[Fixit]

Duplicate Posting:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1154385/posts

[Mister Baredog]

Perhaps because it represents the god of the ACLU – the god of fruits and nuts.

Good one! LOL!

[tdadams]

It is one of nine distinct images on the seal – images that include engineering instruments, a tuna, oil derricks, the Hollywood Bowl, stars representing the movie industry, a prize cow, a Spanish galleon, the cross and Pomona, the Roman goddess of fruits.

LOL, well I guess L.A. got what it asked for. It has certainly been blessed with more than its fair share of fruits.

[NYer]

A tiny cross is a threat, but a giant representation of a pagan god is no problem. It illustrates that the ACLU is not concerned about the establishment of religion at all. It is concerned about the elimination of Christianity from public life in America.

Catholic Ping - let me know if you want on/off this list

[TheSpottedOwl]

The character of Los Angeles has fundamentally changed in the last 15 years. I don't even recognize it any more. I don't mean new buildings and freeways. I mean the character of the people who live there.

See my tag line. I'm looking forward to moving back to the poverty stricken High Desert.

[joesnuffy]

The founding head of the ACLU has admitted as much...the ultimate goal of the ACLU is the illimination of God (God the father God the Son God the Holy Spirit) from American govt. and culture...

Even the Communists have stated the goal is to first rid a culture of God...before Communism can be succesfull....

The ACLU is as much an enemy of the USA as is any other terrorist group

imo

[walford]

Note -- Pagan: any religion that developed in a place where there is not a lot of sand.

To the ACLU, the cross poses a threat because it represents truth that is not man-made.

The Roman Goddess is non-threatening as far as the Left is concerned because they think that it represents moral relativism. Nothing could be further from the truth.

Most of those who are practicing revived European religions today are not being very fastidious about it -- they are 'cafeteria' worshippers. If they did their research, they would find that the religions that originated in pre-Christian Europe [or likewise in Asia, Africa or the Americas for that matter] were quite strict, objectively based [the truth comes from the Divine, not man] and required considerable sacrifice.

In many cases, there was a type of monastic system wherein -- starting in childhood -- people would spend years learning the [often highly complex] theology, the healing arts [many of which were quite effective], practical handicrafts, the ways of the local living creatures, etc. These people were as devout in their religion as any. They considered Life to be a blessing and held that there was order and justice in the universe due to a Divine Plan.

Most of today's neo-nature religion practitioners couldn't be bothered. Instead they just get together and play at the the practice, only doing the parts that are fun and don't require much commitment or effort.

That is why the ACLU is not attacking the Roman Goddess. In fact, the ACLU clearly advocates choosing one religious symbol over another, which is clearly prohibited in the First Amendment. I am offended by this as an American -- even though my own theology is non-Abrahamist -- because the government has no business promoting or prohibiting any given religion.

...and those of you who wish to berate me about how every religion that did not originate in the Middle East is false are free to look here for my position on these matters:
Theological Exclusivism

[GOP_1900AD]

The cross on the hill represents a historical fact, the fact that the Spanish established the Missions which led to the initial stages of our state's development. When doctrinaire atheist extremism reaches past the boundary of depictions of historical facts, for the simple reason that the image in question might be interpreted as a particular endorsement of a particular religion due to the interpreting individual not being sufficiently aware or or educated in the image's true meaning, then this consistitutes an aggregious assault on the factual basis of the rule of law. Therefore, I argue that the act of eliminating the symbol is not only unethical but unconsitutional

[tob2]

Any city that has a tiny cross on it's seal is in danger. My city has one; can hardly wait for the b.s. to start flying! IMHO, if crosses of any size are subject to being banned, then any religious symbol from any religion needs to be banned as well.