Separation of Church and State
Contrary to what you may have heard, the phrase, "separation of church and state" is not
in the Constitution of the United States. It is not a federal law. The idea that
the Constitution forbids religious observances on public property or during public ceremonies
is a vicious canard that was manufactured in the Supreme Court only a few decades ago.
The Editor says...
One street sign or street name does not establish an official religion.
Government demands we keep our Catholic Beliefs
out of their realm yet forces their beliefs into ours.
Separation of Church and
State: Secular progressives are a curious bunch. They will vehemently protest the use of public school
classrooms for after school Bible Study. They will sue to keep high school valedictorians from mentioning The Deity
during graduation addresses. They will ban prayer before sporting events, and suspend children from sports teams who
kneel in thanks after scoring points. These same supposedly non-judgmental secularists will approve of prayer rooms for
Muslim students in public school buildings. I find that odd. Displays of Christianity are to be actively
erased, but religious institutions that have begotten millennia of bloodshed are both coddled and encouraged.
Does
the Sight of a Cross in a Museum Give You Indigestion?. One of the most remarkable aspects
of American Atheists' lawsuit to remove the World Trade Center Cross from the September 11 Memorial
and Museum is their allegation that the Cross has actually made the plaintiffs physically ill: ["]The
plaintiffs, and each of them, have suffered, are suffering, and will continue to suffer damages, both physical
and emotional, from the existence of the challenged cross.["] ... These allegations are of course absurd.
Culberson
Issues Ultimatum to Cemetery Director. A Houston congressman is so upset with the director of
the local National Cemetery, he's threatening to "zero out" her salary unless she quits or moves elsewhere.
John Culberson is one of several Texas lawmakers upset by accusations that Arleen Ocasio won't let are
veterans use "God" or "Jesus" during military services.
The
Separation of Mosque and State? As the White House and Congress debate cuts in federal
spending, millions of dollars are being funneled overseas to help build many Islamic mosques and structures.
An Atlanta television news station, WSB, reported that "the State Department is sending millions of dollars to
save mosques overseas. This investment has received criticism as the United States makes an effort to
slash nearly $4 trillion in government spending."
The
True Meaning of Separation of Church and State. Americans are frequently reminded of what the
revisionists deem our greatest achievement: "Separation of Church and State." Crosses are ripped
down in parks. Prayer has been banished from schools and the ACLU rampages to remove "under God" from
the Pledge of Allegiance. Moreover, "Separation of Church and State" is nowhere found in the Constitution
or any other founding legislation. Our forefathers would never countenance the restrictions on religion
exacted today. The phrase "separation of church and state" was initially coined by Baptists striving for
religious toleration in Virginia, whose official state religion was then Anglican (Episcopalian). Baptists
thought government limitations against religion illegitimate. James Madison and Thomas Jefferson
championed their cause.
Liberals, Democrats
More Likely to Disbelieve Bible, Says Gallup Poll. Liberals and Democrats are more likely than
conservatives, moderates, Republicans and independents to believe the Bible is nothing more than a book of
fables and legends made up by man, according to a new Gallup poll.
ACLU
Attacks God and Children, Again. The famous words, "wall of separation between church and state"
came from a letter of assurance from President Thomas Jefferson to the Danbury Baptist Church. That same
letter from Jefferson also includes the sentiments, "I reciprocate your kind prayers for the protection and
blessing of the common Father and Creator of man." And yet, there is no insistence by the courts nor
the ACLU that public schools recognize the Father and Creator of man.
Atheists
Want Sign Honoring 9-11 Firefighters Removed. A group of New York City atheists is demanding
that the city remove a street sign honoring seven firefighters killed in the Sept. 11, 2001 terrorist
attacks because they said the sign violates the separation of church and state.
Appeasing
the Gods in Hawaii. [Scroll down] The phrase "separation of church and state," of course,
appears nowhere in the U.S. Constitution and was derived from a Jan. 1, 1802 letter by Thomas
Jefferson to the Danbury, Conn. Baptist Association assuring them that no particular Christian
denomination would be declared a state religion. The liberal U.S. Supreme Court picked up
on this nearly a century and a half later and concocted an extra-constitutional doctrine that the
ACLU has wielded like a pineapple machete against public religious symbols or prayers.
Air Force witchcraft:
The Air Force Academy ... reportedly held a ceremony on Tuesday [5/3/2011] to dedicate a pile of rocks in the academy's
"worship area for followers of Earth-centered religions." This is a space cadets can use to perform rituals if
they happen to be witches, warlocks and tree-worshipers. Overlooking the visitor center, the stone circle is
designed for the benefit of a handful of those claiming to be Wiccans or Druids.
The Editor says...
The "separation of church and state" people are all completely silent on this.
Did
the United States Navy Pray for Allah to Forgive Osama bin Laden? At his blog, Andrew Bostom reviews a
Washington Times report that strongly suggests Osama bin Laden was, prior to burial at sea, given a funeral in
accordance with the navy's protocols for funerals for Muslim military personnel. If this is so, it would have
entailed the ceremonial washing and wrapping of the corpse by another Muslim — symbolic of the cleansing
away of the decedent's sins. Those gathered at the service, presumably naval and other U.S. government personnel
aboard the ship, would then have been required to face Mecca as Islamic prayers were recited...
Did Naval Burial Ceremony
Confer Pardon and Paradise on the Muslim Mass Murderer? Anneke Green has a disturbing analysis in the
Washington Times which indicates the very likely specifics of the burial ceremony aboard the USS Carl
Vinson — repeatedly noted by witless counter-terrorism czar John Brennan to be in strict "conformance
to Islamic requirements" — for pious Muslim jihadist Osama Bin Laden, orchestrator of the mass murder
of Americans on 9/11/2001.
Separation of Church and State and the Establishment
Clause: [Scroll down] This un-American freedom destroying concept actually is an integral
component of Marx generated secular humanism and its counterpart Communism. Secular humanists (communists)
are atheists passionately obsessed with replacing our liberty granting "God" with an all powerful, ruthless,
international secular state. The subject of religion is an essential ingredient in the official recipe of
"nationhood" and one of the major principles of unity upon which this nation was founded. It needs to be
addressed in this context.
The Obama administration is using (mostly black)
churches to expand the welfare state.
Michelle's Machine:
[Scroll down] Religious leaders are prodded to work with schools to "create a wellness club for teachers with
volunteer instructors from the congregation" and to "help your local school install a salad bar in its
cafeteria." Most worrisome, though, are the administration's efforts to have congregations place
themselves in the service of government as recruiters for the welfare state. Congregations are told
to "encourage eligible families to enroll their children in [government-subsidized] school meal programs"; if
organizations operate day-care or after-school programs, they are advised to pursue reimbursement for meals and
snacks through the Child and Adult Care Food Program (a federally funded, state-administered welfare program).
Places of worship are asked to serve as feeding sites for the Summer Food Service Program -- another
federally funded, state-run welfare project.
The Editor says...
Where are the "separation of church and state" people now?
Obama
signs order clarifying church-state relationship. President Barack Obama signed an executive order
Wednesday [11/17/2010] clarifying the ground rules for religious groups partnering with the federal government
through the White House's controversial faith office. The order says that religious organizations receiving
federal funds must conduct explicitly religious activities in a time and place that are different from when and
where they do government-financed work.
The lie of "Separation of Church & State".
The essential characteristic of "established religion" in England up to the time of the founding of our country was
coercion by the civil government: The people were forced to practice the established
denomination under pain of death, imprisonment & fines, and were forced to financially support the
established church.
Brass Oldies: Part III. One
of the brassiest of the brass oldies in the law is the notion that the Constitution creates a "wall of
separation" between church and state. This false notion has been so widely accepted that people who
tell the truth get laughed at and mocked. A recent New York Times piece said that it was "a flub of
the first order" when Christine O'Donnell, Republican candidate for senator in Delaware, asked a law school
audience "Where in the Constitution is the separation of church and state?" According to the New York
Times, "The question draw gasps and laughter" from this audience of professors and law students who are
elites-in-waiting.
God
Save The United States and This Honorable Court. There is no constitutional conflict in using
taxpayer dollars to fund faith-based initiatives. This is a position we've advocated for years. The
Supreme Court should leave the faith-based initiative alone and focus instead on removing the special privileges
that are afforded to atheists and others who are antagonistic to religion.
Michelle
Obama and the Muslim Brotherhood. [Scroll down] "They're turning this on its head," said
Rev. Richard Land, who handles public policy for the Southern Baptist Convention. The wisdom of the
original faith-based initiative — about which he was initially skeptical, Land explains —
was "to have people who live in a zip code making the decisions about what are the best ways to alleviate the
problem in that zip code," rather than being pushed to follow some federal initiative. Under the Obama
administration, Land said, "the White House says what your priorities should be."
What
Is the Separation of Church and State?. The first major case that undermined the balance between the
establishment clause and the free exercise clause occurred in 1947. In Everson vs. Board of Education the Supreme
Court, led by Justice Hugo Black, an FDR appointee and member of the Ku Klux Klan, reinterpreted the meaning of the First
Amendment of the Constitution. This decision set in motion an unconstitutional chain of events that has undermined
our First Amendment liberties ever since. Just what did Justice Black and the other FDR appointees to the Supreme
Court do? They hijacked a phrase used by President Thomas Jefferson, "separation of church and state," found in a
letter he wrote to the Danville Baptist Association in Virginia (1802).
'Separation Of
Church And State' Meant To Protect Church From Gov't, Not Vice Versa. "I believe in an America
where the separation of church and state is absolute" — these words of U.S. President John F.
Kennedy helped bring about today's "privatization of faith," which allows politicians to rationalize away their
abandonment of moral principles in the public square, according to former U.S. senator Rick Santorum. In
a speech September 9 at the University of St. Thomas in Houston, Texas, Mr. Santorum contemplated the
consequences of Kennedy's famous words, just before the fiftieth anniversary of the late president's address.
Clarifying the
Separation of Church and State: There is no such thing as "separation of church and state" in America's
history. There is such a thing as separation of the state from the church. Our founding fathers, because
of their experience, were most fearful of the encroachment of the state into the life of the church. They knew
the results of that kind of evil and suffered persecution because of it. So they came to these shores seeking
freedom and the privilege of worshiping God according to the dictates of the Bible and their own conscience.
Separation
of Church and State: Learn more about the origin of the phrase "separation of
church and state," the expression Justice William Rehnquist described as "a misleading
metaphor."
Separation of Church and State
and the Deportation of Christianity. There is no such law! This
phrase ["separation of church and state"] does not appear in any founding
document. It is not in the Constitution of the United States. It is, however,
in the "Constitution" of the former Soviet Union.
"The 'wall of separation between church and State' is a
metaphor based on bad history, a metaphor which has proved useless as a guide to
judging. It should be frankly and explicitly abandoned."
Some states had official
religions well into the 1800's. Congregationalism was established by law as the official
religion of the Connecticut and New Haven colonies when the colonies were founded in the 17th
century. It remained the official religion until the Connecticut constitution was
adopted in 1818.
Jefferson advocated a 'gate' between church
and state. Thomas Jefferson, credited with penning the famous "wall of separation between Church
and State" on which many secular organization have rested their hopes of eliminating Christianity from the
public square, actually believed in a "gate" allowing free passage between the two, according to a researcher
who's reviewed Library of Congress documents.
The Myth of the Separation of
Church and State: The American Humanist Association certifies counselors who enjoy
the same legal status as ordained ministers. Since the Supreme Court has said that Secular
Humanism is a religion, why is it being allowed to be taught in schools? The removal of
public prayer of those who wish to participate is, in effect, establishing the religion of
Humanism over Christianity. This is exactly what our founding fathers tried to stop
from happening with the first amendment.
An
Attack on Naval Academy's Mealtime Grace: Removing leader-led prayers from military training,
especially in this time of national peril, represents a seismic shift in restricting this long-established
American military practice. We are proud of the Naval Academy and its leadership who have not been
bullied by repeated threats from those who would weaken military training and America in time of war and
national security crisis. Prayer is a matter of honor and an American military necessity in time of
war. Those who would undermine or remove it are un-American.
Democrats misplay
the "God Card". Democrats have some serious decisions to make about the future of their
party and its message. The Democrat Party cannot long stand as one that demands separation of church
and state in all — even symbolic — matters while at the same time claiming Biblical
substantiation for liberal public policies.
The
Big Lie: Church and State Separation. The practical myth of "separation of
church and state" is a prime example of how language is used to perpetuate a political lie.
For the time being, this lie is pervasive in American society, with pseudo-intellectuals joining
duplicitous liberals in invoking this phony argument with regularity.
Church
and state: We are on the threshold of America's entry into a post-religious,
post-Constitutional era. Decades of liberal assaults on traditional values and
institutions are bearing fruit — sweet or bitter depending on your
allegiance. The final battles are underway, and the bulwarks erected to
protect us from the dark side of our natures and from governmental tyranny are
being battered down.
School is told to
restore 'Jesus' bricks. A federal judge has ordered a public high school to return bricks
inscribed with Christian messages to a walkway, concluding their removal violated the free speech rights
of the people who paid for them. U.S. District Judge Norman Mordue ruled the bricks, with engravings
such as "Jesus Saves" and "Jesus Christ The Only Way!" did not constitute an endorsement of religious views
by the Mexico Academy, a high school in upstate New York. The bricks containing such engravings were
the only ones removed, while others also referred to God and some commemorated churches.
Dare
we erase God from history? The U.S. Supreme Court on
Wednesday [3/24/2004] heard arguments on whether the diminutive phrase "under God" in the
Pledge of Allegiance is a violation of the so-called "separation of church and
state." We have reached this low point in our nation's history because a
federal appeals court actually ruled last year in favor of an egocentric atheist named
Michael Newdow who abhors our freedoms of religious expression.
Appeals Court Upholds KY
Ten Commandments Display. A Kentucky county has won another court ruling that
says a Ten Commandments display can be posted in the courthouse. … The American Civil
Liberties Union brought the case against Mercer County. The ACLU argued the display
violated the Constitution's guarantee separating church and state.
Atheist
Newdow ditches anti - 'under God' pledge of allegiance lawsuit. Dr. Michael Newdow, an Atheist
activist, has given up his six year legal fight that he hoped would have restricted California school children
from saying "under God" when reciting the Pledge of Allegiance, reports Catholic Lane.
Sidebar Discussion: The Madison Bus Passes
Another War: [In]
the Madison, Wisconsin Metro System, each month this government entity placed a picture of some public figure
on its bus pass. One month it used Martin Luther King Jr. and another, Elvis Presley, another the
inventor of the Internet, Tim Berners-Lee (not Al Gore). But when it decided to use Mother Teresa the
Freedom From Religion Foundation went ballistic, saying it was an impermissible intermingling of government
and religion.
More about the Madison Bus
Passes: Madison Metro System printed a picture of Mother Teresa on its April [2003] bus
pass. Annie Laurie Gaylor, co-founder of the Freedom From Religion Foundation, condemned it as a
violation of church and state. A spokeswoman for Metro said Mother Teresa was selected because she
made Time magazine's list of the 100 Most Important People of the 20th Century. The May bus pass
features a picture of the Rev. Martin Luther King Jr.; Gaylor did not criticize this selection.
The Editor says...
The people at the Freedom From Religion Foundation evidently believe that the appearance of
Mother Teresa on a bus pass constituted the establishment of a national religion. The accusation
is ridiculous, and is merely an attempt to prohibit and suppress the freedom of religious
expression, even though the bus passes were surely not intended to be religious artifacts.
Religious
Holiday Displays Information Letter: The Constitution protects the right of
private citizens to engage in religious speech in a "public forum." In a leading
First Amendment case, the Supreme Court held that a private group could erect a cross
in a public park during the holiday season.
Ten
Commandments Texas Revival Rally Keynote address: When are we going to
get this through our heads? For the last forty, and fifty, and sixty years, the
lawyers and the judges who have pretended that there is some reference to
separation [of church and state] in the Constitution have lied to us!
The
Truth About "Separation Of Church And State": Liberals have run off with this phrase,
prostituting it per usual. The matter is simple. It's this: America does not want
a state church. England has a state church — the Anglican Church. America does
not want one denomination considered The Nation's Church. On the other hand, America has a
religious heritage. It's not Muslim. It's not Hindu. It's not Shinto. It's not
animism. It's not New Age. It's not Paganism. It's not Voodoo. It's
Judeo-Christian. America, while not desiring a state church, does desire religion in life.
The
Separation of Truth and State: The American people have been bamboozled for
more than a generation now that their government can safely ignore God and his moral
standards. The principal underlying presumption in this is that the God of the
Bible is irrelevant. The presumption is that there is not really a God at all, or
if there is a God, he is either too impotent or too distant to be concerned with the
affairs of men. This humanist philosophy presumes that the wisdom of man is the
standard of all things.
Feelings
trumping rights: Church-state separation zealots have often selectively applied their
wall of separation. They have consistently screamed bloody murder at any whiff of Christianity
in the public square, especially when there is the remotest suggestion that government is merely
countenancing Christianity (far from endorsing it). But they've sat idly by as the state
has outright endorsed other religions or worldviews or their values.
Resurrection
Day 2005 — The ultimate sacrifice. In challenging activist-atheists who wish to
raze all religious symbols from public life (erroneously citing the First Amendment and Thomas
Jefferson's "Wall of Separation"), we have often asked, "If you truly believe in atheism, why does
any religious symbol, which you take as meaningless, matter at all?" As for the
courts that take these cases seriously, we ask the following: On what constitutional
basis do atheists have standing to sue?
Fight over the cross revived. More than two
years after officials ordered the image of a tiny cross removed from Los Angeles County's official seal, a
pitched battle continues over the constitutionality of religious symbols in public places. And this week
a band of activists, many from the San Fernando Valley, will get yet another chance to make their case for
returning the cross to the seal even as they have elevated their efforts to the national level.
Removal of
Cross From Los Angeles County Seal Prompts Lawsuit. The decision by Los Angeles County officials
to remove the small cross from the county's official seal has triggered a lawsuit. It was filed Tuesday [10/17/2006]
by the Thomas More Law Center in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit. The decision to remove
the cross from the seal was made in June of 2004 after the American Civil Liberties Union threatened to sue
the L.A. County supervisors because of their use of a Christian symbol.
The Mount Soledad Cross
The latest:
Judge
Calls the Mt. Soledad Cross Unconstitutional. A judge has ruled the 43-foot high cross atop
Mount Soledad is unconstitutional. In a long awaited opinion, the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals ruled
on Tuesday [1/4/2010], that cross is unconstitutional, but that it doesn't need to be taken down.
Court Rules War Memorial Cross
Unconstitutional. A war memorial cross in a public park is unconstitutional because it conveys a
message of government endorsement of religion, a federal appeals court ruled Tuesday [1/4/2011] in a two decade
old case.
The Editor says...
Acknowledgement of religion is not establishment of religion.
The Cross Is Unconstitutional, Again.
The Mount Soledad War Memorial in San Diego, now owned by the federal government, includes a 40-foot tall white
concrete cross, first built by Korean War Veterans in the 1950s to commemorate their fallen comrades.
The federal 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals (known locally as the "Ninth Circus") has ruled that the cross
is unconstitutional.
Three
Republicans introduce bill in Congress to save cross atop Mt. Soledad. Three
Republican members of Congress from San Diego County have introduced a bill aimed at blocking
the removal of the cross atop public land on Mt. Soledad in San Diego. The bill
submitted by Reps. Duncan D. Hunter of Alpine, Darrell Issa of Vista and Brian Bilbray
of Solana Beach comes in reaction to a decision by the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals last week
that the 43-foot-tall cross violated the constitutional separation of church and state by seeming to
endorse a particular religion. The bill would allow religious symbols that are part of
military monuments.
The Editor says...
Not to put too fine a point on it, there is no "constitutional separation of church and state."
If you can find that phrase in the Constitution, please let me know.
ACLU 'dead wrong' on cross.
Some see it as the universal symbol of sacrifice in World War I, others see it as the undisputed sign of Christianity,
but it will be up to the Supreme Court to make a final determination as to whether a 7-foot cross remains standing in a
California desert to memorialize war veterans. The cross was first erected in 1934 in what is now the federally
protected Mojave Desert Preserve by a group of veterans whose doctors advised them that the desert heat would help them
recover from shell shock.
The ACLU Talks Too Much. The
American Civil Liberties Union filed a suit in 2001 demanding that a seven-foot cross erected in the California desert in
1934 commemorating sacrifices endured by our soldiers in World War I be taken down. At some point after 1934 the
land on which the cross was erected became federally protected, and thus the cross became a fit issue for the ACLU's
squalling about the separation of church and state.
Federal Court: Mt. Soledad
Memorial Constitutional; ACLJ Brief Cited. The Mt. Soledad Veterans Memorial in San
Diego is constitutional. That's the finding of a U.S. District Court in San Diego and the
latest decision in a lengthy legal battle that has spanned several decades.
ACLU and 9th
Circuit against Christianity. Mount Soledad first was used as a memorial park in 1914, yet there
has been a cross on the property in one form or another since 1913. During World War II, it became
a part of the military's early warning defense system, and in 1954 a 29-foot Latin cross was erected to honor
Korean War Veterans. In 1989, the first lawsuit was filed against the City of San Diego claiming the
cross violated both the U.S. Constitution and the California Constitution.
The Editor says...
Apparently the Mount Soledad cross was not unconstitutional for 76 years. Did the
California constitution change?
Cross Stays on Mountain, Judge
Rules. A federal judge in San Diego says a giant cross that looks over the city from Mount
Soledad may stay where it is. The cross, part of a national veterans' memorial, has been at the center
of a legal battle for 20 years.
Veterans reenlist. For nearly two decades,
the ACLU has waged war against the cross in the public square, turning the laws meant to protect freedom of
speech against small communities whose budgets can't stand up to a political Goliath. Now the ACLU
may meet its match.
ADF attorneys ask 9th Circuit to
dismiss 17-year lawsuit against Mt. Soledad cross. Now that Congress has passed and the
President has signed a bill that clearly puts the cross under federal control, we hope that the 9th Circuit
will see that it's no longer necessary to continue the ACLU's protracted legal attack on this symbol
dedicated to our nation's fallen heroes.
Atheist
who sued over giant cross dies. Philip Paulson, an atheist who waged a 17-year legal battle to
have a giant cross removed from public land on Mount Soledad, has died. He was 59. Paulson died
Wednesday of liver cancer.
San Diego ordered to remove cross or
pay $5,000 a day. After a 17-year legal battle between the city and a self-described atheist, a
judge has ordered San Diego officials to remove a giant cross from a hilltop park or start paying $5,000 a
day in fines.
Conservative law group
files brief to block removal of Soledad cross. A conservative advocacy group filed a "friend
of the court" brief on behalf of congressional members, asking an appeals court to stay a lower court ruling
ordering the removal of the Mount Soledad cross.
Congressman
asks Bush to save cross. The chairman of the House Armed Services Committee asked President Bush
to help save a 29-foot cross standing on San Diego city property from being removed by court order.
9th Circuit Rejects Mount Soledad
Appeal. The Ninth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals has refused to stay a district court decision
ordering the removal of the historic Mount Soledad cross in San Diego. The Cross has stood on city land
since 1954 and is a memorial to veterans. Instead, the court scheduled oral arguments on the issue for
the week of October 16. That's weeks after the cross is to be removed.
High
court intervenes in fight over cross. The Supreme Court intervened Monday [7/3/2006] to stop, at
least for now, the removal of a large cross from city property in southern California. … Justice
Anthony M. Kennedy, acting for the high court, issued a stay while supporters of the cross continue
their legal fight.
Mount Soledad Cross Land-Transfer Bill Goes To
Bush. The fate of the Mount Soledad cross, the subject of a 17-year legal battle over the
constitutionality of a religious symbol on public land, lies in the hands of President Bush Wednesday
[8/2/2006]. The U.S. Senate yesterday unanimously approved a bill that would transfer the land
upon which the Mount Soledad cross sits to the federal government to be preserved as a national
war memorial.
Update:
President Bush Signs
Mount Soledad Cross Bill. President Bush Monday afternoon [8/14/2006] signed a bill into law
transferring the Mt. Soledad Cross and property on which is sets to the federal government.
Opponent of cross has
terminal cancer. Philip Paulson, who sued the city of San Diego 17 years ago to force the
removal of the Mount Soledad cross from public property, has been diagnosed with terminal liver
cancer. Paulson, 59, and his lawyer, James McElroy, said yesterday they plan to add another
plaintiff to the case so that it may continue.
The Mojave Desert Cross
Voters
Seeing Red Over ACLU Attack. The object at the center of the case is a small, unadorned cross sitting in a
remote part of the Mojave Desert Preserve in Southeast California. A veterans' group erected this memorial cross on
private land in 1934 to honor the dead of all wars. Driving by this secluded location today, however, you'll see a
curious-looking plywood box hiding the memorial, the way someone might cover a condemned building.
ACLU
Pushes High Court to Destroy Cross Memorial. The Supreme Court joined in a fight between the ACLU and
the federal government over a World War I memorial in the shape of a cross. While neither legal team hit
the ball over the fence, the majority seems inclined to save this cross in what will be the first religious liberty
case of the new Court.
The
ACLU's Real Agenda in the Mojave Desert. The cross is in a remote region seen by few. But one of
those is [Frank] Buono, a former Park Service employee and ACLU member who told the ACLU that although he moved to
Oregon, he comes down and sees the cross "two to four times a year." That was enough for the ACLU to file a
lawsuit in 2001 demanding that the National Park Service tear down the cross.
Supreme
Court says Mojave cross can stand. The Supreme Court gave its approval Wednesday [4/28/2010] to
displaying a cross on public land to honor fallen soldiers, saying the Constitution "does not require the
eradication of all religious symbols in the public realm." Speaking for a divided court, Justice Anthony M.
Kennedy said the 1st Amendment called for a middle-ground "policy of accommodation" toward religious displays
on public land, not a strict separation of church and state.
Supreme
Court Rules in Favor of Mojave Cross. On Wednesday, April 28, in a surprising 5-4 ruling by the United
States Supreme Court, justices ruled that the 1st Amendment "accommodates" for religious displays on public land.
In reference to the display of a cross in the Mojave Desert honoring the lives of fallen soldiers, a divided court
ruled that the Constitution "does not require the eradication of all religious symbols in the public realm."
The latest:
Thieves take controversial Mojave Desert cross.
Thieves have stolen a cross in the Mojave Desert that was built to honor Americans who died in war, less than
two weeks after the U.S. Supreme Court allowed the religious symbol to remain on federal land.
War Memorial Torn Down by Vandals: Is This a Hate Crime? The
Mojave Desert War Memorial, which was saved temporarily by a recent U.S. Supreme Court ruling, was torn down
by vandals sometime Sunday night [5/9/2010]. Liberty Institute, which represents longtime memorial
caretakers Henry and Wanda Sandoz, the Veterans of Foreign Wars of the United States (VFW), The American
Legion, Military Order of the Purple Heart, and the American Ex-Prisoners of War, is offering a reward
for information leading to the arrest and conviction of the person or persons responsible for the removal
of VFW property.
AP
Reports Theft of Mojave Cross, Suspects 'Scrap Metal Scavengers'. The Associated Press again
demonstrates bizarre journalistic navel gazing in reporting that thieves have stolen the Mojave Memorial Cross
from the California desert. ... Scrap metal scavengers?!? Of course! Imagine the confused,
head-scratching scene in the Associated Press newsroom when this story broke. Why? Why would anyone
steal this cross, they puzzled? On the one hand, you have embittered anti-religious zealots who just lost
a years' long battle costing them hundreds of thousands of dollars. On the other hand, you have a 7 foot
tall cross with a scrap value of maybe $100...
Veterans Group Vows to Rebuild Mojave Desert Cross.
The Veterans of Foreign Wars has vowed to rebuild a 7-foot high cross-shaped memorial to the nation's veterans
which was stolen by vandals over the weekend. The cross was at the center of a legal fight that went all
the way to the U.S. Supreme Court, which ruled that the cross should remain on federal land.
Liberals take the law into their own hands.
Mojave
Desert cross, focus of long legal battle, is stolen. Less than two weeks ago, the U.S. Supreme
Court ruled that the controversial 7-foot-high Mojave Desert cross could stay put, but on Sunday someone else
decided it should go.
Anonymous
donor offering $100,000 reward. An anonymous donor is offering $100,000 for leads in the hunt for
the thieves responsible for stealing the World War I memorial cross that's been at the center of a decade-long
legal battle. The cross of the Mojave Desert War Memorial in California — erected 75 years
ago as a memorial in honor of America's World War I veterans — disappeared earlier this week,
just two weeks after the US Supreme Court reversed a lower court ruling on its removal. "These thieves
desecrated a national war memorial that was erected to honor America's war dead," said Thomas J. Tradewell
Sr, the national commander of the 2.1 million member Veterans of Foreign Wars.
New
Mojave Desert Cross Sits in Limbo in California Desert. One week after vandals stole a looming
cross from California's Mojave Desert Veterans Memorial, the site's caretakers welded together an exact 7-foot
replica to take its place. All they need now is permission to put it back up.
Authorities
Say Mojave Desert Replacement Memorial Cross Must Come Down. Linda Slater, a spokeswoman with the
Mojave National Preserve, says a maintenance worker spotted the 7½-foot replica cross made of metal
pipes on Thursday in a federal park.
Demolishing War Memorials Destroys Our
National Character
. Thieves stole the cross-shaped Mojave Desert War Memorial during the
night of May 9, less than two weeks after the Supreme Court ruled that the 76-year-old memorial
could stay. Because the memorial was on U.S. property, the thieves committed a federal crime; worse,
they desecrated a national war memorial that was erected by the Veterans of Foreign Wars (VFW) to honor
American service members who have died in battle.
Cross our hearts.
Thieves stole the cross-shaped Mojave Desert World War I Memorial during the night of May 9,
less than two weeks after the Supreme Court had ruled that the 76-year-old memorial could stay. Because
the memorial was on U.S. property, the thieves committed a federal crime; worse, they desecrated a national
war memorial that was erected by the Veterans of Foreign Wars (VFW) to honor American service members who
have died in battle.
Obama
Missed a Great Chance. President Obama had a golden Memorial Day opportunity to show the
country that (contrary to his left flank) he is not anti-military and not anti-Christian, by telling
Attorney General Eric Holder to order the Park Service to permit volunteer veterans to replace the
Mojave Cross that was stolen on May 9. But he let the atheists and those who sneer at our
veterans win the day.
Obama Missed A Great Chance. President
Obama had a golden Memorial Day opportunity to show the country that (contrary to his left flank) he is not
anti-military and not anti-Christian, by telling Attorney General Eric Holder to order the Park Service to
permit volunteer veterans to replace the Mojave Cross that was stolen on May 9. But he let the
atheists and those who sneer at our veterans win the day.
Theft
of Mojave Cross Will Only Stiffen Veterans' Resolve. Last month, in what can only be described
as a cowardly criminal act, some unknown person or persons crept into the Mojave Desert under cover of darkness
and hacked down a memorial cross honoring veterans. Now, someone is attempting to take credit for the
act, and yet, as if to cement their cowardice, doing so anonymously. Here is a simple truth the
perpetrators — whoever they are — will never understand: Their actions will not
discourage those among us in this fight. To the contrary, it makes us more determined to stay the course.
|
|
