Ninth Circuit Court Rules War Memorial Cross Unconstitutional
- Posted on January 4, 2011 at 4:00pm by
Meredith Jessup
- Print »
- Email »
A cross perched atop the Mt. Soledad War Memorial in San Diego, Calif., was deemed unconstitutional Tuesday by the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals, but the court did not explicitly say the landmark must be removed. 
The long-awaited decision is the latest ruling in a 20-year legal battle over the presence of the cross on public land, the San Diego Union-Tribune reports.
Tuesday’s ruling was written by Judge M. Margaret McKeown, a Clinton-era appointee. In the 50-page decicision, the court examined the history of war memorials and the use of the Latin cross. In the end, Judge McKeown concluded that “the Memorial, presently configured and as a whole, primarily conveys a message of government endorsement of religion that violates the establishment clause,” she said, referring to the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution. (Click here to view the full ruling)
“This result does not mean that the Memorial could not be modified to pass constitutional muster, nor does it mean that no cross can be part of this veterans’ memorial,” she continued. “We take no position on those issues.”
So what does the ruling mean exactly? In essence, Tuesday’s ruling reverses a ruling by U.S. District Judge Larry Burns who previously ruled that the cross is just one element of a larger war memorial — a memorial meant to honor all service veterans — and could be used as a secular symbol of service and sacrifice.
The Mount Soledad war memorial currently sits on land that’s been under the control of the U.S. Defense Department since 2006. Though the city had owned the land for decades prior, the federal government’s acquisition of the land meant the city was forced to remove the cross or face daily fines. After the Defense Department acquired the land, a lawsuit was filed by a group of Jewish war veterans and the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU).
Popular Stories
Does Misstated Marathon Claim Prove Paul Ryan Is Dishonest? (POLL) 710 Comments
Paper Details Obama Admin’s Alleged Secret Note Sent to Iran: If Israel Attacks, We Won’t Get Involved 562 Comments
‘Made Up Religion’: TV Historian Enrages Muslims, Receives Threats After Producing UK Documentary Questioning Islam’s Beginnings 383 Comments
This Is the Creationists‘ Response to Scientist Bill Nye’s Viral Pro-Evolution Video Claiming They Harm Children 376 Comments
Roseanne Barr: Most Billionaires ‘Violent Pedophiles’ & ‘Heartless’ Cocaine Addicts 364 Comments
Faith
- This Is the Creationists‘ Response to Scientist Bill Nye’s Viral Pro-Evolution Video Claiming They Harm Children 376 Comments
Pakistani Muslim Cleric Accused of Framing Disabled Christian Girl in Koran-Burning Case Read More- ‘Made Up Religion’: TV Historian Enrages Muslims, Receives Threats After Producing UK Documentary Questioning Islam’s Beginnings 383 Comments
Meet the Controversial German Imam Accused of Brutally Beating His Wife & Pushing Sharia Law Read More
‘Self-Proclaimed Messiah’ & Unification Church Leader the Rev. Sun Myung Moon Has Died — Here’s His Life Story Read More
Business
President Obama Issues Major ‘Green Energy’ Executive Order 312 Comments- Germany’s Upcoming Court Ruling Will be Huge for the EU Read More
Ford Looks to Beat Toyota for Best-Selling Car in 2012 With This Model 149 Comments
Bernanke & QE3: Here’s What You Need to Know Read More- ‘Extortion’: Why Did the Labor Department ‘Drop the Hammer’ on Oregon Farmers? 302 Comments
Technology
- This Is the Creationists‘ Response to Scientist Bill Nye’s Viral Pro-Evolution Video Claiming They Harm Children 376 Comments
‘TaserDrone’: Hackers Weaponize Quadcopter With Actual ‘Shocking’ Technology Read More
Ever Heard of the Wild ‘Burning Man’ Festival in the Middle of the Nev. Desert? Here’s Your Primer Read More
Stanford Develops Technology ‘Better Than Steroids’ for Athlete Recovery Read More
Have You Pretended to Know What ‘the Cloud’ Is? You’re Not Alone Read More
Submitting your tip... please wait!
Comments (276)
Rn mom
Posted on January 4, 2011 at 4:49pmThe 9th circuit judge is a moron! Obviously does NOT know the Constitution and what it means- how dare she reinvent to suite her ideals!!! This isn’t creative writing class! She needs to STFU!
Report Post »foxislyingtoallofyou
Posted on January 5, 2011 at 2:04pmPLEASE POST YOUR LAW DEGREE! Its funny how ALL rulings you dont agree with MUST be “activist judges”. More SELECTIVE OUTRAGE
Report Post »barrycooper
Posted on January 4, 2011 at 4:47pmDo we need to knock down all the gravestones at Arlington? Normandy? This is utter lunacy. This is an utter and complete abandonment of reason, Constitutionality, proportion, common decency, common sense, and even concern for the law generally.
The First Amendment plainly protects religious speech, which is simply a subclass of speech generally. Religious speech is to be neither compelled nor ABRIDGED.
Lunatics. These people have been made clinically psychotic by deviant belief systems.
Report Post »StonyBurk
Posted on January 5, 2011 at 1:37pmAccording to the 9th Circuit we need to Raze Washington D.C. and remove all religious references
Report Post »found in that godless District. I do apologize for my fixation on the Mojave Cross Memorial That still has not been remedied. I appreciate the reference to Gettysburg Have seen the Irish Brigades Cross Memorial there. I guess if a cross is small enough to be dwarfed by the secular it might be more acceptable. The Judge may be clever– but she is an edicated idiot. for she did not consider the terms of the First Amendment-nor the fact that no static display can be or ought be confused as being Congress-or able to make laws respecting an establishment of Religion. The Judge’s decision is VOID.
KEA
Posted on January 4, 2011 at 4:46pmWe are all going to die from vomitting to much! I am sick everyday these anti-American progressives continue to destroy our great land.
Please God Help Us!
Report Post »Adwriter
Posted on January 4, 2011 at 4:46pm“This is not to say that it can’t be modified to comply…” Blah, blah, blah. How might one modify the universal symbol for sacrifice so that it would make these bozos happy? I know, turn it upside down just like the heathen used to do in Rome.
Report Post »StonyBurk
Posted on January 5, 2011 at 9:22amNote to the Judge–By what Constitutional guideline did you modify the Constitution to fit with your dementia? Your decision is lawless, without reason and VOID.And it didn’t even take fifty pages to declare this Truth.
Report Post »dcwu
Posted on January 4, 2011 at 4:45pmWhat does this have to do with “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof;” ? Would the judge be ok if it were replaced with a large yellow and chartreuse striped eggplant?
Report Post »NeoKong
Posted on January 4, 2011 at 4:43pmIf it was dipped in urine then they wouldn’t have a problem with it.
Report Post »They would call it brilliant.
Psytoxic
Posted on January 4, 2011 at 4:39pmJust add symbols of all the other religions so there is no discrimination. The atheists can have a depiction of a singularity.
Report Post »bbquizzle
Posted on January 5, 2011 at 7:21amDon’t forget a sculpture of the Earth for the eco-commies.
Report Post »StonyBurk
Posted on January 5, 2011 at 9:19amNO! The Memorial on Sunrise Rock ought NOT be desecrated by any godless invention . John Bembrey
Report Post »and his band of brothers erected a Cross .Henry Sandoz honored them by his version of the Mojave
Cross. We dishonor those who sacrificed Everything in WWI and the dead of all wars–when we dishonor the memory of John Bembrey and those veterans of WWI who erected a cross on Sunrise Rock.
david3755
Posted on January 4, 2011 at 4:37pmThe 9th is a complete failure of the judicial system. They really do need to be impeached and replaced.
Report Post »Dumbsht
Posted on January 4, 2011 at 4:37pmCongress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof…
Wouldn’t forced removal be prohibition of “free exercise there of”??
Man are we ever screwing up.
Report Post »Sergio Q
Posted on January 4, 2011 at 9:32pmTHREE CHEERS!!! you got it dead on “DUMBSHT” ….now to get the 9th circus court and the seperation of church n state abuserz to get it. (call me a dreamer!)
Report Post »gsjet
Posted on January 5, 2011 at 9:04pmIt couldn’t be any simpler. I will never understand why everything has to be over thought. Its simple english folks. The laws of modern times may be intentionally written in Pig Latin so the courts can turn it anyway they want,(colorable law) but that wasn’t what the Founding Fathers were about.
See, even a guy called DUMBSHT has more sense than the 9th Circuit!! lol just joking. Good post D
Report Post »dantom
Posted on January 4, 2011 at 4:35pmLets give them and california to mexico.
Report Post »angelite49
Posted on January 4, 2011 at 9:25pmAww, c’mon, Dantom. Don’t throw the baby out with the bathwater. Some of us prune-pickers are on the same page as the rest of you. No hablo espanol.
As for me, I fail to see how the placement of a cross = the establishment of a religion. This is where the 9th Circuit misses the intent of the Constitution. The prohibition of the establishment of religion was a response to the King compelling citizens to worship at the Church of England, and the beheading or persecution of those who did not choose that particular expression of faith. The placement of a war memorial in the shape of a Christian cross isn’t at all comparable to that, and therefore the judgment is off base.
Report Post »ENTITLEMENTSBLOW
Posted on January 4, 2011 at 4:32pmIn One Nation Under God, God and the cross are offensive!?
Report Post »tomx1138
Posted on January 4, 2011 at 4:31pmGuarantee you if it was a crescent moon they would say we can’t impede freedom of religion!
Report Post »moreteaplease
Posted on January 4, 2011 at 4:46pmMy thoughts exactly.
Report Post »Grandpa
Posted on January 4, 2011 at 4:31pmLet us build more symbols so everyone will be reminded of their God. God is not a symbol. I think he’d like all the living to be reminded of him more often.
Report Post »simple thought
Posted on January 4, 2011 at 4:28pmhoooodaa thunk it, cross ruled american in america, is that GOD turn’nnnn in his grave..
Report Post »oh thats right , my God is a living God, must be shakeing his head THO
EqualJustice
Posted on January 4, 2011 at 4:28pmI just had a thought… does this mean that they will have to remove EVERY headstone with a Cross in Arlington National cemetary? :(
Report Post »Pawsupday
Posted on January 4, 2011 at 4:43pmI’m sure they are fighting that one to…. It’s another sad day in American history…just sad!
Report Post »GnomeChomsky
Posted on January 4, 2011 at 4:50pmNo. The crosses are upon request of the family, as are the other 38 symbols that are allowed.
Report Post »Chet Hempstead
Posted on January 4, 2011 at 6:33pmNo, because those crosses aren’t bigger and don’t stand higher than the flagpoles flying the American flag. This ostentatious piece of junk makes the memorial look like a church; like the perpetuation of Christain domination was the main thing those honored were fighting for.
Report Post »Plankchapel
Posted on January 4, 2011 at 9:43pmJobs! Jobs! Jobs! The Organizing for America people are being laid off!
Report Post »alcarfl
Posted on January 4, 2011 at 4:26pmThen just leave it there as an aviation visual reference point which it has been for decades, Most flights outbound from Montgomery fly to Mt. Soledad before heading up or down the coast so the firetails out of Miramar can avoid general aviation traffic. Midair collisions aren’t costitutional either, you ninth district ********. Get a life, judges, everywhere!
Report Post »LadyIzShy
Posted on January 4, 2011 at 4:25pmhope the supremes do a better job than the 9th.. shame on them
Report Post »simple thought
Posted on January 4, 2011 at 4:25pmanother stupid attack on chrisitanity in this, a GOD fear’n Christan nation………
Report Post »God is our foundation, how stupid are these people, where is common sene, anyone offended by a cross, move your ass out of america, we toloreate your frig‘n 5 times a day screach’ncall to prey, your round dome mosque, leave our christian symbol the hell alone, just a simple thought
timber wolf
Posted on January 4, 2011 at 5:13pmWell said simple thought, but our country has been high jacked and taken over by nazi marxists/ satanists.
Report Post »booger71
Posted on January 4, 2011 at 4:24pmThe 9th Circuit is interpreting again which is not in their pay grade.
Report Post »AZBabe
Posted on January 4, 2011 at 4:22pmThey have been fighting over this cross for years…I lived in San Diego for 40 years and it has been on the atheists radar since that far back…it’s a darn shame that such a beautiful area as Mt. Soledad can’t be left in peace for the citizens to enjoy. It is truly an awesome place.
Report Post »untameable-kate
Posted on January 4, 2011 at 5:35pmIt is a darned shame when people who are in the minority are allowed to harass the majority with these ridiculous lawsuits. If someone is so easily offended by a cross they need some serious therapy.
Report Post »Moonbat
Posted on January 4, 2011 at 7:48pm@ Kate
One of the functions of the Constitution is to protect the minority, particularly from the government. As far as I’m concerned, this is a tempest in a teapot, but the principle the 9th is applying is sound.
Report Post »StonyBurk
Posted on January 5, 2011 at 9:13amI visited Mt.Soledad when I was on orders for ‘Nam. It is as you say. It seems like fighting words for any Judge to say what this bimbo did in her unlawful decision. I will continue to remind people of the
Report Post »Mojave Desert Cross Memorial -even thinking of getting my first tatoo if I can find an ink artist who can do the Mojave Cross Memorial as it stood -justice.
pavnvet
Posted on January 5, 2011 at 11:36am@ moonbat (which I might add aptly describes you). The framers of the Constitution never said that religion was not part of our heritage or honor our beliefs, just that we can’t (like Muslim countries) establish a religion. Minority rights? What about the majority’s rights? It is a fact that more Christians far and away have lost their lives serving this country than the members of all other religions, plus the atheists and agnostics combined (and by a multiplier of thousands). The great majority of the men honored by these memorials often prayed to their Christian beliefs as they made the ultimate sacrifice.
It may interest those on here worrying about Arlington, that the US Veterans Affairs has approved markers for graves for atheists, to Wicca and most major religions including Buddhist, Hebrew, Muslim and Hindu (plus some you probably have never heard of).
But, as I said above, go visit Arlington and see how many are not crosses.
Report Post »urrybr
Posted on January 5, 2011 at 2:10pmI would tell the Jews to shove the Star of David up their rearends! And I’m a Jew!!
Report Post »shorthanded12
Posted on January 4, 2011 at 4:20pmThe NINTH CIRCUS is showing its true colors, just look at the RINO leaving office and THE SOCIALIST coming into office in the State where the 9TH CIRCUS CALLS home.
Report Post »tjdavid21444
Posted on January 4, 2011 at 4:19pmTotally and completely assinine. There is no occurrence of the phrase “church and state” anywhere in the Constitution. The First Amendment seeks to prevent there from being an official “state religion”. It is to protect freedom OF religion, not freedom FROM religion.
Report Post »gopsnativeson
Posted on January 4, 2011 at 4:40pmThe First Amendment
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
What about the part that says OR PROHIBITING THE FREE EXERCISE THEREOF, OR ABRIDGING THE FREEDOM OF SPEECH
HOW CAN THIS PART OF THE CONSTITUTION BE LEFT OUT, & ALL THAT IS ARGUED OR ACKNOWLEDGED IS THAT CONGRESS SHALL MAKE NO LAW ESTABLISHING A RELIGEON.
IT SEEMS TO ME THAT CONGRESS & IN THIS CASE THE 9TH CIRCUIT IS DENYING THE PETITIONERS THE FREE EXERCISE THEREOF, & ABRIDGING THEIR RIGHT TO FREE SPEECH,
Report Post »hAndyman54
Posted on January 4, 2011 at 6:38pmGOP, you have it correct, but the progresses don‘t care or even read what’s in the Constitution. For them it’s an old outdated document, irrelevant in today’s society. And I agree with Snow Leopard, that we have an established system of voting so that we may correct these things. But the progresses are so deeply entrenched in the bureaucracy that it may already be too late. The United States Congress may have already become irrelevant, and Obama has been proving that regularly with his executive orders, and appointments. Even when a law is written and passed, the bureaucracy writes all the rules and regulations. So we may already be at a point where nothing short of a revolution can restore the Constitution. I pray that things haven’t gone that far, but it sure doesn’t look good.
I find it very troubling, but lately I can’t seem to get the words of Thomas Jefferson out of my head.
Report Post »The tree of liberty from time to time needs to be refreshed with the blood of patriots and tyrants.
Moonbat
Posted on January 4, 2011 at 7:37pmHey, guys — check the text of the 1st amendment that GOP has helpfully typed. Government cannot establish religion. Therefore, a religious display on a memorial operated by the federal goverment is a violation of the first amendment. Period. Granted, it’s easy to find plenty of exceptions to this, but that’s the Constitution, like it or lump it. The 9th is applying the amendment as it was intended, as the writings of Madison and others make abundantly clear.
Oh, and GOP — the first amendment grants freedom of speech to the people, not to the government.
Report Post »Commonsense Libertarian
Posted on January 4, 2011 at 9:12pm@Moonbat:
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
Posted on January 4, 2011 at 7:37pm
Hey, guys — check the text of the 1st amendment that GOP has helpfully typed. Government cannot establish religion.
Obviously you didn’t understand, Please review the first amendment again….
Congress shall make no LAW respecting the establishment of religion.
The government happens to own the land this memorial on, under what circumstances they acquired the land is another subject, but ownership of land does not have anything to do with congress making a law. Therefore, a religious display at a war memorial that happens to be on government land is completely constitutional. Congress made no law respecting the establishment of religion here.
Report Post »Moonbat
Posted on January 4, 2011 at 9:25pm@ commonsense
So the government can ban my religion, censor my speech, and take away my guns, as long as Congress didn’t make a law directing them to do it? Go back to the drawing board, friend.
Report Post »VanGrungy
Posted on January 4, 2011 at 10:22pmMoonBat..
Blame the “Living Constitutionalists”
Report Post »benrumsley
Posted on January 5, 2011 at 9:29am@commonsense
So if the government owns the land, it’s ILLEGAL to have a religious symbol on it. Are you saying that all references to GOD on the walls of Congress and the Supreme Court must be removed? How about all the crosses at the graves in Arlington Cemetary, do they go to? IT’S ALL GOVERNMENT PROPERTY You Dolt. Stop looking down your nose at everyone else and you might see the truth for once.
Report Post »mrclean
Posted on January 5, 2011 at 5:13pmThe ruling is unconstitutional
Judges are usually crooked (playing the game of politics and also accepting bribes) but unfortunately they’re the “rulers” and even though they repeatedly misinterpret our laws they are seldom effectively challenged
No answer that I can see for straightening out these crooks
Report Post »Commonsense Libertarian
Posted on January 8, 2011 at 12:36pmPosted on January 4, 2011 at 9:12pm
@Moonbat:
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
Posted on January 4, 2011 at 7:37pm
Hey, guys — check the text of the 1st amendment that GOP has helpfully typed. Government cannot establish religion.
Obviously you didn’t understand, Please review the first amendment again….
Congress shall make no LAW respecting the establishment of religion.
The government happens to own the land this memorial on, under what circumstances they acquired the land is another subject, but ownership of land does not have anything to do with congress making a law. Therefore, a religious display at a war memorial that happens to be on government land is completely constitutional. Congress made no law respecting the establishment of religion here.
Report Post »
MOONBAT
Posted on January 4, 2011 at 9:25pm
@ commonsense
So the government can ban my religion, censor my speech, and take away my guns, as long as Congress didn’t make a law directing them to do it? Go back to the drawing board, friend.
@Moonbat
That flew right over your head didn’t it? Did I say government could do any of that?
The government should limited to the confines of the constitution. How would having a cross on the top of a building equate to the Government banning your religion? They would have to make a law to do so. That would be unconstitutional as it would be a law respecting the establishment of religion. The 9th circuit ruling the presence of a cross on Government land is unconstitutional, is in essence banning religion and censoring freedom of speech through expression. How do you not understand that?
How you moved into the 2nd amendment, I don’t know, my comment had nothing to do with our right to bear arms. Reading comprehension is a key to success.
Report Post »Commonsense Libertarian
Posted on January 8, 2011 at 12:37pmwow that was weird, I didn‘t quote anything but Moonbat’s response.
Report Post »Commonsense Libertarian
Posted on January 8, 2011 at 12:47pm@ Benrumsley
Where did you get that from?? I was responding to Moonbat confusing congress making a law respecting the establishment of religion with an actual building or display. I said that the cross on the land has nothing to do with a law respecting the establishment of religion as the 9th circuit ruled. The cross is completely LEGAL being there. I am a firm believer in our freedom of religion, it is not our freedom from religion. Try reading a response with context before you snap to the keyboard to cast stones.
Report Post »EqualJustice
Posted on January 4, 2011 at 4:18pmWHY on God’s green earth does the ULTRA LIBERAL NINTH CIRCUIT even exsist and why do they always get these cases, like the AZ law and the no ID to vote controversy? Everyone knows the outcome even BEFORE a case is heard there, so why bother? This is not JUSTICE!
Report Post »snowleopard3200 {cat folk art}
Posted on January 4, 2011 at 5:51pmWe have a system already established by the legislature body we elected; if the people of the land want the process changed, then we do it the way established. To make changes, let the will of the people, and our voices be heard loud and clear; let the legislature remember and be constantly reminded they work for us, not the other way around.
Report Post »82dAirborne
Posted on January 4, 2011 at 7:35pmGood thought Snow – However our President will go around that small detail. The will of the people means nothing to him EXCEPT on election day.
Report Post »Rick300
Posted on January 4, 2011 at 4:18pmAre you kidding me??? Amazing…narrow minds seem to prevail…how much did this lawsuit cost us, the U.S. taxpayer???
Report Post »grandmaof5
Posted on January 4, 2011 at 4:29pmIt’s California, they can afford it (ha-ha), they will just get all their socialist CA elite together and they can write checks to cover the cost, afterall, they said they wanted to give their money away; and what better cause than to disrespect the sacrifice the military has given so they can be free to say and do whatever they please, with the blessing of Obama, who would like nothing else but to be one of them.
Report Post »DagneyT
Posted on January 4, 2011 at 4:15pmThe 9th CIRCUS court is at it again!
Report Post »Elrik68
Posted on January 4, 2011 at 4:20pmCould not have said it better myself Dag… Here’s the one finger Salute to the 9th Circus..
Report Post »American Capitalist
Posted on January 4, 2011 at 4:22pmHow is it that a display like this is unconstitutional. I mean, I know what the liberal progressive left will argue, but… really? This is offensive???
Report Post »EgoBrain
Posted on January 4, 2011 at 4:25pmThis is Not American.
Report Post »American Capitalist
Posted on January 4, 2011 at 4:28pmGovernment Endorsed Religion is not a phrase used in the constitution. Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof… This is definately NOT “mak(ing a) law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof”
Report Post »Paul G
Posted on January 4, 2011 at 4:34pmIn essence,….I still didn’t get the essence
Report Post »Okie from Muskogee
Posted on January 4, 2011 at 4:34pmThis is stupid once again.
If a group of Christians want to purchase and display a Cross, this should be allowed. If any other group wants to display their religious symbol after they purchase it, it should be allowed as well.
Freedom of Religion, not freedom from Religion. We have it backwards.
Report Post »CatB
Posted on January 4, 2011 at 4:36pmThese clowns need to go!
Report Post »neverending
Posted on January 4, 2011 at 4:43pmdirty rotten sob’s -
Report Post »tower7femacamp
Posted on January 4, 2011 at 4:43pmI told you guys about the Jews in our courts and banking
The three-judge panel of the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals quizzed lawyers for the federal government, which owns the La Jolla site, and lawyers for a Jewish veterans organization, which sued along with the American Civil Liberties Union to remove the landmark. The range of legal issues includes the history of the cross, the intent of Congress in taking the land in 2006 from the city of San Diego and the appropriate legal precedents to use in deciding the matter.
Report Post »http://www.signonsandiego.com/news/2009/dec/10/judges-review-soledad-issues/
http://lonelyconservative.com/2010/08/9th-circuit-rules-government-can-track-you-with-gps-without-a-warrant/comment-page-1/
pajamash
Posted on January 4, 2011 at 4:44pmOkie, you have it right. It is these 9th Circuit schmucks that have it wrong.
Report Post »snowleopard3200 {cat folk art}
Posted on January 4, 2011 at 4:48pmOnce again we see the bane of PC run amok going over the deep end; then again at least these have been consistent in their wanting to impose their own cramped views on the nation. Demented as it is to the rest of the Christian nation.
Report Post »RaptureReady_004
Posted on January 4, 2011 at 5:03pmThats crazy! What’s next? They say you can’t wear a crucifix necklace at school, or work or place of business. Reason: Don’t want to OFFEND. Now , not in a Memorial. Now where? A CEMETARY!! It may offend a passerby or something. geez. What is wrong with these judges?
82dAirborne
Posted on January 4, 2011 at 5:04pmAre you kidding me??? I am not a hugely religious person. Kind of middle of the road on that. But I am certainly not offended by a cross or a menorah or a depiction of Buddha; nothing of the sort. If those things give comfort or solace to others who am I to complain?
I don’t care for porn either so I just don’t watch it. I wouldn’t dare try to tell another American not to watch it. I guess I’m just not very bright – I wish someone would explain the problem with this kind of thing to me. I just can’t understand how this hurts anyone.
The way I see it the Constitution tells us that government can’t endorse or control religion and vice versa. Seems pretty cut and dried to me.
We need a little more common sense and the ‘ol “Live and let live” mentality of old.
Report Post »TAXLORDCOMETH
Posted on January 4, 2011 at 5:07pmLet’s pull up all the crosses in Arlington Cemetary!
Report Post »oldguy49
Posted on January 4, 2011 at 5:26pmthere are no atheist in a fox hole
Report Post »cykonas
Posted on January 4, 2011 at 5:27pmThe question that interests me is how and why did the DoD come to own this land in 2006? The article says before that it was owned by the city of San Diego. I suspect that once it became Federal Government property, even though no specific law was passed, the court is ruling that the cross being the only visible symbol represents a de facto “sponsership” of Christianity over other religions.
It sucks, I agree, but the argument may have legal merit. Does anyone know how and why the property ownership transferred to the DoD? It also surprises me that it’s a Jewish group of veterens. I would think with what the US military has done for Jews and the Jewish state during and since WWII, a cross on a war monument would not be offensive to them.
Report Post »Reavist
Posted on January 4, 2011 at 5:29pmTheir ruling prohitbits the free exercise of religion – their ruling is unconstitutional.
Report Post »TXPilot
Posted on January 4, 2011 at 5:35pmMay the 9th Circut and the entire city of San Franciso/ Oakland slide off into the Pacific.
Report Post »geminisailor
Posted on January 4, 2011 at 5:40pmFug’m
Report Post »AzDebi
Posted on January 4, 2011 at 5:46pmHey DAG…you beat me to it…my sentiments EXACTLY!
Report Post »Peter8888
Posted on January 4, 2011 at 5:46pmWhat a chicken SH&T judge and a waste of ink! Idiots! After 25 years of serving I know the cross around my neck meant somethimg and I was government property!
Report Post »snowleopard3200 {cat folk art}
Posted on January 4, 2011 at 5:50pm@OldGuy49
You hit upon the answer to the 9th Circut.
Report Post »tower7femacamp
Posted on January 4, 2011 at 6:02pmoperation Mocking bird Meredith
Report Post »tower7femacamp
Posted on January 4, 2011 at 6:07pmoperation Mocking bird Meredith
Report Post »http://www.mormonthink.com/QUOTES/gov.htm
highcarry
Posted on January 4, 2011 at 6:12pmsay goodbye arlington
Report Post »kryptonite
Posted on January 4, 2011 at 6:34pmShame on those liberal Jews. They are pushing away the only friends they have left in the world.
Report Post »Plankchapel
Posted on January 4, 2011 at 7:07pm@DAGNEYT — You are so right on!!!
You know, our courts are so screwed. TAX DOLLARS went to restore MOSQUES overseas, but a cross, representing Someone Who died for us, as a memorial for those who also died for us being declared unconstitutional?!
“We have been the recipients of the choicest bounties of heaven. We have preserved, these many years, in peace and prosperity. We have grown in numbers, wealth and power, as no other nation has ever grown. But we have forgotten God. We have forgotten the gracious hand which preserved us; and we have vainly imagined, in the deceitfulness of our hearts, that all these blessings were produced by some superior wisdom and virtue of our own. Intoxicated with unbroken success, we have become too self-sufficient to feel the necessity of redeeming and preserving grace, too proud to pray to the God that made us! It behooves us, then to humble ourselves before the offended Power, to confess our national sins, and to pray for clemency and forgiveness.” ~ April 30, 1863 ~ President Abraham Lincoln’s Proclamation for a National Day of Fasting, Humiliation, and Prayer
Our National Motto is IN GOD WE TRUST.
@AMERICAN CAPITALIST
Report Post »Posted on January 4, 2011 at 4:28pm
I totally agree with you. Absolutely on spot!
click4cheapandeasyweb
Posted on January 4, 2011 at 7:18pmI wish we could make the 9th circuit unconstitutional.
Report Post »DisillusionedDaily
Posted on January 4, 2011 at 7:18pmI wonder if the judge would see anything wrong if the monument was topped off with a crescent and star???
Report Post »heyjim55
Posted on January 4, 2011 at 7:25pmThe ACLU sueing isn‘t a surprise but the jewish war vet’s well that peaks my interest, could they be converted Marxists? the next time you see a large protest by the Left look to see if there are any Vietnam War vets marching with them. Most of the vets that returned from that war would not have a problem with that cross but a Marxist would and a Jewish Marxist would not hisitate to use his families faith as a angle to attack that monuments existance.
Report Post »C. Schwehr
Posted on January 4, 2011 at 7:59pmInteresting since the decision of the court VIOLATES the free exercise of religion as mandated by the 1st amendment. Fortunately, the 9th CIRCUS court has an 80% overturn rate on it’s findings…and this will also be overturned in time. Screw you ACLU!
Report Post »racialcoward
Posted on January 4, 2011 at 8:27pmMOST WAR MEMORIALS AT GETTYSBERG NATIONAL CEMETARY HAVE CROSSES ON THEM AND PRAYERS TO GOD/
Gettysberg is Federal property so all those stone monuments will have to be destroyed. Do the people of Pennsylvania really want to keep their Star up on the US Flag? Is it worth it anymore?
Report Post »Cemoto78
Posted on January 4, 2011 at 9:12pmThese black robed rubes made their moronic decision, let them try and enforce it. Time for “We the People” to tell these idiots where to put their decision, and that is assuredly where the sun don’t shine.
Report Post »mikem1969
Posted on January 5, 2011 at 8:56amOnce again, an attack on AMERICAN ideals by a communistfornia court.
Report Post »StonyBurk
Posted on January 5, 2011 at 9:09amThe decision is invalid. It cannot be reconciled to the terms used in the First Amendment’s establishment clause. It cannot be reconciled to the debates in Congress when the Amendment was introduced-Cannot be reconciled to laws and/commentaries written closer to the adoption of the Amendment. I do not believe this Judge understands the US Constitution do not believe this panel of Judges has honored their Oath taken by all Judges to defend the Constitution (Not modern Myth-nor constructs of an errant and corrupted court led by the transmission belts to Soviet communist dictatorship (the ACLU) The decision apparently did not consider the man who erected a memorial on
Report Post »Sunrise Rock back in 1934. Nor the intentions of th ecurrent Caretaker Henry Sandoz. and this panel most clearly ignores the history of such crosses from 1620-1960 in America. I suppose next time I see some anti war protesters placing little white crosses in the public parks to protest our wars I ought remind these people they are violating the modern construct of the First Amendment.Next time I see some snot nosed kid crying as he/she/it buries a beloved pet and places a simple cross I should lecture them on the new interpretation of the establishment clause. There is NO Constitutional violation caused by the Mojave Desert Cross. the decision is loony tunes and VOID.IT is no law.
Jim in Houston
Posted on January 5, 2011 at 9:21amMore stupidity, but what else would one expect from the most liberal court in the land?
Report Post »bsone
Posted on January 5, 2011 at 11:03amIsn’t the 9th Circuit really the Supreme Court of the United Counties of California?
Report Post »Kaen
Posted on January 5, 2011 at 11:23amThe 9th Circuit Court is Un-Constitutional…
Report Post »getalong
Posted on January 5, 2011 at 1:27pmMaybe this un-American judge should have asked the families of those killed or injured while fighting in the war whether they find the cross offensive.
Report Post »Jon_ny
Posted on January 5, 2011 at 1:33pmIgnore them !!!! And than tell to take the fly leap !!!!!! Than break the 9th and charge them with treason…
Report Post »patriot4all
Posted on January 5, 2011 at 1:40pmWould it be too much to hope they’ll just die and go away?
Report Post »cmttufw
Posted on January 5, 2011 at 4:15pmThe 9th circus and Bin Laden must all attend the same book club. Bin Laden announced on all of his websites that they are going to do all they can to destroy the symbol of the cross…….hmmmmm….interesting.
Report Post »ozz
Posted on January 5, 2011 at 6:44pmWhy is it every asinine circuit court decision I read about has “ The 9th circuit court” in its title?
Report Post »Its bull any ways. “separation of church and state” appears no where in our founding documents.
Not the constitution or the The Declaration of Independence.
Historical evidence proves beyond the shadow of a doubt the founding fathers meant exactly the opposite in the first amendment.
Congress requisitioned bibles as text books for our first public schools, and sighted the concern that the youth growing up may be unable to read the scriptures as the reason for the establishment of the first public school.
So how long do we let the left push their lies people?
Lucy Larue
Posted on January 5, 2011 at 8:18pmDagneyt,
Yes they are. Ugh!
Webster’s says that a cross is a structure consisting of an upright beam with a transverse beam, used for executions. That is the FIRST and most common definition. The ROMANS, from what I know, were not Christians.
This whole fandango of certain people being upset at the sight of a cross is beyond idiocy! The idea that their complaint is given credence is MORONIC!
It disgusts me to visualize 9th. circuit judges sitting in their black robes pontificating and thinking really “DEEP THOUGHTS” to come to this decision. Again UGH!
This “SANITY” only prevails in Wonderland. Down is up and up is down and we’re painting the roses red!
Report Post »BeckIsNuts
Posted on January 6, 2011 at 9:17amI wouldn’t want to see any symbols of Islam displayed on any government property. The law protects us from that, see we have to take the good with the not-so-good.
Report Post »