Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Court Bans Mojave Cross on Private Land In Public Park
Reuters & PE.com via Blog ^ | 6 Sep 07

Posted on 09/06/2007 2:31:47 PM PDT by Jay777

The decision today is the latest in the lengthy case. The American Civil Liberties Union originally filed a lawsuit in 2001 on behalf of a man who said its location on federal land violated the U.S. Constitution.

The original cross was erected in 1934 by a prospector to honor World War I veterans. The latest version was installed in the mid-1990s. President Bill Clinton authorized the Mojave National Preserve in 1996, including the land where the cross sits.

The cross has been covered, first by a tarp and now by a box, as the case makes its way through the courts, Wanda Sandoz said.

A while back, a friend of mine took a trip to the Mojave Desert where this cross is. Below is a little film of his disturbing experience.

(Excerpt) Read more at stoptheaclu.com ...


TOPICS:
KEYWORDS: aclu; antichristianleague; atheismandstate; clintonlegacy; cross; lawsuit; mojave; privateproperty

1 posted on 09/06/2007 2:31:49 PM PDT by Jay777
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Jay777

why in the hell is there a box over it???
is this “guilty until proven innocent” for the cross?


2 posted on 09/06/2007 2:34:14 PM PDT by cjohnson1 (http://www.uncoveror.com/castro.htm)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Jay777

Thats it, if it is Judea/Christian it must go. But, if some muslims asked for foot baths and prayer rugs to be available at the park, why no problem. In fact, it would not surprise me that the menu at the park concession stand would not have any pork items to eat. I am fond of BLT sandwiches as well as a good pork barbeque from time to time....


3 posted on 09/06/2007 2:36:04 PM PDT by The Forgotten Man (He works, he votes, generally he prays--but he always pays....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: cjohnson1

Somebody needs to paint a cross on the box!


4 posted on 09/06/2007 2:48:57 PM PDT by OrangeDaisy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: OrangeDaisy

Laserlight show. Floodlamps, Something...


5 posted on 09/06/2007 3:01:36 PM PDT by weegee (NO THIRD TERM. America does not need another unconstitutional Clinton co-presidency.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: AdmSmith; Berosus; Convert from ECUSA; dervish; Ernest_at_the_Beach; Fred Nerks; KlueLass; ...
Ping!
6 posted on 09/06/2007 4:49:25 PM PDT by SunkenCiv (Profile updated Wednesday, August 29, 2007. https://secure.freerepublic.com/donate/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Jay777

The title says “public land” and the body says “federal land”. Which is it?


7 posted on 09/06/2007 5:45:03 PM PDT by Bob J (Rightalk.com...a conservative alternative to NPR!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Jay777

It being a 9th Circuit decision, the odds favor a reversal in the Supreme Court.


8 posted on 09/06/2007 6:18:22 PM PDT by Popocatapetl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Jay777

The judge who issued the ruling, Margaret McKeown, was a Clinton appointee. She also worked as a lawyer for the Carter Administration.

I know you’re all as surprised as I am. /sarc


9 posted on 09/06/2007 7:48:03 PM PDT by DemforBush
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson