Thumbs Up: Court Rules the Old Rugged Cross Must Come Down

[Altfish]

Umm so a nation shouldn't pay to maintain such famous landmarks as the pyramids (Egyptian religion), Taj Mahal(Islamic mausoleum) or any of the ruins of Roman and Greek Pagan temples, or Stonehenge.

Stonehenge is the only one I can knowledgeably discuss here.
The UK is not a secular nation. Unfortunately we are a Christian (CofE to be precise) nation.
I understand that Stonehenge was privately owned and was bequeathed to the nation in the 1920s
But, Stonehenge is run and maintained by English Heritage which is funded by membership and fees paid by visitors.

 

[Altfish]

I must say that the cross in question is a monstrous looking object, it does not deserve 'preservation' and demolition would undoubtedly improve the area.

 

[Faithofchristian]

"An old, rugged cross that has stood on public land in a Washington, D.C., suburb for almost a century has been deemed unconstitutional by a federal court.

The 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled Wednesday (Oct. 18) that the so-called Peace Cross violates the establishment clause of the Constitution with “excessive religious entanglement.”

“The Latin cross is the core symbol of Christianity,” the court wrote in a 33-page opinion. “And here, it is 40 feet tall; prominently displayed in the center of one of the busiest intersections in Prince George’s County, Maryland, and maintained with thousands of dollars in government funds.”

The cross is planted in the town of Bladensburg, a short drive from the U.S. Capitol, at the intersection of a state road and a federal road, and commemorates World War I veterans.
source​

Slowly but surely.

.

This is where people are being fooled.

This is not in violation of the Constitution in no way. But however The 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in it's self, is in Violation of the 1st Amendment of the Constitution.

The 3 Main branches of the Government,
Which is, The President, Congress, and the Senate.
Since Congress can not Establish no law Prohibiting the Exercise of Religion, And Congress is one of the 3 Main Branches of the Government. That means Neither can the 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals.Which is over stepping their boundaries of the
1st Amendment of the Constitution.


You know people will say, doesn't the Constitution say, Separation of church and State, I would like for people to show as to where in the Constitution said this ?

What the Constitution does say is.
Constitution Amendment 1, "Congress shall not make No law respecting an establishment of Religion, or Prohibiting the free Exercise there of"

Now Notice the words
( prohibiting the free exercise thereof)

what this means is that the 4th U.S Circuit Court of Appeals, is in violation of the First Amendment of Constitution by Removing that Cross, Because as a Christian that cross is my Religious freedom to Exercise my freedom of Religion. Is it not ?

This means as the founding fathers sat it down, Was that the Government could not interfere with the establishment of Religion nor could the Government establish no law prohibiting the free Exercise Thereof.

Therefore that Cross is Christians Constitutional right to Exercise Their Religion.
Is it not ?

It's time for Christians to stand up and Exercise their freedom of Religion as guaranteed by the founding fathers in the
1st Amendment of the Constitution.

 

[Altfish]

This is where people are being fooled.

This is not in violation of the Constitution in no way.

You know people will say, doesn't the Constitution say, Separation of church and State, I would like for people to show as to where in the Constitution said this ?

What the Constitution does say is.
Constitution Amendment 1, "Congress shall not make No law respecting an establishment of Religion, or Prohibiting the free Exercise there of"

Now Notice the words
( prohibiting the free exercise thereof)

what this means is that the Government in it's self is in violation of the First Amendment of Constitution of removing that cross, because as a Christian that cross is my Religious freedom to exercise my Religion. Is it not ?

This means as the founding fathers sat it down, Was that the Government could not interfere with the establishment of Religion nor could the Government establish no law prohibiting the free exercise thereof.

Therefore that Cross in my Constitutional right to exercise my Religion.
Is it not ?

But isn't the issue that the government owns the land and pays for the monument's upkeep?

So, I suppose if the land rental was paid for by a church and all maintenance cost paid for by a church it'd be ok. But as I see it, the cross is on the land free of any rental charge, and the maintenance of the cross/area around it is paid for by the government.
Would you be happy if that was being done for (say) an Islamic statue or a Satanic statue?

 

[Faithofchristian]

But isn't the issue that the government owns the land and pays for the monument's upkeep?

So, I suppose if the land rental was paid for by a church and all maintenance cost paid for by a church it'd be ok. But as I see it, the cross is on the land free of any rental charge, and the maintenance of the cross/area around it is paid for by the government.
Would you be happy if that was being done for (say) an Islamic statue or a Satanic statue?

Didn't you Notice that land is public land and not owned by the Government.

Whether it be public land or government land, As a Christian the 1st Amendment of the Constitution does not say whether it be public land or government land.

The Government can not establish no law prohibiting the free Exercise Thereof.

Therefore if that cross is on Government land, The Government still can not violate the free Exercise Thereof.

 

[Altfish]

Didn't you Notice that land is public land and not owned by the Government.

Sorry, isn't 'public land' the same as 'government owned land' ? i.e. isn't it up to the government to maintain that land?
If there is a difference who owns 'public land'?

 

[Faithofchristian]

Sorry, isn't 'public land' the same as 'government owned land' ? i.e. isn't it up to the government to maintain that land?
If there is a difference who owns 'public land'?

If that land is Government land thats better Yet.

For the Government can not establish no law prohibiting the free Exercise Thereof.

Otherwise the Government will be in violation of the 1st Amendment of the Constitution.

 

[Altfish]

If that land is Government land better Yet.

For the Government can not establish no law prohibiting the free Exercise Thereof.

Otherwise the Government will be in violation of the 1st Amendment of the Constitution.

But what is the difference between 'Government Land' and 'Public Land'?

 

[Altfish]

If that land is Government land thats better Yet.

For the Government can not establish no law prohibiting the free Exercise Thereof.

Otherwise the Government will be in violation of the 1st Amendment of the Constitution.

Which is where the Satanic Temple step in and ask for their monument to be placed next to the Christian Cross

 

[Faithofchristian]

But what is the difference between 'Government Land' and 'Public Land'?

There is no difference what land it is.
The Government still can not Establish no law prohibiting the free Exercise Thereof.

The 1st Amendment of the Constitution guarantees that.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

This is where people are being fooled.

This is not in violation of the Constitution in no way. But however The Government it's self, is in Violation of the 1st Amendment of the Constitution.

You know people will say, doesn't the Constitution say, Separation of church and State, I would like for people to show as to where in the Constitution said this ?

What the Constitution does say is.
Constitution Amendment 1, "Congress shall not make No law respecting an establishment of Religion, or Prohibiting the free Exercise there of"

Now Notice the words
( prohibiting the free exercise thereof)

Now you notice the words "no law respecting an establishment of religion."

The budget bill that approved the funds to put this up was "a law respecting an establishment of religion." So is every bill that approves money to maintain it, every approved redesign for this section of highway, etc. etc.

what this means is that the Government in it's self is in violation of the First Amendment of Constitution by Removing that Cross, Because as a Christian that cross is my Religious freedom to Exercise my freedom of Religion. Is it not ?

No, it's not. What does this particular cross have to do with your worship? Do you have your worship services in front of it or something?

This means as the founding fathers sat it down, Was that the Government could not interfere with the establishment of Religion nor could the Government establish no law prohibiting the free Exercise Thereof.

Therefore that Cross is Christians Constitutional right to Exercise Their Religion.
Is it not ?

What does this cross have to do with the worship of Christians who have never even heard of it?

It's time for Christians to stand up and Exercise their freedom of Religion as guaranteed by the founding fathers in the
1st Amendment of the Constitution.

It's strange to me that you don't think you have full free exercise of your religion now. How do you see it as being infringed upon?

 

[Faithofchristian]

Which is where the Satanic Temple step in and ask for their monument to be placed next to the Christian Cross

Seeing you have no understanding what the founding fathers establish or what they Written.

John Addams one of the founding fathers Written and all the founding fathers agreed with.
"That the Constitution was written for a Moral and Religious People and is unfit for any other people.

Therefore your santanic temple is not included.
You really believe those founding fathers would approve of a santanic Temple, unto which those founding fathers were all Christians.
Go Figure

 

[Altfish]

There is no difference what land it is. .

So why in Post #45 did you say, "Didn't you Notice that land is public land and not owned by the Government."

The Government still can not Establish no law prohibiting the free Exercise Thereof.

The 1st Amendment of the Constitution guarantees that.

But as I said in post #49 that is when the Satanic Temple steps in.

 

[Faithofchristian]

Now you notice the words "no law respecting an establishment of religion."

The budget bill that approved the funds to put this up was "a law respecting an establishment of religion." So is every bill that approves money to maintain it, every approved redesign for this section of highway, etc. etc.


No, it's not. What does this particular cross have to do with your worship? Do you have your worship services in front of it or something?


What does this cross have to do with the worship of Christians who have never even heard of it?


It's strange to me that you don't think you have full free exercise of your religion now. How do you see it as being infringed upon?

That budget that your referring to. Can not over ride the 1st Amendment of the Constitution which was set in place by the founding fathers

 

[Altfish]

Seeing you have no understanding what the founding fathers establish or what they Written.

John Addams one of the founding fathers Written and all the founding fathers agreed with.
"That the Constitution was written for a Moral and Religious People and is unfit for any other people.

Therefore your santanic temple is not included.
You really believe those founding fathers would approve of a santanic Temple, unto which those founding fathers were all Christians.
Go Figure

I think it is you who are showing your lack of understanding. Satanism is a religion.

Can I remind you of....
http://freethinker.co.uk/2014/09/17/satanists-devilishly-cunning-stunt/
...or...
An After School Satan Club could be coming to your kid’s elementary school

 

[Faithofchristian]

Now you notice the words "no law respecting an establishment of religion."

The budget bill that approved the funds to put this up was "a law respecting an establishment of religion." So is every bill that approves money to maintain it, every approved redesign for this section of highway, etc. etc.


No, it's not. What does this particular cross have to do with your worship? Do you have your worship services in front of it or something?


What does this cross have to do with the worship of Christians who have never even heard of it?


It's strange to me that you don't think you have full free exercise of your religion now. How do you see it as being infringed upon?

Look , if we let the Government to do what they are doing whether it be a cross or any other thing.
Once the Government starts there will be No stopping the Government of over running the people.
The Constitution for the people's protection from the Government over running people.

The cross is only a step for the Government to over ride our Constitutional Rights as a People.
What's Next in Line. Your Constitutional rights of what you do or where you go or what you own or what you eat and don't eat.
Once the Government starts, the Government will not stop, until it has full control over People.

 

[Faithofchristian]

I think it is you who are showing your lack of understanding. Satanism is a religion.

Can I remind you of....
http://freethinker.co.uk/2014/09/17/satanists-devilishly-cunning-stunt/
...or...
An After School Satan Club could be coming to your kid’s elementary school

Can you prove that a santanic religion is part of the Constitution, When in fact the Founding fathers were Christians.
Now why would a Religion And moral Christians have anything to do with a santanic religion.

 

[DavidFirth]

"They"? Who be "they"?

.

Oh, people like you who hate the very idea of God's righteousness prevailing, of course.

 

[sayak83]

I must say that the cross in question is a monstrous looking object, it does not deserve 'preservation' and demolition would undoubtedly improve the area.

That decision is the one that is important. If it's not historically significant and not a landmark for that area then it should be brought down.

 

[sayak83]

Can you prove that a santanic religion is part of the Constitution, When in fact the Founding fathers were Christians.
Now why would a Religion And moral Christians have anything to do with a santanic religion.

Satanic religion is very moral.