Results 1 to 6 of 6

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

  1. #1
    Senior Member AirborneSapper7's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    South West Florida (Behind friendly lines but still in Occupied Territory)
    Posts
    117,696

    Memorial cross finds 3 allies in Supreme Court fight ACLU



    LAW OF THE LAND
    Memorial cross finds 3 allies in Supreme Court fight
    'This case reveals the extreme lengths the ACLU will go to erase religious monuments'

    Posted: June 09, 2009
    10:06 pm Eastern
    By Drew Zahn
    © 2009 WorldNetDaily


    The Mojave cross

    A World War I memorial cross built in the Mojave Desert by the Veterans of Foreign Wars to honor their fallen comrades has come under attack from the American Civil Liberties Union, which claims the display on federal land violates the First Amendment. The ACLU has further fought against transfer of the cross to into private hands, insisting instead that it be destroyed.

    But as the fate of the cross rests now with the U.S. Supreme Court, three new allies have come to the side of the VFW and the memorial it established 75 years ago.

    The American Center for Law and Justice, Liberty Counsel and the Thomas More Law Center have all filed briefs with the court this week in support of the monument, calling the ACLU's case ill-founded.

    "Passive displays like the World War I Memorial, the Ten Commandments, Nativity scenes, or statements like the National Motto do not force anyone to participate in a religious exercise and, thus, do not establish religion," said Mathew D. Staver, founder of Liberty Counsel, in a statement. "This case reveals the extreme lengths the ACLU will go to in order to erase religious monuments.

    "For 75 years this cross in the Mojave Desert did not disturb anyone," Staver continued. "It stood as a memorial to the heroes of World War I. Removing this memorial would be an insult to our war veterans. Doing so under the guise of the First Amendment is an insult to the Framers of the Constitution."

    As WND reported, the Mojave Desert Memorial Cross in the Mojave National Preserve was erected in 1934 by World War I veterans who wanted a place to remember their lost trench-mates from the big war.

    But the ACLU, representing a man from Oregon who has alleged he might drive on a desert road in California and might be offended by the cross, has won lower court rulings that the cross must cease to exist.

    After a federal district court held that display of the cross violated the Establishment Clause within the First Amendment, Congress directed the Department of the Interior to convey one acre of property that included the memorial to the VFW in exchange for a five-acre parcel of equal value. But the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit determined that the cross – and the land transfer – violated the Establishment Clause. Further, the cross has since been enclosed in plywood to prevent people from seeing it until the case is resolved.


    The Mojave cross, encased in plywood to prevent people from seeing the symbol

    The ACLJ, however, representing itself and 15 members of the House of Representatives – House Minority Leader John Boehner, Todd Akin, Michele Bachmann, Roy Blunt, Eric Cantor, Randy Forbes, Scott Garrett, Walter Jones, Jim Jordan, Doug Lamborn, Thaddeus McCotter, Jeff Miller, Mike Pence, Joseph Pitts, and Joe Wilson – believes the ACLU has overstretched its preferred definition of the "separation of church and state" yet again.

    "The high court should reject this legal challenge and conclude that the government's action is not only appropriate but constitutional," said Jay Sekulow, chief counsel of the ACLJ, in a statement. "This case represents the most extreme example of a phenomenon that has plagued the federal courts for decades: Ideologically motivated citizens and public interest groups search out alleged Establishment Clause violations, almost always in the form of a passive religious symbol or display of some sort, and turn it into a federal case because they are offended. It's time for the high court to put an end to this disturbing practice."

    Richard Thompson, president and chief counsel for the Thomas More Law Center, added in a statement, "Since the beginning of America, crosses have been used to memorialize our fallen war veterans and to give solace to their families and comrades. Ironically, the Ninth Circuit used the very Constitution these veterans defended with their lives to order the destruction of the memory of their heroic sacrifices."

    Furthermore, as WND has reported, the Liberty Legal Institute has launched a website called Don't Tear Me Down that describes the attack on the cross in the desert, which now needs a favorable ruling from the U.S. Supreme Court or faces demolition.

    Attorneys with the Liberty Legal Institute, which calls the case a "microcosm" of the trend of hostility towards veterans' memorials in the U.S, say the impact will reach many more memorials than just the one in California. They earlier set up a SaveOurMemorials.com website to warn about the situation.

    Besides the Mojave Desert cross, which the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals has ordered destroyed, there also has been pending dispute over the Mt. Soledad memorial where an atheist sued for the removal of a cross image, a recent attempt by a religious group called Summum that could have forced the removal of donated Ten Commandments monuments in Utah, an attempt to take the Ten Commandments away from a historic location in Texas, and the order to remove a Ten Commandments reference in Kentucky.

    In the Mojave Desert cross dispute, Liberty Legal filed an amicus brief on behalf of the Veterans of Foreign Wars, the American Legion, the Military Order of the Purple Heart and others seeking permission for the cross to remain because the land on which it stands originally had been owned by the VFW, which donated it to the government in the 1930s.

    The organization responded to the unfavorable court ruling by donating five acres of land to the government and submitting a request that it be allowed to retrieve the monument. A court shot down the plan.

    "It is bad enough to say that the veterans’ memorial is unconstitutional, but it is outrageous to say that the government cannot give the monument back to the people who spilled their blood and put it there in the first place,
    Join our efforts to Secure America's Borders and End Illegal Immigration by Joining ALIPAC's E-Mail Alerts network (CLICK HERE)

  2. #2
    Senior Member Richard's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Boston
    Posts
    5,262
    Ever visited Latin America there is a cross on public highways everywhere anyone lost their life in an accident.
    I support enforcement and see its lack as bad for the 3rd World as well. Remittances are now mostly spent on consumption not production assets. Join our efforts to Secure America's Borders and End Illegal Immigration by Joining ALIPAC's E-Mail Alerts network (CLICK HERE)

  3. #3
    Senior Member azwreath's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    6,621
    Quote Originally Posted by Richard
    Ever visited Latin America there is a cross on public highways everywhere anyone lost their life in an accident.





    That's correct.

    They're also all over the place in this country now......especially here in the SW.

    The only thing I find disturbing about them is the realization of just how many people are killed in accidents out here. Especially when you consider that the memorials only represent a very small portion of the actual number..........
    Join our efforts to Secure America's Borders and End Illegal Immigration by Joining ALIPAC's E-Mail Alerts network (CLICK HERE)

  4. #4
    ELE
    ELE is offline
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    5,660

    Obama and his followers want him to be thought of as God.

    Obama follows in Hitler's foot steps.............the goal is to get God and religion out of our country and replace it with statues of Obama.

    The ACLU is only interested in our bill of rights when they are persecuting the American people................


    Glad the Supreme Court is fighting the ACLU ( Anti-American Anti-Civilian Anti-Liberty Union).
    Join our efforts to Secure America's Borders and End Illegal Immigration by Joining ALIPAC's E-Mail Alerts network (CLICK HERE)

  5. #5
    Senior Member LuvMyCountry's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    694
    Do not rely on the Supreme court. After yesterdays ruling they are a joke. Our country changed drastically in the Chrysler ruling yesterday. They tore up the Constitution. It no longer represents the people that live in this country. People dont realize it but capitalism died yesterday.

  6. #6
    Senior Member cayla99's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Indiana, formerly of Northern Cal
    Posts
    4,889
    Quote Originally Posted by LuvMyCountry
    Do not rely on the Supreme court. After yesterdays ruling they are a joke. Our country changed drastically in the Chrysler ruling yesterday. They tore up the Constitution. It no longer represents the people that live in this country. People dont realize it but capitalism died yesterday.
    Amen
    Proud American and wife of a wonderful LEGAL immigrant from Ireland.
    The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good people to do nothing." -Edmund Burke (1729-1797) Join our efforts to Secure America's Borders and End Illegal Immigration by Joining ALIPAC's E-Mail Alerts network (CLICK HERE)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •