Senate votes to put (San Diego) Mount Soledad cross in federal hands

[MindPilot]

WASHINGTON – With a speed and decisiveness that surprised some, the Senate on Tuesday approved a plan to transfer the land beneath the Mount Soledad war memorial to federal control in an effort to avoid a court-ordered removal of the cross that stands there.
The Senate's unanimous vote sent the cross-transfer plan to President Bush for his expected signature. It creates what some consider an entirely new dynamic in the 17-year effort to save the cross, but which others say is a hopeless attempt to preserve a symbol on city land that courts have said unconstitutionally favors one religion over others.

http://www.signonsandiego.com/news/metro/20060801-1730-cnssoledad.html


100 - 0 I'm at a loss for words. Not one Senator can refrain from pandering to the Christians. Fuck them all.

[DavidDvorkin]

1. 100 - 0!

I agree with you. Fuck them all.

[MindPilot]

5. Right you are! They care more about dead veterans

than they do live soldiers.

[GI_NE_DEM]

2. City Land/ Church Symbol

I've never understood how we're supposed to have separation of church and state, and yet there are people who insist on the ten commandments on government property, adding "under God" to the pledge of allegiance, etc. THIS is how they want to "honor" the Korean vets? Must not have had any Jewish (or any other non-Christian) soldiers serving then?

[The Sushi Bandit]

3. Devine Krap: here is some un-spun facts about this issue

http://devinekrap.blogspot.com/2006/07/house-passes-bill-to-save-mount.html

Edit... here is some un-spun facts about this issue:

The Mt. Soledad Cross was dedicated to "Our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ" in a dedication bulletin by the grandmother of William J. Kellogg, President of the Mt. Soledad memorial Association on Easter Sunday, 1954 with no mention to Korean War veterans.

Every Easter holiday sunrise since 1954 was an occasion at Mt. Soledad for local Christian worship services to celebrate the crucifixion of Jesus Christ.

There was no placard or marker to be found anywhere on Mt. Soledad Natural Park nor at the site of the Mt. Soledad Easter Cross to indicate that it was a veterans' memorial until after 1992, when the Mt. Soledad Memorial Association installed such a marker with a "Veterans" memorial inscription.

House passes bill to save Mount Soledad cross

7-20-6 WASHINGTON – The House on Wednesday passed a bill that would transfer the land beneath San Diego's Mount Soledad cross to the federal government. With a 349-74 vote, House members voted to seize the land and give it to the Defense Department in an effort to avoid a court-ordered removal of the 43-foot-tall cross that towers over La Jolla.

“The memorial cross serves a legitimate secular purpose of commemorating our nation's war dead and veterans,” said El Cajon Republican Duncan Hunter, one of three San Diego-area congressmen who wrote the legislation to preserve the cross, which was dedicated in 1954 as a Korean War veterans memorial. “Therefore, the display of the Mount Soledad cross on federal property – is constitutional.”

Those fighting to remove the cross from Mount Soledad argue that say it's a Christian religious symbol and should not sit on public land atop a prominent hill. They note that even historical maps refer to the monument as the “Mount Soledad Easter Cross.”

“If this bill were nothing more than a veterans' issue, we would have a very simple decision before us today,” said Rep. Susan Davis, a San Diego Democrat. “But unfortunately, that is not the case. The courts have told us time and time again what this issue is about: It is about a demonstrated preference of one religion over all others.”

Earlier this month, the U.S. Supreme Court temporarily blocked a lower court order forcing the city to remove the cross by Aug. 1. That deadline, set by U.S. District Court Judge Gordon Thompson Jr., would have imposed a $5,000-a-day fine if the cross stayed beyond that date. Thompson first ordered the cross removed in 1991 on the grounds that it was a religious symbol that violated the state constitution's church-state separation guarantees. The cross has been the subject of 17 years of legal battles.

[MindPilot]

12. And until very recently...

There had never been any service on any day commemorating veterans. This supposed "war memorial" was never the site of a service on D-day, V-E day, Memorial Day, Veteran's Day, or even July 4th. But every Easter Sunday...

[slackmaster]

13. As a fellow San Diegan I can vouch for the truth of MindPilot's post

The cross was long known to many as the "Easter cross". The war memorial aspect is window dressing added after the lawsuits started.

MindPilot, I know how strongly you feel about this. I am sorry for the way things are going.

[MindPilot]

15. Thanks for that; I appreciate it.

I think the case will end up in the Supreme Court because the new twist is that it now involves eminent domain and a federal "taking" of land. For that to fly, I believe the federal government has to demonstrate a "public good" that justifies taking the land and that may be difficult to do since the land is already a public park. How much publicly gooder could it get? Oh, yeah, it would be adorned with a specific symbol of a particular religion.

If the SCOTUS--already openly hostile to church-state separation--decides to hear it this time around, they will either uphold the Constitution or essentially nullify the Establishment clause.

Either way, we have a landmark case right here in our front yard.

[The Sushi Bandit]

16. This says it all

[PurityOfEssence]

4. Ah, make it federal

Since there's a long standing tradition of sucking up to the belief in god in the federal realm in direct violation of Article One of the Bill of Rights, let's just go with precedent.

Elves and angels dance with much more relevance than actual living organisms in the minds of average Americans; too bad they don't believe in fairies.

The fear of "god" will fuck us all. There's no way out.

Silly children.

[leesa]

6. Our Senators don't have a clue what the Constitution means.

[Maat]

7. And Boxer voted for the transfer also.

With ANY OTHER Supreme Court, this wouldn't matter (the transfer), and the Cross would be down fairly quickly.

They are doing this to stall; they will keep this in litigation for years, and, by that time, the Court will have swung so far right that they won't even recognize a separation of church and state.

Sorry, this fairly-recent law school graduate (2 years ago) is pretty despondent over this whole thing.

I wrote a letter to my alleged rep., Darrell Issa, explaining that the cross offended me, because of the message of superiority (the superiority of one particular viewpoint of Christianity - conservative Christianity) it was sending. I received a form letter back, explaining that the Cross didn't offend anyone (I must not be "anyone."). Disgusting.

[Joanie Baloney]

8. All Hail the Cross!

"You Muslims, Jews, atheists, Buddhists and believers of separation of church and state....stand quietly to the side and don't fidget. Oh, here...look at the plaque honoring some dead soldiers. That should keep you quiet for awhile. Don't bother the Christians while we're enjoying the Cross."

That's what it reminds me of - adults at Thanksgiving, shushing the kids to the basement to play. Quietly. And then to eat at the folding kids table.

Believers of the U.S. Constitution are not kids. We will not be "shushed".

JB

[TechBear_Seattle]

9. "At the name of Jesus, every knee shall bow..."

Or else be accused, tried and convicted of treason against the United States of America, one Nation Under God, for ever and ever. Amen."

[sdfernando]

10. Time to send a sternly worded letter

to Boxer. I'm highly disappointed with this vote and surprised at her actions. I've already written off Dianne Fineshit but Boxer has been a breath of fresh air for the most part. Still I'm going to let her know that one of her constituents is not happy.

[MindPilot]

11. I just called Boxer's office.

I told the staffer that I was disappointed in her vote; it was just political pandering while ignoring the very constitutional principals she was supposed to be upholding. Not to mention the slap in the face to non-Christians, especially non-Christian veterans.

San Diego office number: [phone]

[unda cova brutha]

14. Im calling now

[Bandit]

17. What Senator doesn't want government control over the land

It isn't just about the cross. When that issue come around I doubt it will be 100-0. This vote was just for annexation.

[Lindacooks]

18. And THAT is what they spent their time on??

Well, just ignore people without health care, a stumbling economy, disastrous wars, the Gulf STILL not cleaned up, hurricanes coming, FEMA still in shambles, treason by Bush/Cheney - yeah, a piece of land with a cross on it is more important.

GRRRRRRRRRRRRR.

[MindPilot]

19. Senator Boxer's reply

Looks like that was a go-along-to-get-along vote and she doesn't really have a stand on the issue. In other words, political pandering to the Christians. :shrug:


Thank you for contacting me regarding the Mount Soledad cross in San Diego . I appreciate hearing from you.

As you may know, on August 1, 2006, the Senate passed H.R.5683, which will transfer ownership of the land on which the cross sits from the city of San Diego to the federal government.

This issue continues to be reviewed by the courts to determine the validity of the city of San Diego 's transfer of land and the legal effect of previous Congressional action concerning the memorial.

Again, thank you for writing to me. Please do not hesitate to contact me again about this or any other issue of concern to you.


Barbara Boxer
United States Senator