Skip to comments.
Group Threatens Lawsuit Over Crosses
Newsmax.com ^
| 11 January 2005
| Carl Limbacher
Posted on 01/11/2005 10:44:38 AM PST by concretebob
A conservative group is threatening to sue the Secret Service for religious discrimination over security guidelines that would ban Christian crosses from President Bush's inaugural parade route.
(Excerpt) Read more at newsmax.com ...
TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Government; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: christian; churchandstate; crosses; inaugaration; parade; route; secretservice; security
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-42 next last
Didn't see this posted after a search.
To: Neets; Darksheare; scott0347; timpad; KangarooJacqui; The Scourge of Yazid; Conspiracy Guy; ...
PING
2
posted on
01/11/2005 10:46:22 AM PST
by
concretebob
(I AM NOT worthless, I'm a perfect Bad Example)
To: concretebob
Thanks for the ping.
To: concretebob
We Christians are not going to be satisfied until we are looked at as lunatics.
The S.S. are NOT baning crosses because they are crosses. PICTURES of a cross are fine. they are banning large "structures" which could double as weapons or containers of weapons. It is a safety issue to protect President Bush. Take it easy everybody.
4
posted on
01/11/2005 10:48:50 AM PST
by
NJ Neocon
(Democracy is tyranny of the masses. It is three wolves and a sheep voting on what to have for dinner)
To: NJ Neocon
We Christians are not going to be satisfied until we are looked at as lunatics. Amen!!
5
posted on
01/11/2005 10:49:49 AM PST
by
Columbine
(Bush '04 - Owens '08)
To: NJ Neocon
6
posted on
01/11/2005 10:50:50 AM PST
by
Conspiracy Guy
(Could someone tell me how to set up a tagline? Any help is appreciated. Thanks)
To: concretebob
GOOD GRIEF! Can these folks READ? There isn't a ban on any display of the cross, there's only a ban on crosses made from wooden sticks or attached to the same because they could be taken apart and used as weapon. Folks can display crosses made from cardboard that are hand-held, draw a picture of a cross, wear a cross or crucifix, or whatever.
Folks need to get some common sense!
7
posted on
01/11/2005 10:51:18 AM PST
by
SuziQ
To: Columbine
We have real issues to be concerned about. I believe the Secret Service is banning crosses strictly for security purposes and I have no problem with that.
8
posted on
01/11/2005 10:51:20 AM PST
by
mlc9852
To: NJ Neocon
Now you're post makes sense. Why would there be crosses anyway? It's an innauguration parade, not a parade for religious rights. I am all for religious symbols of whatever persuasion, but sometimes our side can get just as wacky as the secularist/atheists in reaction to their paranoia.
To: mlc9852
This mean I can't carry a cross made out of two RPG's?
10
posted on
01/11/2005 10:55:39 AM PST
by
Conspiracy Guy
(Could someone tell me how to set up a tagline? Any help is appreciated. Thanks)
To: concretebob
Seems like a silly suit to me.
11
posted on
01/11/2005 10:56:29 AM PST
by
Conspiracy Guy
(Could someone tell me how to set up a tagline? Any help is appreciated. Thanks)
To: brooklyn dave
GRAMMAR POLICE ALERTNow you're post makes sense.
Which actually reads:
Now you are post makes sense.
Does that make sense?
12
posted on
01/11/2005 11:01:40 AM PST
by
grellis
(#47,569 11-29-00. See? I made it easy for ya!)
To: SuziQ
GOOD GRIEF! Can these folks READ?Its far easier to rant and manufacture religious indignation than to read and comprehend.
13
posted on
01/11/2005 11:02:40 AM PST
by
NJ Neocon
(Democracy is tyranny of the masses. It is three wolves and a sheep voting on what to have for dinner)
To: NJ Neocon
thought it was easier to be rude and insulting...
14
posted on
01/11/2005 11:12:44 AM PST
by
tutstar
( <{{--->< http://ripe4change.4-all.org Violations of Florida Statutes ongoing!)
To: tutstar
Nope. Not reading is pretty easy.
Besides, I was being accurate. This is a ridiculous issue based a heck of a lot more on sanctamonious indignation that Anti-Christian persecution. We keep crying wolf like this and we will lose all credibility in the face of real persecution.
15
posted on
01/11/2005 11:26:42 AM PST
by
NJ Neocon
(Democracy is tyranny of the masses. It is three wolves and a sheep voting on what to have for dinner)
To: grellis
give me a f****** break. The post wasn't to you anyway. I am just typing my little ass off and am bound to make some typos.
To: concretebob
Nobody's banning crosses at the inauguration. Wooden crosses are banned, as are signs with wooden sticks. Such could be used as weapons.
Anyone, however, may carry all the non-hard crosses they want. Make 'em out of cardboard; print 'em on a shirt. Whatever.
This is a bogus headline. If you read the article, you see that crosses, per se, are not banned at all.
17
posted on
01/11/2005 11:42:48 AM PST
by
MineralMan
(godless atheist)
To: All
This was posted for its news value only, I read the article, I know what it says.
I never implied anything.
I thought it was interesting
18
posted on
01/11/2005 12:37:15 PM PST
by
concretebob
(I AM NOT worthless, I'm a perfect Bad Example)
To: SuziQ
and I totally agree with you.
19
posted on
01/11/2005 12:40:14 PM PST
by
concretebob
(I AM NOT worthless, I'm a perfect Bad Example)
To: Conspiracy Guy
I also agree with you, it is silly and stupid, and I guess my CROSSbow will have to stay in the truck.
20
posted on
01/11/2005 12:42:21 PM PST
by
concretebob
(I AM NOT worthless, I'm a perfect Bad Example)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-42 next last
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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson