Page 1 of 6 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 58

Thread: Thieves steal cross after Supreme Court rules it can stay on Gov Land

  1. #1
    Veteran Member Chief's Avatar
    Joined
    Nov 2009
    Posts
    25,484
    Thanks
    6159

    From
    Earth
    http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100511/...s_mojave_cross



    This really bothers me. I hope these vandals get caught and jailed. They had their day in court and lost. It pisses me off to see them then just decide to take matters into their own hands, and cut down this memorial that's been standing since World War I. I hope they didn't damage it.

  2. #2
    Senior Member MajikMyst's Avatar
    Joined
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    8,101
    Thanks
    32

    From
    Seattle Wa.
    While I do not condone the theft of the cross.. Just a clarification here..



    On a 5-4 vote in April, the U.S. Supreme Court refused to order its removal. The high court told a federal judge to take a new look at a congressional plan to transfer land under the cross to private ownership.





    That was take from your article.. While the supreme court ruled it could stay.. It did order a judge to look at selling the land to a private owner.. There by also saying that it shouldn't be on federal land..



    I have no problem with memorials.. I do have an issue with someone else assuming they are all christian and wish to be honored with a cross..



    I think the cross should be there.. As should the Star of David and any other symbol of religion that might represent all the fallen soldiers of WWI.. Christians do not have a monopoly on america.. They never have and never will..

  3. #3
    Banned Camp
    Joined
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    11,730
    Thanks
    5662

    From
    NE Wisconsin
    [quote name='gabebrooks' date='11 May 2010 - 01:36 PM' timestamp='1273603009' post='150052']

    http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100511/...s_mojave_cross



    This really bothers me. I hope these vandals get caught and jailed. They had their day in court and lost. It pisses me off to see them then just decide to take matters into their own hands, and cut down this memorial that's been standing since World War I. I hope they didn't damage it.

    [/quote]



    Actually the cross has been standing since 1932 as a memorial to WWI dead. The VFW is offering a $25,000. reward for the arrest of the scum that stole it. Why anyone would make a stink about it being there is beyond me. I've seen it. It's small and way out in the middle of no where.

  4. #4
    Council Member Djinn's Avatar
    Joined
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    40,742
    Thanks
    25417

    From
    Pennsylvania, USA
    [quote name='Bourne' date='12 May 2010 - 04:59 AM' timestamp='1273654767' post='150261']

    Actually the cross has been standing since 1932 as a memorial to WWI dead. The VFW is offering a $25,000. reward for the arrest of the scum that stole it. Why anyone would make a stink about it being there is beyond me. I've seen it. It's small and way out in the middle of no where.

    [/quote]

    Technically, the cross was destroyed sometime after it was erected in 1934 (not 1932) and was replaced.

  5. #5
    Veteran Member Pragmatist's Avatar
    Joined
    Nov 2006
    Posts
    44,293
    Thanks
    12719

    [quote name='Bourne' date='12 May 2010 - 04:59 AM' timestamp='1273654767' post='150261']

    Actually the cross has been standing since 1932 as a memorial to WWI dead. The VFW is offering a $25,000. reward for the arrest of the scum that stole it. Why anyone would make a stink about it being there is beyond me. I've seen it. It's small and way out in the middle of no where.

    [/quote]



    Well, I thought it would look good on my dog's grave but seeing as the VFW is offering 25k for it, I suppose I could sell it to them and just make one myself.

  6. #6
    In the Human Network Babylon's Avatar
    Joined
    Apr 2007
    Posts
    11,350
    Thanks
    3707

    From
    Jersey
    [quote name='MajikMyst' date='12 May 2010 - 04:23 AM' timestamp='1273652587' post='150256']

    I have no problem with memorials.. I do have an issue with someone else assuming they are all christian and wish to be honored with a cross..

    [/quote]

    Oh get over yourself. Who assumed they were all Christian, just because some people CARED enough to create a memorial..? If the people who represented the fallen Jews or any other religion gave two shits they would have erected their own Memorial. You'd think it was a statue of 2 pigs giving each other Oral. It's a damn memorial honoring dead soldiers, do you have anything else to blame on Christianity that doesn't make sense..?

  7. #7
    Veteran Member Dr.Knuckles's Avatar
    Joined
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    97,856
    Thanks
    4423

    From
    Vancouver
    In Canada defacing a memorial is actually a serious criminal offence. Up to 5,000 fine or up to 2 years jail or combination of both.

  8. #8
    Best Garage Ever! Disappointed not surprised's Avatar
    Joined
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    2,253
    Thanks
    0

    From
    SoCal
    [quote name='Dr.Knuckles' date='12 May 2010 - 12:17 PM' timestamp='1273691832' post='150478']

    In Canada defacing a memorial is actually a serious criminal offence. Up to 5,000 fine or up to 2 years jail or combination of both.

    [/quote]

    Hopefully the perps "fall down the stairs on the way to court" too.

  9. #9
    Council Member Djinn's Avatar
    Joined
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    40,742
    Thanks
    25417

    From
    Pennsylvania, USA
    While it doesn't in any way justify the theft, it seems that many have forgotten the reason for the lawsuit. It was not merely that the cross was being challenged as a government-sanctioned religious symbol.



    The lawsuit was filed on behalf of someone who sought a permit to build a small Buddhist shrine in the same area - and was denied. The Christian cross was allowed, but the Buddhist shrine was not. IMO, that's government promotion of one religion over another.

  10. #10
    Proud deplorable Bigot Outdraw Poker Champion, Colinks :Swap Champion
    Joined
    Nov 2006
    Posts
    14,225
    Thanks
    3072

    From
    MI
    [quote name='Djinn' date='12 May 2010 - 06:35 PM' timestamp='1273703710' post='150572']

    While it doesn't in any way justify the theft, it seems that many have forgotten the reason for the lawsuit. It was not merely that the cross was being challenged as a government-sanctioned religious symbol.



    The lawsuit was filed on behalf of someone who sought a permit to build a small Buddhist shrine in the same area - and was denied. The Christian cross was allowed, but the Buddhist shrine was not. IMO, that's government promotion of one religion over another.

    [/quote]



    On the surface I 100% completely agree.



    Not being familiar with the court case, however, I wonder how many Buddhists fought in our defense in WWI. Since that is what the Cross was for it would only make sense to allow other religious symbols to symbolize the same thing, as long as they were represented on our side.



    Did I word that so anyone could follow it!!?

Page 1 of 6 123 ... LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Supreme Court rules against wrongly convicted man
    By Blueneck in forum Civil Rights
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 1st April 2011, 08:34 AM
  2. Replies: 52
    Last Post: 3rd March 2011, 05:43 PM
  3. is the Supreme Court the highest court in the land?
    By nonsqtr in forum Political Discussion
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 8th November 2009, 08:35 PM
  4. Replies: 27
    Last Post: 28th June 2008, 11:07 AM
  5. Saddam cross-examined in court
    By News Poster in forum Current Events
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 5th April 2006, 10:02 PM

Tags for this Thread


Facebook Twitter RSS Feed