...unless the sale was illegal.
Private Group Buys Land Under Cross Memorial to Save Display Opposed by Atheist
- Thread starter Angel4Truth
- Start date
...unless the sale was illegal.
You wish!
I really don't. It creates a problem I'd rather not deal with. But the problem of the government endorsing religion is a bigger one.
A war memorial isnt endorsing religion, unless you are afraid of seeing a cross.
...unless, of course, that memorial happened to be in the form of a religious icon. In which case, they should know better.
I'm afraid of letting Christian theocrats take over the country and impose their beliefs on everyone else.
HisServant
New member
The rules of eminent domain and public property acquisition.
For instance, the Supreme Court ruled in 2014 that Rail Road right of ways acquired by eminent domain must be returned to the original property owners if the use for which the property was acquired was terminated.
yeah a cross on a grave imposes beliefs on others, what a baby you are.
It's not on graves, it's near graves, some of which may not be for Christians, and the Constitution and case law are fairly clear. If you want a religious icon, fine. But the government can't make it happen.
Every time someone wants to bring religion into government, you're always there to minimize it and defend it. But only, it seems when it's Christianity. Don't think I don't know what you're up to.
wow look at all those crosses on grave-markers at Arlington national cemetery...boo!
On individual graves. Not the same.
Um, you said its not on graves, they certainly are. Too bad you are offended, really.
Well then let me be clear, so that there's no doubt in your mind. I don't object to crosses on graves. I don't object to memorials to the dead, public or private. I don't have an objection to personal graves, paid for by public funds even, with whatever message that person and their family want on the grave, religious or not. What I do have a problem with is a religious memorial that isn't individualized by the person it memorializes, when the government can be seen to be endorsing one religious perspective over another. The memorial in question in San Diego was on public land, and I believe it was built with public funds, and is a collective memorial to a bunch of people who may or may not have been Christians.
Your problem is with the Constitution, not me.
Then you should be happy now, private funds paid it back multi fold over what it initially cost
Then you should be happy now, private funds paid it back multi fold over what it initially cost
Well, that in itself isn't quite good enough. The government has to sell the lands by a fair process without favoring a religious group. Which is what I said at the outset.
So sue them. Let us know how it goes.
Seems like I already mentioned that too.
rougueone
New member
A4T, Considering the flow of our culture and the courts. It's a matter of "when" not "if". I hope I am wrong.