosses conflict with a just-passed lighting ordinance. If he doesn’t remove the crosses he faces fines.

Comments (233)

1 2 3 ... 5
  • Mick
    Posted on February 16, 2011 at 9:03am

    More power to you Mr. Behr! Stand up for what you believe and do not bend or sway!

    Fight the double standard!

    God, Christ, and the Holy Spirit be with you!

    Report Post »  
    • RabiaDiluvio
      Posted on February 16, 2011 at 10:38am

      If he were a decent Christian he would not be planting crosses vindictively in such a manner as to interfere with his neighbors and create hardship. He would be more interested in the teachings of Jesus and not so much in displaying his faith like some kind of demented peacock.

      From Matt 6: 1 “Be careful not to practice your righteousness in front of others to be seen by them. If you do, you will have no reward from your Father in heaven.
      2 “So when you give to the needy, do not announce it with trumpets, as the hypocrites do in the synagogues and on the streets, to be honored by others. Truly I tell you, they have received their reward in full. 3 But when you give to the needy, do not let your left hand know what your right hand is doing, 4 so that your giving may be in secret. Then your Father, who sees what is done in secret, will reward you.
      5 “And when you pray, do not be like the hypocrites, for they love to pray standing in the synagogues and on the street corners to be seen by others. Truly I tell you, they have received their reward in full. 6 But when you pray, go into your room, close the door and pray to your Father, who is unseen. Then your Father, who sees what is done in secret, will reward you.

      Report Post »  
  • Ronko
    Posted on February 16, 2011 at 9:01am

    Good for him somebody needs to stand up and say that my rights won’t be ignored or taken away. The only thing I would ask is why a 25 ft high cross. Why couldn’t it be 5-10 feet high instead. The permit also violates the 1st amendment with his right to freedom of religion. Why should he pay for something when he has the god given right to do it regardless.

    Report Post »  
    • awizard
      Posted on February 16, 2011 at 9:15am

      The 1st amendment?.. Nobody’s stopping him from expressing his religion … the question is pushing it on others in an intrusive manner … Light a 5″ foot cross, turn the big one off at night … Why be so obnoxious about it …

      Report Post » awizard  
  • N37BU6
    Posted on February 16, 2011 at 9:00am

    Tacky…

    Report Post » N37BU6  
  • enduro
    Posted on February 16, 2011 at 9:00am

    If it was a giant mexican flag or a some other odd ball religious symbol, this community probably wouldnt have a problem. But since it is a cross, the atheist of this country have a problem. These are interesting times indeed. I would love a big lighted cross in my neighbors yard. This would light up my area and save me some money on security lights.

    Report Post » enduro  
    • dawg of gawd
      Posted on February 16, 2011 at 11:16am

      If if if . . .the classic idealogue’s response. Tell you what, got to your front porch right now, look next door, I’m putting up a 25 light sculpture of Whoopi Goldberg. You don’t mind, do you? Good.

      Report Post » dawg of gawd  
    • beckisnutsisnuts
      Posted on February 16, 2011 at 2:26pm

      That’s right, atheists could care less about the wacko religions because they know in thier heart they are false. But when JESUS is the focus, well then that just burns them up!

      Doesn’t that kind of make you shudder Mr. BUTCHER, PRAGMATICA, THEBERTMANLIVES, STUPID WINDMILL, MIDDLECLASSMORON and those of that ilk?

      Report Post »  
  • kenman53
    Posted on February 16, 2011 at 8:58am

    The county should impose new taxes for special “green Draperies” to provide for all who are offended!
    Kiss my Ass! Let it shine! ( Just don’t play that damn Church music!)

    kenman53  
  • teddrunk
    Posted on February 16, 2011 at 8:58am

    Would the city make him take down a symbol if it was a lighted crescent moon?

    Report Post »  
  • lainpa
    Posted on February 16, 2011 at 8:49am

    I thought the lighting ordinance was passed to get him to take the lights down. The end of the video says they were working on this for 4months. He did apply for a permit and said he is willing to change the bulbs. I say turn it on for two hours a night. Good for him for standing up for his beliefs!

    Report Post »  
  • bone60
    Posted on February 16, 2011 at 8:49am

    After digging for some additional info on this story it seems that this started with the man haphazardly parking construction vehicles on the street and the woman asking him to police it up a bit. The man then erected numerous crosses on his property and the woman mad more complaints for him to police up his area as it was an eyesore. Now it seems the man is using the very large cross to push the limit on his right to erect any cross of any size. While this is allowed, why would a so-called christian not be able to work it out with the neighbor, She has asked for the lights to be extinguished because they shine directly into her house at all hours. While he has the right, he seems to be using the Lord to further prove his point. IMHO he is at fault is is harassing the woman and is not a very good Christian if he will not work it out.

    Report Post »  
  • 9thCommandment
    Posted on February 16, 2011 at 8:48am

    Well at least it is not an old Chevy up on blocks.

    Report Post »  
  • CountMeIn
    Posted on February 16, 2011 at 8:41am

    It strikes me as a bit tacky. An unnecessarily gaudy display that kind of goes against what I feel believing in Our Savior is all about. Inner grace does not require bombastic pronouncements of faith and is far more likely to convert non-believers.

    Of course, I am not all that fond of loud Christmas displays either…

    Report Post »  
  • Pyx
    Posted on February 16, 2011 at 8:41am

    It doesn’t look that blinding to me but, the white balance or the exposure could be turned way down to make the picture look that way.

    Report Post » Pyx  
  • Guerrino_P
    Posted on February 16, 2011 at 8:38am

    The same thing is happening to two of my neighbors. One is Muslim and has a twenty five foot Crescent Moon on his front yard and the other is Jewish who has a twenty foot Star of David on his front yard. City officials have told them to take both symbols down. Another example of government sticking there noses where it doesn’t belong. Praise to God.

    Report Post »  
    • Blacktooth
      Posted on February 16, 2011 at 4:35pm

      Glad I don’t live in your neighborhood, as these “religious symbols” will eventually lead to violence.
      Those symbols are provocative and will lead to provocation. Or do you think they are just expressing their free speech rights?

      Report Post » Blacktooth  
  • blessedmidwest
    Posted on February 16, 2011 at 8:38am

    What compelled him to take such an “in your face” stand? He mentioned athiests and devil worshipers. Are they so prevalent in his town that he thought a symbol of the the Lord had to be emblazoned in his neighborhood?

    Report Post » blessedmidwest  
    • Old Truckers
      Posted on February 16, 2011 at 2:56pm

      This is a man who fearful. This is defensive posture on his part.

      Report Post » Old Truckers  
    • Blacktooth
      Posted on February 16, 2011 at 4:10pm

      oldtruckers,
      “This is a man who fearful. This is defensive posture on his part.”

      hmmm, Fearful of what? Of the threat to his faith from Islam or the government or from his neighbors?
      If a man is fearful of a threat, he will arm himself with whatever he considers a shield.
      Maybe in his heart, the cross, being as big as it can be will provide him the the shield. I bet he has guns also.

      Report Post » Blacktooth  
  • grannyjojo
    Posted on February 16, 2011 at 8:36am

    Geeze….I’m not sure where this guy is coming from but if *I* were him I’d apply for the permit and turn the lights off and have my cross up for all to see. I’m a Christian but maybe the lighting of the cross is a nuisance in the neighborhood. I don‘t think I’d want to have it shining bright every single night, all night long in my yard. And its not about being a Christian, its about being a NUISANCE, and that is whether it is a cross, a train, a big doggie, whatever. On the other hand I hope they are not about to stop things like Christmas lights, lights people put up for things like Valentine’s Day, the Fourth of July, Halloween, etc. I’m praying for this young man to have some peace internally and with his neighbors. God bless

    Report Post »  
  • Your Name Here
    Posted on February 16, 2011 at 8:32am

    Two wrongs make it right?
    Behr may be right in his thinking but he is taking a confrontational stance which has a negative effect regarding his message.
    The whole “in your face” attitude is counterproductive to his stated objective.
    The next thing you know the Muslims will want minarettes for their call to prayer.

    Report Post » Your Name Here  
  • Ialmostforgot
    Posted on February 16, 2011 at 8:32am

    Was the lighting ordinance passed to target his lights?
    I find it hard to believe the lights are ‘blinding’.
    Freedom of Speech and Religion should trump the city on this one,
    but God is slow to anger.

    Report Post »  
    • GhostOfJefferson
      Posted on February 16, 2011 at 8:50am

      I live across the street from a neighbor who covers every square inch of his house in lights for any and all holidays, including Groundhog Day (I jest not). It is in fact highly obnoxious and the lights penetrate even thick curtains. He has every right to do what he does, but let‘s not pretend that this is anything but a blatant disregard for one’s neighbors and an act of incivility.

      Report Post » GhostOfJefferson  
  • kickagrandma
    Posted on February 16, 2011 at 8:29am

    Use firalitas. I bet there are some people near you who will help you with that. Also, reflective tape so that people driving by at night can see the hope in the cross/crosses. You are right that this is all about GOD and whatever people do against HIS kids will anger HIM and will earn them a wrath the likes of which no one has ever seen. Sorta makes you want to be here to see it, doesn’t it?

    Will be praying for you beginning right here and now. LORD JESUS, thank you for this opportunity to pray for YOUR child Carl. Please continue to bless, to encourage and to protect him in his public stand for YOU. Give him YOUR wisdom, YOUR patience, YOUR heart for HIS people as well as for those who are lost in the darkness~~~ all for whom those crosses testify to the TRUTH of YOU and YOUR love for us. In JESUS’ name, we pray, amen! GOD BLESS!!!

    Report Post »  
    • dsd13130
      Posted on February 16, 2011 at 9:45am

      OK, I don’t believe the Lord cares whether this guy has a 25 foot lighted cross in his yard or not. Do I believe the wrath of God is going to strike down this town and his neighbors???? No. Be a little tolerant. I wouldn‘t care if there was a large cross in my neighbor’s yard but the lighting might be an issue.

      Report Post » dsd13130  
  • Gonzo
    Posted on February 16, 2011 at 8:28am

    Putting up a lighted muslim crescent moon and sta next door would be an interesting experiment. Same reaction from the city? I wonder.

    Report Post » Gonzo  
    • mrlogan3
      Posted on February 16, 2011 at 10:45am

      Same reaction if not worse, it’s not about religion, it’s about being a considerate neighbor. Also, many Muslims object to the use of the crescent moon and star symbol.

      Report Post » TRUTH  
    • Gonzo
      Posted on February 16, 2011 at 2:46pm

      It should be about being a considerate neighbor Mr.Logan. I bet the city council would think twice if it was muslim symbolism. Out of fear. It‘s a monument to the Christian faith that violence is not feared from it’s adherents. Muslims should aspire to it.

      Report Post » Gonzo  
  • Lonescrapper
    Posted on February 16, 2011 at 8:28am

    But if he wants to burn a 25 foot American flag, that’s fine, despite the city’s burn ban :P

    Report Post » Lonescrapper  
  • Republic
    Posted on February 16, 2011 at 8:28am

    Was that Rachael Madcow’s sister in the video?

    Report Post »  
  • mikenleeds
    Posted on February 16, 2011 at 8:27am

    God is the light and has always been..

    Report Post » mikenleeds  
  • SpankDaMonkey
    Posted on February 16, 2011 at 8:22am

    .
    He needs to build a bigger one

    Report Post » SpankDaMonkey  
    • weeblewacker1
      Posted on February 16, 2011 at 9:58am

      if i lived next to him,i’d build one of those muslem minarets in my yard.

      Report Post »  
    • SpankDaMonkey
      Posted on February 16, 2011 at 10:47am

      .
      now thats a good idea. I wonder which one would piss’em off less……………..

      Report Post » SpankDaMonkey  
    • Resolved
      Posted on February 16, 2011 at 10:57am

      I have to wonder if a 25 foot cross isn’t on the obnoxious side, BUT, I also have to wonder if people would be so quick to force it’s removal if it were a monument to Islam or Same-Sex Marriage or something of that nature. Turn the lights off and leave the cross!

      Report Post » Resolved  
    • RabiaDiluvio
      Posted on February 16, 2011 at 11:17am

      If it were a monument to Islam, etc…there would be no one here to defend the display at all. They would be siding (appropriately) with the neighbors.

      Report Post »  
  • smithclar3nc3
    Posted on February 16, 2011 at 8:21am

    It doesn’t look any brighter than Christmas lights are they banning Christmas lights as well.

    Report Post »  
  • MrButcher
    Posted on February 16, 2011 at 8:21am

    “It’s been about the Lord since the beginning and if anyone tries to make me remove them, they will only anger the Lord,”

    Sounds like a rational chap.

    Don’t hit your ball in his yard, kiddos.

    Report Post » MrButcher  
  • Oh, God!
    Posted on February 16, 2011 at 8:16am

    If it conflicts with the lighting ordinance, turn off the lights, but keep the cross there. It is his property, but lately that does not seem to matter.

    Oh, God!  
    • DrammyCoke
      Posted on February 16, 2011 at 8:21am

      Makes sense to me!!!!!! Make it big and make it high!!!

      Report Post » DrammyCoke  
    • Cemoto78
      Posted on February 16, 2011 at 8:24am

      If he were to put something similar to this reflecting Islam or the Muslim faith, nobody would say a thing in fear of reprisals. Once again, political correctness, social engineering, and social justice will be the death of this country.

      Cemoto78  
    • grandmaof5
      Posted on February 16, 2011 at 8:27am

      That is a good solution and will make it clear in a hurry what the real problem is, lights or God. Also might use smaller watt bulbs (or mercury bulbs, surely they wouldn’t complain about that, and call the hazmat team to come clean up if one breaks).

      Report Post »  
    • kuuk1
      Posted on February 16, 2011 at 8:32am

      I agree keep the cross but turn off the lights-I would be up-set if I had a bright lights shining through my window and can’t sleep…I get up at 1:30 am. You don’t win souls to Christ by being obnoxious.

      Report Post »  
    • exdem
      Posted on February 16, 2011 at 8:39am

      What is this man thinking??? He must be one of those older white folks that Obama and MSNBC are always talking about who clings to his guns and religion. This outward display of Christianity will not be tolerated in America!!! We are well on our way to being converted to an Islamic Nation and all signs of Christianity must be forbidden.He is offending Muslims with that cross , in fact it might even qualify as a hate crime. He should have built a Mosque in his yard if he wanted to be left alone. Even Blumberg could get behind him then.

      Report Post »  
    • Ditto Head
      Posted on February 16, 2011 at 8:39am

      If this moron’s “faith” is in his crosses, he’s an idolater and is in grave danger. He obviously doesn’t believe the clear instructions of the Bible.

      Ditto Head  
    • GhostOfJefferson
      Posted on February 16, 2011 at 8:47am

      Ah, land of the free, where you’re free to do with your property whatever your government and neighbors permit you to do!

      I do think that having lights all over the thing and flashing it on at night is the height of incivility and rudeness in a neighborhood setting. Good Christian meekness and mildness probably wouldn‘t recommend being obnoxious to one’s neighbors. But, it is his property, and it bothers me how little property rights we have these days.

      Report Post » GhostOfJefferson  
    • mtnclimberjim
      Posted on February 16, 2011 at 8:56am

      A true Christian would love they neighbor. Turn down the lights pall.

      Report Post » mtnclimberjim  
    • ishka4me
      Posted on February 16, 2011 at 9:01am

      if it doesn’t break my arm or pick my pocket,….. this is in the break my arm category. This cross belongs in vegas, not residental PA. 25 foot illuminated cross>? really>? come on

      Report Post »  
    • ishka4me
      Posted on February 16, 2011 at 9:05am

      exactly, it is the word that is holy, not the idol. like the nuts who go to holy land expecting God to talk to them. It is the word which is holy, not some old rocks, or statues of baal. there is no holy water, holy cites, no one who can touch you and heal you while taking your money. The word is holy, that is it

      Report Post »  
    • watchtheotherhand
      Posted on February 16, 2011 at 9:14am

      These types of situations are what scare so many about the ever tightening control government exhibits over our lives. Yes this may be annoying and possibly the more humble thing to do is consider your neighbor as yourself. However, the fact that government and neighbors can essentially force you to take something down that is on your property is a slippery slope to not having personal property in a functional way. I have a business in a historic district of our town and had to go before a board to get permission to put new windows in my own business. Then they tried to tell me I had to get more expensive ones to match the older ones more closely. When I asked them if they were going to fund the difference they said no. So i said neither will I spend the extra money and got up and walked out.

      Report Post » SLEAZYHIPPOs ILLEGITIMATE OFFSPRING  
    • decendentof56
      Posted on February 16, 2011 at 9:40am

      I think he should not have it lit at night. It would only be a matter of time before a Muslim will have a brightly-lit cresent. Anyway, the bright light (not the cross) would be annoying.
      We have a Nazarene church nearby. Last summer they were allowed to place a very annoying lighted sign in the front of the church. The sign flashes, scrolls, and is very bright. All the neighbors near that church complained. They did not complain about freedom of religion, just the very bright sign which flashed through their windows.
      The question is, couldn’t the church have the sign lighted just during the day? Really, though, you do have to ask.. “why not just a sign with a softly-lit background”? The township committee was negligent in the first place.

      Report Post »  
    • jzs
      Posted on February 16, 2011 at 9:48am

      I assume from these posts that if I were to put a 25 foot high replicate of the Koran, or a statue of Buda, or a 25 foot high Big Bird or Dracula, that would be okay? Or would you start worrying about your property values and the ability to sell your house?

      Report Post » jzs  
    • DontBeADouche
      Posted on February 16, 2011 at 9:48am

      Just avoid the whole topic and take the stance that you’re for the alphabet and support the proper representation of the small letter T. The lights just make it a sparkly T. Granted that would be in favor of English….Ok, I guess we can’t win.

      Report Post » DontBeADouche  
    • Miguelito
      Posted on February 16, 2011 at 9:53am

      For those who have a Bible read: Luke 6:37. Evil came to earth to kill, steal and destroy!

      Report Post »  
    • GhostOfJefferson
      Posted on February 16, 2011 at 10:11am

      @jzs

      “I assume from these posts that if I were to put a 25 foot high replicate of the Koran, or a statue of Buda, or a 25 foot high Big Bird or Dracula, that would be okay? ”

      Yes, that would be fine. Inconsiderate, rude and obnoxious, but it’s your land. Just don‘t be expecting an invitation to the neighborhood barbecue if you’d do such.

      “Or would you start worrying about your property values and the ability to sell your house?”

      Who knows? Regardless of what I worry about, my property value is determined at the point of sale, and nowhere else, and my property value worries in no way empower me to dictate to others how to use their land.

      Report Post » GhostOfJefferson  
    • ozz
      Posted on February 16, 2011 at 10:15am

      Property rights have degraded so much because cities allow lots to be 1/4th the size they should be. If we had a minimum lot size of 1 acre then there would be more room to be your self and not in your neighbors face so much. True it is kind of a little late, but it is a prime example of governments general lack of foresight. Just the thought of one needing a permit to plant something on your property is just plain wrong. What happened to liberty?

      Report Post » ozz  
    • watchtheotherhand
      Posted on February 16, 2011 at 10:18am

      @ JZS….I would defend your right to put whatever you wanted in your yard especially if it was not a permanent structure, which this is not. Now I am all for neighbors being men and not cowards and having personal conversations about inconsiderate actions or things, but to use local government to strong arm someone else to do what you want them to do……. is to me wrong. It is no different than freedom of speech that so many of us hold dear. I love the fact that people can have such different views and disagree with me just like you have done many times JZS and I respect you for dong it and sometimes you expand my thinking on things. I would never seek to use laws to shut you up or take away your freedoms. We cannot say freedom is freedom except of course when it effects my property values. That”s not freedom. I guess I am not saying I wouldn’t find that annoying but the point to me is what we have the right to force people to do with what they own. Would a 10 foot cross be OK? How about a 5foot one or maybe a 1 foot cross or maybe not one at all? Where is the line drawn and who draws it. Again, I see it as the clash between collectivism and individualism on a somewhat smaller scale.

      Report Post » SLEAZYHIPPOs ILLEGITIMATE OFFSPRING  
    • encinom
      Posted on February 16, 2011 at 10:36am

      @Cemoto78
      YOu are wrong all you god chrisitians would be down there burning korans and protesting how islam in “invading” America.

      Look, if god knows all, and is all powerful he doesn’t need some PA hick to create a vegas version of the cross.

      Report Post »  
    • encinom
      Posted on February 16, 2011 at 10:39am

      @GhostOfJefferson

      While it is his property, the lights from his Las Vegas cross are preventing his neighbors from enjoying their property. Would you complain if your neighbor blasted gospel music and heavy metal music 24/7. It is the same issue. Your rights end when they interfer with the rights of others.

      Report Post »  
    • wyldibrouse
      Posted on February 16, 2011 at 10:48am

      Didn’t read all the replies, but has anyone thought of glow in the dark paint for the cross?

      Report Post »  
    • GhostOfJefferson
      Posted on February 16, 2011 at 10:57am

      @Enicom

      I may have missed the reference, where is anybody guaranteed a right to enjoyment while on their own property? Kind of a vague thing to claim isn’t it? What if my neighbor’s car is painted red and when he pulls it into his driveway every day I am prevented from enjoying my property?

      Heh.

      Report Post » GhostOfJefferson  
    • PubliusPencilman
      Posted on February 16, 2011 at 10:57am

      So, for all of you arguing the that this loon’s cross is protected by his “property rights,” let’s consider this hypothetical:
      Let‘s say I’m out in my yard mixing a lot of bleach and ammonia (don’t worry! I have a gas mask on!). However, my neighbor does not have his gas mask on, and the wind just happens to change direction so deadly chlorine gas wafts over to his house and kills his family. Now would you say that because I was on my own property I am not responsible for what happens?

      This is an extreme example, but the same principle holds true with the lights. It is the same reason that even when you claim first amendment rights, you can still be sued for libel or slander. Those of you who take an absolutist view just aren’t thinking things through.

      Report Post »  
    • GhostOfJefferson
      Posted on February 16, 2011 at 11:10am

      @PubliusPencilman

      “Let‘s say I’m out in my yard mixing a lot of bleach and ammonia (don’t worry! I have a gas mask on!). However, my neighbor does not have his gas mask on, and the wind just happens to change direction so deadly chlorine gas wafts over to his house and kills his family. Now would you say that because I was on my own property I am not responsible for what happens?”

      Owning property does not mean you get to physically harm people on that property. Property rights are like any other right, and extends only so far that it doesn’t harm somebody else. So for example, I have a right to keep and bear arms freely and at my discretion, I do not have a right to go out and shoot random innocent people with those arms. You have a right to do anything you wish with your property, however, if you’re launching physically harmful chemical assaults off of it, the problem is with harming others NOT property rights.

      “This is an extreme example, but the same principle holds true with the lights.”

      False, as explained above.

      “It is the same reason that even when you claim first amendment rights, you can still be sued for libel or slander. Those of you who take an absolutist view just aren’t thinking things through.”

      Libel and slander are absurd charges that shouldn’t exist.

      Report Post » GhostOfJefferson  
    • heavyduty
      Posted on February 16, 2011 at 11:23am

      It‘s your property only until the establishment decides it’s not your property. I agree with him, though I don’t have a 25ft. cross on my property. If I wanted to put one on my property then I would do so. Yeah, them lights are just totally blinding, I had to put my shades on just to what the clip. The man is right and we do have to stand up for our faith. The Lord is very clear on this subject. For if you deny Him, then He will deny you.

      Report Post »  
    • encinom
      Posted on February 16, 2011 at 11:30am

      @GhostOfJefferson

      So you have no problem with a family moving next door to you and blasting satanic heavy metal music 24/7.

      “where is anybody guaranteed a right to enjoyment while on their own property?”
      Your red example makes little sense, while both noise and light do enter neighbors property interferring with the enjoyment thereof. Part of having property is the ability to enjoy it and the use of it. Again, the vegas cross is interferring with the rights of the neighbors to enjoy their own proptery free from the vegas light show.

      Report Post »  
    • watchtheotherhand
      Posted on February 16, 2011 at 11:31am

      @ ENCINOM……although you make an interesting point. I have to disagree with your example of the blaring music. Although the lights at night might be annoying and would be a gracious act to turn them off if his neighbors are really bothered. But they are not telling him that they are telling him to take it down. I would not tell someone they couldn’t listen to music, maybe just not so loud. I would never say they couldn’t listen to music on their own property, but people are saying this man can’t even have the cross on his property, lights or no lights.

      Report Post » SLEAZYHIPPOs ILLEGITIMATE OFFSPRING  
    • GhostOfJefferson
      Posted on February 16, 2011 at 11:41am

      @encinom

      “So you have no problem with a family moving next door to you and blasting satanic heavy metal music 24/7.”

      A situation which never happens in real life. The few times I’ve had neighbors blasting music, they were having house parties and responded politely to requests to turn it down a little.

      “Your red example makes little sense, while both noise and light do enter neighbors property interferring with the enjoyment thereof. ”

      No, I’m a fan of blue you see. Somebody running around the neighborhood in a blaring red car, which clearly clashes with the blue on my property, offends me and stops me from enjoying my property as I wish.

      I do agree, it makes little sense, but then so do claims of “blaring satanic music 24/7″.

      Where is the right to enjoy your property listed again? I don’t think I saw that in your answer.

      “Part of having property is the ability to enjoy it and the use of it.”

      Where is the right to enjoy it stipulated?

      Property rights traditionally include the right to use and dispose of the property as you see fit. It does not mean you get to force others to act as you wish on their own property.

      There are provisions however for things like this article describes, and they are called neighborhood covenants (or home owner’s associations if you will), which are private contracts. If you wish to avoid being offended by people who erect 25 foot crosses with blazing lights, ensure that you move into a neighborhood that has private covenants against such action. Problem solved, and no government strong arming required.

      “Again, the vegas cross is interferring with the rights of the neighbors to enjoy their own proptery free from the vegas light show.”

      The right that doesn’t exist?

      Report Post » GhostOfJefferson  
    • Soldier4Christ
      Posted on February 16, 2011 at 12:08pm

      God Bless Him !!! There needs to be more brave souls like this guy! They are trying to take our faith from us one step at a time. Look at every dictatorship and communist country; none of them have faith. I plan to build me a giant cross myself. If its against any city ordinance ohh welll. They will have to live with it. He is not bothering anyone. The city council thinks they are all high and mighty, but the truth is … they don’t have as much power as they like to pretend they do. Keep your cross up brother …. God Bless You

      Report Post » Soldier4Christ  
    • missionarydad
      Posted on February 16, 2011 at 12:11pm

      Maybe it is just me but I do not think the Lord would approve of him angering so many people in his name. I realize that it is important for people to share their faith with others and nothing wrong with standing up for your faith, but this is over the line and too much in your face as well as breaking the law. Apply for a permit and subject yourself to the rule of law there chief.

      Report Post »  
    • Soldier4Christ
      Posted on February 16, 2011 at 12:14pm

      Liberals always like to say that “the right” wants to take away their rights. If you look at every law that restricts ones property use or that even allows the government to take our property you will see that they are all liberal backed. They want to take our rights to use our property how we see fit, practice our religion openly and spread the good word, and run our businesses without their hands in it. Yet we want to take our their rights. One man on here said it best … The only standards liberals have are double standards.

      Report Post » Soldier4Christ  
    • independentvoteril
      Posted on February 16, 2011 at 12:15pm

      OK I will admit that IN TOWN a brightly lit 25′ cross could cause some issues when people are trying to sleep.. I am NOT sure about the weather in PA but here outside Chicago we get really high winds it would be to his advantage to make the crosses smaller 10′ and make sure they would only topple on to his property for the safety of others and to avoid law suits.. His heart is in the right place the LORD knows it however.. the Bible also says you must live within the laws of the land.. I DO however wonder about the timing of the bill on lighting.. GOD BLESS this man for making his statement many don’t bother.. BTW with EASTER coming I could use a 10′ cross for my yard..

      Report Post » independentvoteril  
    • Soldier4Christ
      Posted on February 16, 2011 at 12:18pm

      Missionry,
      He is angering so many people because its a cross. If it was a huge Steelers helmet or anything else non-Christian they would not have a problem with it. I’m sick of these liberals having a problem with everything that is Christian. What is worse is the Christians who want to seem like they have an open minded and side with the liberals on every subject even one’s that are completely wrong and against their own faith.

      Report Post » Soldier4Christ  
    • Leopold
      Posted on February 16, 2011 at 12:36pm

      This ordinance will be used at Christmas time. Guaranteed

      Report Post »  
    • watchtheotherhand
      Posted on February 16, 2011 at 12:55pm

      @ SOLDIER4CHRIST………who would be doing that???? I believe that standing for what we believe in would mean not using my liberty if it causes someone else to stumble……..I will become all things to all people so that I might win some. I believe as far as the law goes this man should have the right to feature this cross. However, from a purely spiritual perspective, I think we have to ask ourselves what are we trying to accomplish? Preserve rights or win people to Christ? Paul said he had many rights as a Roman citizen but did not use them that the gospel might be furthered, (he was imprisoned without trial and beaten both of which were prohibited against Roman citizens). Paul also said ……..The very fact that you have lawsuits among you means you have been completely defeated already. Why not rather be wronged? Why not rather be cheated? Now I know this was lawsuits between believers but the emphasis was about how this was perceived by an unbelieving world. We should preserve our rights and each should do as his conscience leads him for anything done out of faith is sin. I‘m just not so sure it’s as clear cut as you have presumed.

      Report Post » SLEAZYHIPPOs ILLEGITIMATE OFFSPRING  
    • sheila t.
      Posted on February 16, 2011 at 12:57pm

      No. 1. You should be able to do anything within your rights as long as it doesn‘t infringe someone else’s rights. Having to put up with glaring lights is an infringement. One can put up a cross without disturbing others.

      No. 2. This jerk has had legal issues with the neighbor and this is clearly his way of annoying her. Why this isn’t reported, I don’t know, but it’s true. That changes everything here. To say he is doing something for religious purposes is a lie and God knows that. He better go to Confession ’cause he‘s got some ’splaining to do.

      Report Post »  
    • jzs
      Posted on February 16, 2011 at 1:21pm

      Interesting conversation. Here’s another hypothetical. You’re my neighbor – and let’s say you have kids too – and I decide I want to turn my house into a a 24 hour bar and strip joint. It’s my property correct? So there’s traffic at all hours, people parked in front of your house all the time (it’s a public street, you don’t own it). And you can be sure that the value of your house and land drop close to zero because no one wants to live next to a strip joint. Do I have that right regardless of the effect on your life and the value of your property?

      Don’t say zoning laws prevent me from doing that. That‘s what we’re talking about, the government telling you what you can and can’t do with your property. Would you guys be on my side with that hypothetical? Or would you agree that at some point – I don’t know where that point is – I can do things on my land that adversely effect the quality of your life and the value of your property.

      Report Post » jzs  
    • PubliusPencilman
      Posted on February 16, 2011 at 1:24pm

      GhostofJefferson,

      Obviously you are right about that fact that property rights do not give you a right to harm people, so really you made my point for me. After all, I don‘t think it is a stretch to say that disrupting someone’s sleep with bright lights is doing them harm–they use this tactic in interrogations!

      You may take issue with the extreme nature of the example, but what if someone was creating gas that was not deadly, but just smelled really really bad, and would waft into the neighbor’s house? Isn’t that preventing the neighbor from enjoying their own property? Or, for another example, what if someone is having a really loud party every night? Do you think that there should be no noise ordinances at all?

      Report Post »  
    • bolec slodkie
      Posted on February 16, 2011 at 1:34pm

      Wrongo bongo. “..the crosses conflict with a just-passed lighting ordinance. If he doesn’t remove the crosses he faces fines.” Which means that the fines are expost facto. As an example if it were made legal to “abort peole with diminised mental capacity up to 60 years of age” does that mean because your logic is wrong you could be retroactivly aborted.

      Report Post »  
    • watchtheotherhand
      Posted on February 16, 2011 at 1:39pm

      @ JZS…..good example, I would agree that that would be most undesirable. I guess that is why we have residential zoning versus business zoning. I know you said don’t use that but private property and business property are 2 different things. As a business owner I full expect to follow certain codes and laws as I serve the public. But from a personal standpoint my residence does not serve the public and therefore should not be subject to the same standards. I am not trying to be belligerent at all, when you come down to it boundaries and laws are meant to be good things for civilization, but there is always that tendency for laws to overstep and infringe on the individual. I guess that’s why these type of tensions are ultimately good for they continue to pressure us to maintain reasonable boundaries. Good to enter the fray with you again. Like iron sharpening iron !

      Report Post » SLEAZYHIPPOs ILLEGITIMATE OFFSPRING  
    • watchtheotherhand
      Posted on February 16, 2011 at 1:44pm

      I think most reasonable people would agree certain standards are not bad, the point of contention seems to be encountered at what those standards should be and when they should be instituted. Especially when that may clash with other rights such as freedom of expression and the rights of the individual versus the rights of the group. What a tension exists between these things and such different views to boot.

      Report Post » SLEAZYHIPPOs ILLEGITIMATE OFFSPRING  
    • AmericanSoldier
      Posted on February 16, 2011 at 1:46pm

      1. I believe he does have the property rights to do what he did. I am a strong supporter of property lights.

      2. On a personal level, why would you need a 25′ lighted cross to show your true belief in Christianity? Is this man that insecure about his faith? And if it‘s true that he’s had legal disputes with his neighbor, this could be a simple case of wanting to annoy his neighbor while trying to look like a religious martyr.

      Report Post » American Soldier (Separated)  
    • Clive
      Posted on February 16, 2011 at 2:39pm

      Cemoto78,
      I’m sure if there were some gigantic muslim light up sign, next to my house, i’d make sure it got taken down.

      Report Post »  
    • Old Truckers
      Posted on February 16, 2011 at 2:40pm

      Obnoxious neighbors are what try mens souls

      Report Post » Old Truckers  
    • DrFrost
      Posted on February 16, 2011 at 2:47pm

      I got rid of a dog I bought because he barked too much during the day when I was gone and my neighbor worked graveyard shift. I moved a security light because the neighbor’s daughter complained that it was shining into her bedroom window and keeping her up at night. You need to be sensitive to the needs of your neighbors. Doing so is the very essence of the golden rule. So I’d agree that turning the lights out at night, if they’re bothering your neighbors, is not the sort of compromise that God would get offended at.

      Report Post »  
    • PubliusPencilman
      Posted on February 16, 2011 at 4:38pm

      I am in no place to judge anyone’s religion, but what do you think would most impress an infinite, omnipotent and omnipresent God: a makeshift 25ft. cross covered with cheap christmas lights, or having compassion for one‘s neighbor and respecting one’s responsibility within the community?

      This guy is “pious” in the same way that someone is more “patriotic” if they have a bigger American flag than their neighbor. In other words, in no way that has real meaning.

      Report Post »  
    • watchtheotherhand
      Posted on February 16, 2011 at 5:14pm

      @ PUBLIUSPENCILMAN……that was my point

      I believe that standing for what we believe in would mean not using my liberty if it causes someone else to stumble……..I will become all things to all people so that I might win some. I believe as far as the law goes this man should have the right to feature this cross. However, from a purely spiritual perspective, I think we have to ask ourselves what are we trying to accomplish? Preserve rights or win people to Christ? Paul said he had many rights as a Roman citizen but did not use them that the gospel might be furthered, (he was imprisoned without trial and beaten both of which were prohibited against Roman citizens). Paul also said ……..The very fact that you have lawsuits among you means you have been completely defeated already. Why not rather be wronged? Why not rather be cheated? Now I know this was lawsuits between believers but the emphasis was about how this was perceived by an unbelieving world. We should preserve our rights and each should do as his conscience leads him for anything done out of faith is sin. I‘m just not so sure it’s as clear cut as some have presumed.

      Report Post » SLEAZYHIPPOs ILLEGITIMATE OFFSPRING  
    • getalong
      Posted on February 16, 2011 at 9:26pm

      Geez, what a good idea minus the blinding lights. No neighbor should have that kind of intrusion and Jesus wouldn’t want to anger his neighbors. Take the lights off the Crosses but keep the Crosses up. Private property is about the only place nowadays you can erect a Cross. A sad, sad commentary on our country. God does say for us to be bold and courageous in our faith but he never said that in doing so we should intrude on the goodwill of our neighbors.

      Report Post »  
    • HEARDENOUGHCRAP
      Posted on February 17, 2011 at 1:06am

      I have to wonder if he as thought about the “meek shall inheiriti the earth”, (although I have to wonder after the liberals get through with the earth, who’ll want it!) The love of God is in our hearts, not in the symbol of the cross. The cross is a symbol of the Christian faith, not the faith itself. Faith is believing in what is NOT seen. We find the Holy Spirit in prayer, and in reading the Word. We are admonished to “pray for those who dispitefully use you:”. We are to pray for our enemies, and do as we think Jesus would do in everyday situations. I must seem like an awful contridiction. On the one hand I do love the Lord, and want to act as He would want me to act. But, on the other hand, even Jesus got angry when he saw His Father’s house used by the money changers. This adds a new perspective on the phrase, “Leave it at the Cross”.

      Report Post »  
    • naed5048
      Posted on February 17, 2011 at 2:00am

      Oh yea it’s not in your back yard.. If it was, I believe you’d be signing a different tune

      Report Post »  
1 2 3 ... 5

Sign In To Post Comments! Sign In

Sign Up For Our Newsletter!

Glenn Beck Radio

Listen to Glenn Beck 24/7 Listen Now
Restoring Love