Posted on 11/02/2017 12:04:38 PM PDT by markomalley
When I lived in Maryland and commuted a few miles to my Washington Times job, I often drove by a huge World War I memorial known as the “Peace Cross.” Every so often I thought: I wonder if someone is going to file a lawsuit against the monument, claiming to be offended by it.
It’s true that the Supreme Court has said there’s no legal basis in removing a monument simply because one person is offended by it – but these are strange times. Look at what the new iconoclasm is doing to some Civil War monuments and could do to others.
In fact, one legal group posted a blog item suggesting that if the Ten Commandments offend you, don’t visit Washington, DC. And yes, there is now an effort to remove the peace cross.
Here is the top of the New York Times report on this controversy. The key: Try to find information stating why someone – right now – is offended by this old monument.
BLADENSBURG, Md. – Five miles from the United States Supreme Court, a 40-foot-tall World War I memorial in the shape of a cross has stood for nearly a century. Now, it is at the center of a battle over the separation of church and state that may end up on the court’s docket.
The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit declared this month that the Peace Cross, which sits on state-owned land in Maryland and has been maintained with public funds, was unconstitutional, a ruling that supporters of the monument warned could result in a “cleansing” of memorials on public grounds across the country…
The Peace Cross, which commemorates 49 fallen soldiers from Prince George’s County, looms over the knotted intersection of Maryland Route 450 and United States Alternate Route 1 in this old port town of 10,000 people. ... The monument was erected in 1925 with funding from local families and the American Legion, but the state obtained title to the cross and land in 1961, and has spent at least $117,000 to maintain them.
In a 2-to-1 ruling, the three-judge panel declared that the Peace Cross violated the First Amendment by having “a primary effect of endorsing religion and excessively entangles the government and religion.”
Reading that, I wondered if these circuit judges had ever driven past that cross every day to work. It’s in a roundabout more noted for honking horns than holiness. Now for some implications:
If the Fourth Circuit denies a request for the full court to reconsider the panel’s decision, defenders of the monument vow to take the case to the Supreme Court. They argue that the ruling sets a dangerous precedent, threatening national treasures such as the 24-foot Canadian Cross of Sacrifice and 13-foot Argonne Cross in Arlington National Cemetery – both within the Fourth Circuit’s jurisdiction – as well as the ground zero “cross,” the steel beams discovered among World Trade Center debris now on display in the National September 11 Memorial & Museum.
“It is brooding hostility toward religion, a sort of cleansing,” said Kelly Shackelford, the president of First Liberty Institute, one of the legal groups aiding the American Legion in defending the cross. “We would immediately need to begin massive bulldozing and sandblasting of veterans memorials across the country in a way that most people would find inconceivable.”
As I scanned various other articles about this lawsuit, I never did find out why the plaintiff thought the peace cross was suddenly offensive after it’s been there for 92 years. A press release from the American Humanist Association didn’t either.
It’s an angle other media should have brought up. The Washington Times had a different read on what else the case could mean.
Ronald D. Rotunda, professor of jurisprudence at the Fowler School of Law at Chapman University in Orange, California, said if the logic of the court’s ruling is applied consistently, countless public memorials that contain religious references could be ordered to be altered or destroyed.
He said the court’s reliance on “fact-specific” judgments is “a fancy way of saying, ‘Trust us. We don’t make the legal rules. We should ban what we feel like banning, and we’re not going to ban Arlington Cemetery crosses right now.’”
“Oh, and those crosses are smaller!” Mr. Rotunda said. “Really, that’s legal precedent. They find in the First Amendment a constitutional test based on the size of the cross. That’s a hoot!”
The governor of Maryland has sworn he’ll fight the ruling, as he too has driven by the cross just like I have. A Save-the-Peace-Cross group has its own Facebook page, so this looks to be a good fight brewing here.
But the question that still niggles: What moved the humanists to go after this monument right now? I believe only one of the plaintiffs lives in Prince George’s County, which is where the cross is. All three of them are humanist activists which they have a right to be, but let’s not pretend they’re ordinary Bladensburg residents whose lives are being ruined by this monument.
So do read the rest of what the Times has here. The implications are staggering when you consider how many crosses there are on historic monuments across the country. Let’s hope more reporters dig into the details of this important story.
More crap from the global communist groups.
Give it back to the American Legion...
+++++
The monument was erected in 1925 with funding from local families and the American Legion, but the state obtained title to the cross and land in 1961
See how easy it is?
Ping!
In a 2-to-1 ruling, the three-judge panel declared that the Peace Cross violated the First Amendment by having “a primary effect of endorsing religion and excessively entangles the government and religion.”
Hey, “In God We Trust”
Maybe these guys would like to tear down the Supreme court building as well.
Maryland “Freak State” PING!
I am furious this cross or any cross is at issue politically.
Let’s talk “symbols”, shall we?
Now that I understand so much better what Islam is all about, I hate seeing the round globe at the top of the “steeple” of the mosque. It can just as easily be put inside and swing on a chain above the backs of the men who prostrate themselves before the EAST. Interestingly, women are not similarly involved with the butt high ritual...so why not? I don’t like seeing the ball symbol. It symbolizes like no other symbol except the sickle moon the distance between Islam and all other religions.
I really dislike the sickle moon..is that chosen because it more easily describes the machete used to separate our infidel heads from our chests? What other religion or path of faith believes in KILLING people with opposing views?
Mecca is another significant site. What use it except to break men into a frenzy of hate toward the rest of the world? I have heard of no peace offering from Mecca ever. I know of no other so-called religion calling their people to jihad because those people worship differently.
But, in my opinion, the worst symbol of the depravity of human kind is the out line of it in the Koran. Actually, I think every educated person on earth ought to read it...page by page. Then find another person to discuss it with. Then find any bible or article of faith by any other religion and compare a comparable verse from the Koran with one from that religious treatise. There is no other like the Koran.
We are fools if we think a Cross symbolizes anything negative. The 4th Circuit Court is wrong and considering their views lately, may be should be replaced by men and women of more mature and worldly judgement.
Of course, all this is my opinion...my First Amendment right to have. I am absolutely sure NO Muslim believes I have such a right. If there is one who does, I want that one to Pledge Alliegiance to the UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
and to swear on pain of death to uphold the Constitution and Bill of Rights.
Agents of Satan who will pay a very high price, not for this cross specifically but for the hate in their hearts and their on going work for Satan.
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.