A lone cross built to honor the dead of World War I, bolted to a desert rock on public land, raises a host of complicated issues about which religious displays violate the Constitution’s ban on establishment of religion and who may challenge them. But the Supreme Court yesterday seemed disinclined to answer most of them.
Justices spent nearly half of the oral argument deciding what they were deciding about the 61/2-foot cross in the Mojave National Preserve in California and appeared to settle on a rather narrow question: whether Congress solved the problem by trying to transfer the land on which the cross sits to private ownership.
[…]
The case was the first major opportunity for the court under Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. to delve into the meaning of the First Amendment command that “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion.” Previous court rulings on religious displays have been mostly narrow and case-specific, producing few rules on who may challenge government actions or what violates the Establishment Clause.Justices seemed uninterested in reviewing the lower court’s decision, which found that a former park superintendent who objects to religious displays on public land is entitled to bring the lawsuit. Only Justice Antonin Scalia seemed to want to decide the more basic question of whether the cross was unconstitutional in the first place.
It’s not so complex. A cross is a Christian symbol, it’s on government land, it’s prohibited. But justices aren’t smart enough to figure that out.
The issue is just as simple as #2 says.
PEDRO!!!!!!—HOW do you miss such a simple point??? “Issues” are never about the dead. Its all about what government sponsorship of religion does to the LIVING!!!! You going to start posting links to Limbaugh now???
But, to the subsidiary issue: is a solution to sell the land? Yes and no depending on how its done and what “motives” may result in all to the point that when you try to dance and weave around a simple truth, you wind up looking like Tom Delay with food splints.
Best to be avoided. To that end, I suggest the law should be: No land within the boundaries of federal property will be sold for private erections of monuments or other activities that do not directly support the activities of said federal property.
We need to nip this stupidity in the bud before too many more people get upset about the rights or feelings of dead people===Catholic or otherwise.
#2-it’s on government land
There is no such thing as government land since land is purchased and maintained with the people’s money collected via taxes.
Let the people decide with a vote.
Why should the government decide how I can interpret what’s there? When I see crosses at the top of a hill like this I see scarecrows, and home gardens, and children eating fresh vegetables, not religion.
In the last few decades I’ve seen this tendency to waste an incredible amount of time on these issues. If they don’t have anything better to do maybe there’s too many supreme court judges. It seems to me there’s plenty to be done right now.
#6–Pedro==thats not the “best” argument but ok. The violation of law occurs every day that some taxpayer looks up and says “Shit, my money is going to pay for religious idolatry!!!” This is very consistent with the notion that “I don’t want my taxes paying for abortions.” except its totally opposite. ((Heh, heh!))
Nice to see you and Dr Doodiepants are so flexible with your constitutional rights. Everybody is free to agree with you right?
#2 Luckily for all of us the members of the SCOTUS both liberal and conservative don’t think as one dimensionally as you do.
#8-boob-(the cross vs abortion)
I don’t really see why you have a problem with the cross in this context.
The cross was erected to honor the dead and abortion is to increase the dead.
I imagine that you will be a ghoul till the end so what’s the problem?
#10–Dr Dodd==the cross was erected because the good christians wanted to draw attention to god’s loving mercy towards all mankind under the unrecognized assumption that everyone is christian. Not everyone is and our god given (sic!)CONSTITUTIONAL rights say that regardless of which assumptions you assume, TAXPAYERS should not be picking up the bill.
#9–Gig==#2 simply referenced our god given (sic!)CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS. If such rights are one dimensional or multi==the grounding issue remains the same. Do you think the government should tax people to raise up and maintain religious symbols or not?
#11-boob-the cross was erected because the good Christians wanted to draw attention to God’s loving mercy towards all mankind.
Well, we can’t have any of that.
Perhaps you would prefer a scene from the happenings from a San Francisco street party?
#13–Dr Dodd==its been said 3-4 times now. Why do you only respect Constitutional Rights when they flow your way==or do you rather actually not understand FREEDOM at all and only recognize when free people are made to bow to your idols and care not about your minority status?
There is a simple solution: dynamite.
#6, pedro,
Why should how long it has been there matter?
This country embraced slavery for centuries before it was banned. We denied the vote to women and minorities. We allowed schools to force religion (as well as common prayers) on our children.
Righting a wrong has no past time frame to use as an excuse.
This cross is not a work of art. It is in an out of the way place that is only accessible over park land. There is no one buried there.
If the VFW want the cross then they should be allowed to move it to a site they own. Leave our natural parks natural.
#14-boob
Your biggest complaint is that taxpayers (you) are forced to pay for the maintenance of this cross.
What could that cost be? Judging from the picture I would say maybe $500 dollars in 75 years assuming it’s been painted a few times.
That figure pales to the cost of one night out of drinking a womanizing by Ted Kennedy which also was at taxpayer expense.
#4 Dr Dodd
The people are the government.
#19–Dr Dodd==so you are expressly affirming you don’t care about Constitutional rights. Pretty short sighted and ego maniacal. The taxpayer issues is the weakest argument that is still valid that I could think of to explain the issue to you and your ilk.
The issue that is MOST important is FREEDOM. I guess that doesn’t mean much when you define freedom as doing exactly whatever your god requires and then thanking him for it. You know, coveting the power of the Muslim Theocracy is against your basic teachings?===Just a reminder.
Yep, all very consistent.
#20-LDA-The people are the government.
Try telling that to Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid and I bet they would disagree.
In your context – I agree.
We need to stop letting these ACLU types bastardize Article 6, which reads:
“Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof”
Madison even stated in 1789 what the interpretation of Article 6 should be: “Mr. Madison said he apprehended the meaning of the words to be, that Congress should not establish a religion, and enforce the legal observation of it by law, nor compel men to worship God in any manner contrary to their conscience….”
In other words, the US government CANNOT endorse a public religion, but that is a far stretch from saying that no religious symbols can appear on government property – just that the government cannot discriminate.
If we are going to remove this, do we need to remove all the crosses from Arlington NATIONAL Cemetary? I’m not even religious, but this sort of shit is getting out of hand.
For those who disagree with #6, I am an atheist but I love old church buildings and cathedrals. They are part of history, both in the US and abroad. It would be hard pressed not to find symbols of religious meaning on markers, monuments and buildings constructed in the first 150 years of the United States. To me, this cross is no more than evidence of human emotions being conveyed in a manner that was appropriate at that time. I would have a completely different opinion if someone constructed a similar piece now because the act is no longer simple emotion, but promotion. Perhaps if the art overtly shared a hateful message, but even then, its historical context should be considered before removing if that is the wishes of the majority.
#12, Alphie
As private individuals put it up, not the state, the state did not establish religion…
And its no longer public land…end of issue.
True, the VFW did erect it. They did it on public land with the consent of the government. That makes the government complicit in the act. So that makes the side question, was the erection legal under the Constitution.
Then when the legal questions about the cross were raised, the National Park Service (under Bush) gave the land it is on away to a private group. That leads us back to the first question of if it is legal to allow a private group to erect and maintain a religious symbol on public land.
The cross is the universally recognized symbol for Christianity. As is the Star of David the symbol Jews, star in a circle is the Wiccan symbol, and a crescent moon with a star the Islamic symbol. The symbol says enough about the religion.
Thank goodness Teddy isn’t around anymore running up those damn bar bills…..
#21-boob-so you are expressly affirming you don’t care about Constitutional rights.
Actually I was looking for the opportunity to take a shot at Ted “the Swimmer” Kennedy and you provided an opening.
>>The issue that is MOST important is FREEDOM.
So why do you have a problem with this cross if you are taking up the banner for freedom?
#23–Chris==”As an American” you should know by heart the FIRST FREAKING AMENDMENT in our BILL OF RIGHTS. course, we all make innocent mistakes.
But your ignorance abounds and counters the innoncent mistake defense. NO LEGITIMATE constitutional argument/understanding ends with reciting constitutional provisions with a side helping of a quote from a Founding Fathers. Only retards do that.
Establishing religion doesn’t mean establishing all religions on a non-discriminatory basis. All such symbols are a forcing of religion onto atheists thru use of government authority. Court cases are uniform that “freedom OF religion” also means “freedom FROM religion.” Just as it should.
#24–wireless==right you are “if” that is the import of the symbol. Even so, not a good argument to spend money and time on upkeeping the symbol if it is closely associated with establishing religion.
#27–Dr Doodiepants==you have descended to the level of Alfie. No thanks.
#24, wirelessg,
Perhaps if the art overtly shared a hateful message, but even then, its historical context should be considered before removing if that is the wishes of the majority.
You mean like the millions of people who died fighting because “god was on their side”? How about all those tortured in the name of “god”. Should we remember the people uprooted from their homes and indoctrinated into Christianity because the government thought worshiping nature’s spirits was too pagan?
Yup, historically religion presents a dismal picture and hasn’t done much to redeem itself.
#29-boob-you have descended to the level of Alfie.
Rendering you speechless does have it’s rewards.
Thanks.
#31–Dr Dodd==good one. I see we are reading off the same page on humor. Not at all the same page regarding the nature of Freedom and the Constitutional separation of church and state. YOU actually should inform yourself.
I worship Satan.
No doubt some US soldiers who died in WWII did too.
The Christian cross is a CHRISTIAN symbol, it does not in anyway represent my religious beliefs. In fact I find the cross offensive. A blight upon my beliefs. A symbol of repression, a clear symbol of death.
Thus, I want the US government to cough up some land so that I can erect my own private monument to honor dead fellow Satan worshipers.
Will the be popular? No. Does that diminish my beliefs? No.
Our democracy was erected for ALL the citizens in US, not the majority, nor the minority.
Giving one belief a platform over a different belief is flat out unconstitutional. Thus this cross must come down.
Period.
#32–Pedro==gee, I respect you so much more when you cogently attack OTHER people. But when you attack ME–you seem rather clueless. How does that happen?
#8 What about the taxpayer’s money wasted on the Supreme Court’s hearing about this non-issue? /// Hardly wasted especially given the basic ignorance on
display here regarding the underpinning issues of Religious Freedom and Tolerance ((yes==tolerance.==I dare you.))
2. How about we consider Mount Rushmore a sign of political idolatry, //// There is no constitutional ban against political idolatry. Keep your eyes on the ball if you even know what the ball is? Bouncy, bouncy.
3. yet you come down hard on those who oppose the healthcare reform because they don’t want to pay for other people’s healthcare /// What don’t you understand that under Single Payer YOU pay less? Use your purposeful mind for something other than to vote against your own interests or are you truly so perverted that you can’t be happy unless others are sad?
I’ll let Fusion finish you off as you really are also at the Alfie level of stupidity. In the main, you confuse government action with private action. Big difference there. YOUR rights to worship as you wish are not infringed just because you can’t force me to do the same. Silly boy.
Arlington National Cemetery is covered with Christian crosses and Jewish stars of David. I’m sure no one will be upset if we plow them under.
There are war memorials all over the place that have distinctly Christian symbols all over them.