OMG..Federal Judge Rules that displaying the HOLY CROSS is Unconstitutional!.

originally posted by: DanteGaland
a reply to: SeaWorthy

SHow me in the BIBLE where someone cut down a PINE TREE and dragged into their MIDDLE EAST home and decorated it?

Christmas trees are PAGAN in origin.

Actually
Jeremiah 10:1-5 King James Version (KJV)

"1 Hear ye the word which the Lord speaketh unto you, O house of Israel:

2 Thus saith the Lord, Learn not the way of the heathen, and be not dismayed at the signs of heaven; for the heathen are dismayed at them.

3 For the customs of the people are vain: for one cutteth a tree out of the forest, the work of the hands of the workman, with the axe.

4 They deck it with silver and with gold; they fasten it with nails and with hammers, that it move not.

5 They are upright as the palm tree, but speak not: they must needs be borne, because they cannot go. Be not afraid of them; for they cannot do evil, neither also is it in them to do good."

It appears that God does not like Christmas trees.

originally posted by: SeaWorthy

originally posted by: Kostafa
a reply to: carewemust

With the separation of church and state, I don't really see an issue with this. There's thousands of places people can go to worship a symbol.

As long as it's consistent and decisions like this aren't put into action as a result of whoever cries the loudest.

Then what is the difference having Moses and the ten commandments on the Supreme Court? Among multitudes of other things?

Do you go to the Supreme Court to enjoy time with family or friends? Is it an outdoor setting that you could find yourself strolling through on the way to another location?

Don't get me wrong, I don't think religious symbology should be anywhere except private, established locations, but there's a difference.

originally posted by: SeaWorthy

originally posted by: Kostafa

originally posted by: carewemust

originally posted by: Kostafa
a reply to: carewemust


With the separation of church and state, I don't really see an issue with this. There's thousands of places people can go to worship a symbol.

As long as it's consistent and decisions like this aren't put into action as a result of whoever cries the loudest.

I wonder how many city properties in America have a Holy Cross, or a Jesus in the manger at Christmas? Now, every nutjob who eschews productive activities in life, can cite this Pensacola example as a precedent for their city park cleared of any religious items or images.

I'm guessing the Pensacola example was a permanent fixture and not a temporary celebratory symbol.

I get what you're saying, and you're right, this will most likely be used to that effect, but I still don't take issue with that. There's established places for religious symbolism and exhibiting and celebrating one's religion. I for one don't think shared public property is that place.

Established places include the whole of the USA from a historic point of view.
The decorating of light posts, public buildings, and roadways store windows and homes, the ambiance of the (holly-days) the whole country has looked forward to and participated in from day one.

You mean the temporary Christmas decorations? (also businesses and homes are private spaces). So I'll ask this: would you support the city being decorated for every religious celebration? Would you support the city permanently erecting religious icons of every denomination in all public spaces?

Or do you feel that only Christian icons should be allowed?

With Freedom of Religion, should the government be seen to exercise 'their' chosen religion in public spaces but others are not allowed to be represented there?

Or is it time for the word to be put forward that the nation was founded under Christianity and this will be represented across the country in various ways, so that these types of rulings don't happen? Is there any implications with taking this approach?

a reply to: Kostafa

You mean the temporary Christmas decorations?

So they made a time distinction? Our town puts up decorations on the street lights and public buildings. Like I said I am against all of it but none of my business just seems very hypocritical.

Originally, the Federal Government, may it burn in hell, was only supposed to be in charge of settling disputes between States by regulating inter-State commerce.

Why have we let it become so powerful?

a reply to: SeaWorthy

It's a pagan holiday so it isn't hypocritical.

originally posted by: mOjOm
a reply to: carewemust

Is the park owned by the Government and paid for by tax dollars including the cross???

I don't see the connection where the Federal Government and the park are combined.

it's a city-owned park, that why....and if anyone drives through some parts of the southern states, the amount of crosses is astonishing....one other thing....if anyone moves to a small town in the south, you better be a Christian, because atheists are not welcome to put it mildly.....

a reply to: jimmyx

Sounds like a good reason not to visit the south then.

originally posted by: carewemust
What has gotten in to U.S. Federal Judges this year? First they make it illegal for the U.S. government to properly screen for incoming terrorists, and now one says that displaying the Holy Cross is against the United States Constitution!

A federal judge has ruled that a cross in Pensacola’s Bayview Park violates the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment to the United States Constitution and must be removed within 30 days.

“I am aware that there is a lot of support in Pensacola to keep the cross as is, and I understand and I understand and respect that point of view,” U.S. District Judge Roger Vinson wrote in his ruling. “But, the law is the law.”

Source Article: www.northescambia.com...

What's next? No audible prayers allowed in public? It seems that the U.S. is heading down that slippery slope doesn't it?

-CareWeMust

What part of 'Separation of church and state' do you not understand?

originally posted by: jimmyx

originally posted by: mOjOm
a reply to: carewemust

Is the park owned by the Government and paid for by tax dollars including the cross???

I don't see the connection where the Federal Government and the park are combined.

it's a city-owned park, that why....and if anyone drives through some parts of the southern states, the amount of crosses is astonishing....one other thing....if anyone moves to a small town in the south, you better be a Christian, because atheists are not welcome to put it mildly.....

In Ca we have people place crosses along the main highways and freeways everywhere, where loved ones died in crashes, the CalTrans does upkeep on them and not remove them.

I live in pensacola and most of us don't care if that cross is there ether way. That is just a little park I've been going to all my life and I don't even remember that cross lol This is not news. The people in this city don't even care about this. We collectively laughed at the few who wanted it taken down and we collectively laugh at the ones getting butt hurt because it is. Most of us believe that the judge did the right thing. It's not even an issue here. This was only even reported on for click bait.

Having a religious symbol in any place run by the government is against the constitution clearly.

a reply to: CB328

In God we Trust.

Can I have your monies now?

originally posted by: carewemust

originally posted by: mOjOm
a reply to: carewemust

Aren't all these Religious Monuments in places just "Idol Worship" anyway???? I didn't think that was even allowed.

The majority of the people who pay taxes in Pensacola are all for the cross, and don't mind that .03% of the city's maintenance budget ($233 annually) is used for keeping the cross painted.

A Federal Judge should focus on bigger, more important items. No wonder they have such a large caseload!

I live here and what your saying is just not true. The majority of us don't care about that cross one way or another. Our loud (and sometimes violent) religious minority are the only ones that care.

originally posted by: mOjOm
a reply to: jimmyx

Sounds like a good reason not to visit the south then.

One among MANY.

Unfortunately. CHEAP real estate though...cost of living is LOW.

So are WAGES tho...

originally posted by: JinMI
a reply to: CB328

In God we Trust.

Can I have your monies now?

That was from the Red Scare and should be removed. The Republicans were so terrified of communists.

originally posted by: rickymouse

originally posted by: Krakatoa

originally posted by: rickymouse
Look at all the crosses on the tombstones at the national veteran cemeteries. I suppose they have to remove all those headstones from public land.

This idiotic racy is going to make a lot of people cross.

I believe that is different since for other denominations, a different headstone is used. It is a headstone commemorating the person laid to rest there, not a generic public statement.

Every headstone in the national cemetaries I have been to have a cross at the top. I suppose if you weren't a christian you couldn't get buried in one of the Veteran spots. I have been to only about five big cemetaries and maybe twenty smaller ones, but I never saw a non christian headstone. I suppose there are some in areas where Christianity is not so profound. Just because I have never seen one of those older veteran headstones without a cross does not mean they don't exist. I think those veterans units were built around the time of WW11 and up to the korean and Vietnam war they were still planting people in those areas.

My father was half native american and was not a christian. He followed native teachings all his life. He was part of our military for most of his life. He also got a little white cross on his tombstone in that military graveyard . It would have made him sick and it makes me sick to this day whenever I visit that grave. Maybe we should start talking about this.

a reply to: Deaf Alien

I don't disagree really, nor do I see anything being done about it.

In fact, I don't much care and it really makes me shake my head at the folks that do.

a reply to: carewemust

Now, every nutjob who eschews productive activities in life, can cite this Pensacola example as a precedent for their city park cleared of any religious items or images.

I would be proud of my city if it was the catalysts that helped end religion of all kinds. We will never know freedom or true brotherhood in this world till we give up these childish fantasies.

originally posted by: TheTory

originally posted by: Krakatoa

originally posted by: TheTory
What a shame. The cross is the only bulwark against the minaret.

That too cannot be placed upon public land either. And if it was, could also be challenged and removed under the same precedent.

It's been there since the 40's. It's to strip away the history and culture of the city for the sake of 4 pious citizens. It's a shame.

I grew up in pensacola. Taking down that cross is in no way stripping away our history or culture. People need to get a grip.