Posted on 05/21/2005 9:58:14 PM PDT by BigFinn
The San Diego City Council voted this week to allow voters to decide the fate of the historic Mt. Soledad Cross overlooking the Pacific Ocean in La Jolla.
The vote represented the newest chapter in a long line of legal battles to remove the cross, led by ACLU attorney James McElroy, who represents an atheist seeking to remove the Christian symbol from public lands.
The legal battles date back to 1989.
Essentially, the voters will decide whether they want to transfer the property to the National Park System as a war memorial.
For more than 50 years, the site has been recognized by the public as a place where war veterans are honored for their service to the United States.
The Mt. Soledad Association manages the site where plaques recognize war veterans who served in the last century. Most of the veterans recognized are from the greater San Diego area.
Last November, two Republican congressmen from San Diego County, Rep. Duncan Hunter and Rep. Randy Cunningham, added a provision to an appropriations bill to allow the city to designate the site as a national war memorial.
If the citizens of San Diego agree with this proposal, the site will be maintained by the National Park System. The bill was signed into law by President Bush in December.
Representatives from the Mt. Soledad Association and the park system were in Washington last week to discuss a working plan to manage the site.
Opponents of the transfer, including the ACLU, contend it is illegal and unconstitutional. However, a lawyer for the Thomas More Center, Charles LiMandri, contends there is legal precedent for protecting religious symbols that already are on federal land.
While the debate on religious symbols on public land slowly is working its way through the courts, the proposition to transfer city property to the federal government will be decided by San Diego voters July 26.
San Diego Mayor Dick Murphy, who is leaving office in July, says "it may provoke additional litigation, but some things are worth fighting for."
Murphy was a supporter of a referendum that forced the city council to revisit the issue. The referendum sparked a record 89,000 petitions to request that the cross not be dismantled from its present site.
The initiative rescinded an earlier vote by the council that would have removed it.
The referendum, put together in just a month, was widely supported by San Diego radio talk-show hosts Roger Hedgecock, Rick Roberts and Mark Larson and Los Angeles host Paul McGuire.
Slightly more than 33,000 verified signatures were required for the referendum to be successful, based on a registered voter base of approximately 650,000 voters.
I am not offended by trolls.(check my tagline)
What part of - THEY HAVE BEEN HERE FOR DECADES - did you not understand?
I'm agnostic (Why bother stating the obvious.) and I don't support mixing religion and politics. you do not live here to you don't have to support it.
Obviously, you don't share my beliefs...but unlike most people, I'm not going to browbeat you over it.
That is all you have been doing is browbeating. Why don't you run along now, Troll.
"The San Diego City Council voted this week to allow voters to decide the fate of the historic Mt. Soledad Cross overlooking the Pacific Ocean in La Jolla."
"If the citizens of San Diego agree with this proposal, the site will be maintained by the National Park System. The bill was signed into law by President Bush in December.
Essentially, the voters will decide whether they want to transfer the property to the National Park System as a war memorial."
"Opponents of the transfer, including the ACLU, contend it is illegal and unconstitutional. However, a lawyer for the Thomas More Center, Charles LiMandri, contends there is legal precedent for protecting religious symbols that already are on federal land.
"the rights of the person/people/organization/government/etc that erected the cross on public land" and the rights of the citizens are being blocked by the aclu and the lone citizen they are pimping for.
No. In my opinion, taking this cross down is yet another chipping away at the foundation of what this country USED to be.
Surely you've heard of the frog in the kettle?
Hey, it's not ME that's offended.
And, trust me...MY religion will NOT be rioting, yada yada yada if that cross comes down.
But thank you for the polite answer, and I mean that.
I was talking about Jesus.
ping out tomorrow.
Well......we ARE discussing a cross here.
Anyway....I'm outta here for tonight. Y'all sleep well.
The active point here is that this monument was built long before the current interpretation of the 1st amendment was made. Based on your argument, all the monuments and memorials in DC should be sold to private citizens, along with almost every courthouse or government building in this country. Explain to me how honoring the God whose principles provided the impetus for the founding of this country is wrong, whether you believe in Him or not. If the Bible were purely fiction, it would still be a document worthy of at least the respect given the Magna Carta just because it is the basis of all the laws observed in the free world.
Thought I would let you know that there are other (me) conservatives who share your opinion of separation of church and state. Religous symbols should not be placed on public lands.
When do you want crosses gone from the gravestones at Arlington?
How is erecting a religious symbol on public property establishing a religion?
And welcome to Free Republic.
Sour Puss
Have you quite sucking on your Persimmon.
When people register legitimate complaints that the crosses offend them - which isn't going to happen. Why don't you come up with an intelligent objection.
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.