the right decision, it most often the toughest.
The 12-foot high white crosses with 6-foot horizontal crossbars... good grief!
erected in 1998, monuments were paid for with private funds and erected only with the permission of the troopers' families. Nearly all of the 14 crosses are on public land....
"Unlike Christmas, which has been widely embraced as a secular holiday ... there is no evidence in this case that the cross has been widely embraced by non-Christians as a secular symbol of death," they said....
"This may lead the reasonable observer to fear that Christians are likely to receive preferential treatment from the UHP," the justices wrote.
...the crosses could imply that the trooper who died there was a Christian.

who were the cowards that approved this anyway?
...nutz.

there is no evidence in this case that the cross has been widely embraced by non-Christians as a secular symbol of death," they said....

A more recognized symbol of death would be hard to imagine. Someone's being stupid here.

I suppose the thing that next mosts suggests death is a skull-and-crossbones. However, many would also see that as being a sign of poison, immediate danger, or pirates.

This is funny. Now, I want to see Manypaths, BetelG and Donnerboy and Zombie come and defend this, as

1. All people agreed
2. The families were alright with it
3. Public land
4. Private Funds
5. This is the symbol the family oked to represent their families death.
6. No one inside of the group of people that died has openly complained.

Ready...
3...
2...
1...

3. Public land

That would be the problem. Private land and private funds would be OK.

That wasn't hard at all.

A three-judge panel from Denver's 10th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals said in its 38-page ruling that a "reasonable observer" would conclude that the state and the Utah Highway Patrol were endorsing Christianity with the cross memorials.

I disagree with this. When I see a cross in the ground, my first thought is "somebody died here" and my second thought is religious.

It is a little morbid to mark graves with one of the more slow and torturous forms of Capital Punishment, but there you have it.

"First erected in 1998, monuments were paid for with private funds and erected only with the permission of the troopers' families."

So what business does the government have censoring them? What a crock of judicial nonsense.

Public as apposed to Government land there Kanrei.

Exactly Exp.

Public land belongs to all of us. Using private funds to errect something on public land is what the issue is.

Private land and there would be no issue.

They are crosses, a memorial. Again, someone once said "it doesn't matter if those affected are in agreement.

No one in the public is being misrepresented.

.the crosses could imply that the trooper who died there was a Christian.

I didn't think there were that many christians in Utah. Mormons yes, Christians no.....

"This may lead the reasonable observer to fear that Christians are likely to receive preferential treatment from the UHP,"

That is NOT the conclusion a "REASONABLE OBSERVER" would come to in my opinion.

I believe that a "REASONABLE OBSERVER" would come to the conclusion that an individual had lost their life and show respect.

Sorry to pop your hate filled bubble their Sparky, but I disagree with the ruling.

Boy, I don't often agree with your side when things don't go your way in the court of law. Not really sure what to do now.

Do we fly a Plane into the Courthouse, Change the Constitution or Bomb an Abortion Clinic?

"This may lead the reasonable observer to fear that Christians are likely to receive preferential treatment from the UHP"

Most people I know are reasonable and I don't know ANYONE who would think this.

The croses represent dead people, not the state. Unless a non-Christian was denied an alternative marker, I don't see how anyone is being affected negatively.

If they were Stars of David I would also assume somebody died but then I would assume they were Jewish. The same as I would with the crosses and Christianity. A symbol of death does not preclude the dual symbolism of religion.

i wonder how much money it's gonna take to scrub all the crosses off on the Arlington Cemetery headstones?

Or in Normandy. A lot of crosses there. Stars of David too. And it's because the guy lying in the ground directly underneath was a Christian, or a Catholic, or a Lutheran, or a Jew. It's not the US government or the French endorsing a specific religion.

Earlier this week, NY Gov Patterson offered to let the Ground Zero mosque build instead on public land, and he was hailed by both sides as a visionary (no pun intended) looking to defuse a volatile situation.

I guess it all depends on your persuasion. And, of course, whether or not the aggrieved party is a group of Christians, or Muslims. Then, not a close call.

I didn't think there were that many christians in Utah. Mormons yes, Christians no.....

#11 | Posted by northguy3 at 2010-08-20 01:41 PM | Reply | Flag:

Ummmm.... ain't mormons a christian sect?

Kinda like catholics/baptists/methodists/
quakers/shakers/bakers and rakers are christian sects?

Federal land or State land?

Utah should challenge the feds to come take them down and then arrest 'em for vandalism when they show up to do so.

A more recognized symbol of death would be hard to imagine. Someone's being stupid here.

#2 | Posted by Zed

This is funny. Now, I want to see Manypaths, BetelG and Donnerboy and Zombie come and defend this, as

present and accounted for!

Here is a thought... A RIP tombstone. Universal symbol of Death. Non denominational.

Zed, when you live inside a box it is tough to see.

Does anyone dispute that the symbolism of a cross is Christian? It seems dubious to erect 12-foot Christian symbols on public land, regardless of whether they were privately funded or not. I guess a case can be made that roadside crosses are so prevalent today that they symbolize death in general, but the Christian symbolism is undeniable.

ah yes...and last night on daily show...skit with the manvi and wyatt.,.

wyatt was TEAM JESUS and monvi was TEAM MOHHAMED...wyatt turned around to show Jesus pic making him look stupid and when it was time for manvi to turn around and show pic of mohammed...he only turned slightly knowing that they couldnt ridicule mohammed but could jesus....

typical liberal bullshit...and sure..wyatt said something about it but then stewart defended it...

so if muslims want to abide by first amendment, why not HERE???????

bullshit.

point of placing this here is to show liberal bullshit two face.

Does anyone dispute that the symbolism of a cross is Christian? It seems dubious to erect 12-foot Christian symbols on public land, regardless of whether they were privately funded or not. I guess a case can be made that roadside crosses are so prevalent today that they symbolize death in general, but the Christian symbolism is undeniable.

#19 | Posted by rcade
* * * * *

Are the Christian symbols in Arlington unconstitutional, or not?

Posted by rcade at 2010-08-20 02:06 PM | Reply

It's more a symbol of roman imperialism, and, as Kanrei pointed out a very slow and painful method of capital punishment.

It's only a symbol of xtians for the xtians.

On Sesame St. its a letter in the alphabet.

Yeah I can see RCADE's point. 12 feet is a little overboard. At that size it is more of a symbol of religion than it is a marker or acknowledgment of a death. I know that is splitting hairs.

When I think of a burial marker I think of a small non-discreet white cross.

#22 Nice.

Brings up a good point, what if the guys name was Tom? Can't use his initial?

.the crosses could imply that the trooper who died there was a Christian.

I didn't think there were that many christians in Utah. Mormons yes, Christians no.....

#11 | Posted by northguy3 at 2010-08-20 01:41 PM |

So I guess an athiest trooper doesn't get a cross? Or does he get one with a red circle and line through it?

Just a thought, why not use a symbol that reflects each individual's religious belief or lack there of. In this case that would probably mean all Christian crosses but the state could have argued that if the trooper had been Jewish or Muslim they could have had a corresponding symbol or maybe just a big question mark.

"On Sesame St. its a letter in the alphabet."

Like the BIG W?

point of placing this here is to show liberal bullshit two face.

#20 | Posted by afkabl2

No-aflac-the point was so you could bash liberals-again-and show how much hatred you hold.

Ditto's again to EXPSREDEMTION's statment of...

---
"3. Public land
That would be the problem. Private land and private funds would be OK.
That wasn't hard at all."
---

Also controversy would have likely been avoided if a plaque were used instead of a religious symbol to honor the fallen state Highway Patrol troopers.

#29 | Posted by Massai at 2010-08-20 02:23 PM | Reply |

You mean Kanrei's post in response to my post.

Give credit where credit is due. It ain't due here.

Thanks Exp.

As I said earlier, when I see a cross on the side of the road, my first thought is "somebody died here." A cross seems to be the international symbol marking a grave. The only issue I see here is that it was done on public land instead of private and, just because I see the cross on the side of the road that way does not mean others do too. As public land belongs to us all, it should be free of any religious icons.

In a black and white world the crosses need to go. Let's just enforce the rules equally and try our best to avoid double standards while trying to be tolerant to the less rational, less mainstream religions.

As public land belongs to us all, it should be free of any religious icons.

#31 | Posted by kanrei
* * * *

So . . . is that also true of Arlington, or not?

I just want someone to explain that memorials on public land in Utah is somehow different from memorials on public land in Virginia. Or not.

So . . . is that also true of Arlington, or not?

I just want someone to explain that memorials on public land in Utah is somehow different from memorials on public land in Virginia. Or not.

No. Arlignton is a National Park and, more importantly, a graveyard; the side of the road in Utah is not.

Are people really this stupid or just too lazy to think on their own?

#33 | Posted by rightisright

To me the difference is that at Arlington they tombstones with individual beliefs carved into them such Muslim, Christian, Jewish and even Pagan. These on the other hand are massive crosses which presents a religious uniformity that does not exist.

How many non Christian families were contacted but no memorial was made for their fallen family member because they objected to the crosses?

The 14 crosses erected along Utah roads to commemorate fallen state Highway Patrol troopers convey a state preference for Christianity and are a violation of the U.S. Constitution, a federal appeals court said Wednesday.

A three-judge panel from Denver's 10th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals said in its 38-page ruling that a "reasonable observer" would conclude that the state and the Utah Highway Patrol were endorsing Christianity with the cross memorials.

This may lead the reasonable observer to fear that Christians are likely to receive preferential treatment from the UHP," the justices wrote.

To fear Christians are likely to receive preferental treatment from the UHP? Are you fucking kidding me? Like how? Letting Christians speed? Drive drunk? Is the UHP now guilty of religious profiling?

They actually include that as part of the reason they find the crosses are a violation to the US Constitution?

Public land
That would be the problem. Private land and private funds would be OK.

Might be correct, but seems to be an exaltation of form over substance. The state could carve out that parcel of land, sell it to a non-profit, and keep the crosses up.

So . . . is that also true of Arlington, or not?

#33 | Posted by rightisright at 2010-08-20 02:43 PM

Crispee,

You don't believe Cops give speacial treatment based on stickers or other things they see in a car? Isn't that why everyone donates to the PBL or the Fallen Trooper's Fund? You think that, in Utah, two of teh same cars going the same speed, but one has a big Cross in the windshield and the other doesn't have equal chances of being pulled over?

As long as we understand here that its not that big a deal to trample over the wishes of the families of men and women that have died defending our roads. So someone passing by on an interstate doesn't feel offended. I mean come on who really cares about those people anyway....

Is the UHP now guilty of religious profiling?

Just how would you religiously profile anyhow? All them xtians look the same to me!

#33 | Posted by rightisright at 2010-08-20 02:43 PM

You have a point.
#38 | Posted by LIVE_OR_DIE at 2010-08-20 02:52 PM

See posts 34 and 35. He has no point.

argued that the crosses could imply that the trooper who died there was a Christian.

Valid point.

Jewish officer in Utah? Fuck you.

Muslim officer in Utah? Fuck you.

Atheist officer in Utah? Fuck you twice.

Only Christians get remembered when they die.

Only Christians get remembered when they die.

well yeah!!

everyone else is going to hell.

LOL

#39 | Posted by kanrei at 2010-08-20 02:53 PM

Thankfully, I am not one of those "reasonable observers" who fear Christians are likely to receive preferential treatment. Hell, I really don't think I want to know what these justices consider a reasonable person.

When someone dies in a car accident on our roads, they mark it with a cross. It works as a memorial for the families and as a reminder to drivers to be careful. Some corners have 6 or 7 crosses on them. Kinda grim.

The only other symbol I can think of that's so well associated with death is RIP.

who fear Christians are likely to receive preferential treatment

I don't fear it; I've accepted it. How else can people scream religious intolerance at those who say "Happy Holidays" while claiming it isn't intolerant to try and stop a house of worship from being built?

Kanrei

Of course there are situations but that is on all sides. Same could be said of seeing a white man and a black man which might get pulled over. The officer has a choice either really would be wrong unless he got them both. So the officer makes the choice and moves on.

Lets not forget this is in honor of fallen troops. There is no reason to avoid religion in this instance. We need to remember the government is here to protect our right to religion not be a wall to close it down.

Whenever I see a cross at a memorial, the first thing I want to do is convert to Christianity and kill everyone else who isn't.

Since when does the "establishment clause" refer to cultural symbols?

Memorial crosses (and Christmas trees, et. al.) are no more establishing a state religion than Obama attending a basketball game establishes a state basketball team. The God-haters need to be dismissed as the evil crackpots that they are.

I don't fear it; I've accepted it. How else can people scream religious intolerance at those who say "Happy Holidays" while claiming it isn't intolerant to try and stop a house of worship from being built?

#47 | Posted by kanrei at 2010-08-20 02:59 PM

Maybe there is a new niche in Utah. Religous IDs. You can have any faith and be covered. You get pulled over by a cop named Hussein, you hand him your muslim card. McGillicutty, the catholic card, Brownstein, the jewish card...

JD,

I was just trolling Crispee. =D

Let's build a mosque on top of Ground Zero, but let's not dare put up a cross anywhere.

argued that the crosses could imply that the trooper who died there was a Christian

#50 | Posted by crispee_oc at 2010-08-20 03:07 PM

FF!

An Atheist gets pulled over by an Atheist Cop.

Driver: But officer, I am an Atheist

Cop: I don't believe you.

Let's build a mosque on top of Ground Zero, but let's not dare put up a cross anywhere.

#52 | Posted by osbo25 at 2010-08-20 03:07 PM |FLAG:Post Brought To You By the Letters D-U-H

What if they were?

#53 | Posted by LIVE_OR_DIE at 2010-08-20 03:07 PM |

What if they weren't? I would personally find it very offensive if my father or mother's place of death was marked with a cross.

I just want someone to explain that memorials on public land in Utah is somehow different from memorials on public land in Virginia. Or not.

I think that a big difference would be the fact that Arlington contains actual Burial Sites.

I think this case is more similar to the Mohave Cross which the SC recently said did not violate the First.

With the Majority in that case still on the bench, I have to think the chances of this being overturned are pretty good.

#54 | Posted by kanrei at 2010-08-20 03:08 PM | Reply | Flag:

That doesn't make any sense.

The cop would have to address the fact that he does not believe in the existence of the driver, or something of that nature.

"Why was I pulled over sir"

[Ticket: Automobile functioning with non existent driver, of which was resisting arrest and causing undue duress to officer, tazer was implemented]

So it's okay to carve out public land for memorials and cover them with memorials and crosses, provided said land is not adjacent to major roadways.

Wow. Well, we've got a lot of work to do.

It's amazing all the things that offend people. Just amazing.

I think this case is more similar to the Mohave Cross which the SC recently said did not violate the First.

Isn't the Mohave Cross on private land?

#58 | Posted by ExpsRedemption at 2010-08-20 03:12 PM |

It is called a joke Exp. Read it again.

What if they weren't? I would personally find it very offensive if my father or mother's place of death was marked with a cross.

#56 | Posted by kanrei at 2010-08-20 03:10 PM

But, considering Christians make up the majority of this country it's beyond the realm of possibility that all of these officers were Christian.

So what if they were?

So it's okay to carve out public land for memorials and cover them with memorials and crosses, provided said land is not adjacent to major roadways.

RIR works so hard to miss the point.

Well it probably is now Kanrei.

But before it was stolen, it was on public land.

LOD,

I don't play "what if" games.

So what if they were?

What if they weren't?

considering Christians make up the majority of this country it's beyond the realm of possibility that all of these officers were Christian.

NO, it isn't. Assuming every officer killed in Utah is Christian is being very biased.

#54 | Posted by kanrei at 2010-08-20 03:08 PM

You had to one up me didn't you Kan....

Reminds me of Seinfeld where the guy with the laser stole George's thunder when he wanted to scream "that's got to hurt" in the theater...

No. Arlignton is a National Park and, more importantly, a graveyard; the side of the road in Utah is not.
Posted by kanrei at 2010-08-20 02:47 PM | Reply

Sooo.... the constitution as applied in this case does not apply to national parks?

It is interesting that at the time the Constitution was ratified, some of the states had "State" churches and this caused seemingly no conflict as it was understood that the first amendment prohibited the establishment of a FEDERAL religion and the states reserved the sovereign right to establish or maintain a state church as their residents so decided.

Now, the incorporationistas want some judge, nominated by some random jackass politician to have unilateral authority over all decisions made at the state, county, city, and neighborhood level!

Oh, what a long way we have come that some whiner gets their fucking pubes in a knot over the thought that someone commemorates a state trooper with a frigging cross.

Sooo.... the constitution as applied in this case does not apply to national parks?

Did you miss my saying "more importantly, a graveyard?" I mean, you quoted it, but that doesn't mean you read it.

"This may lead the reasonable observer to fear that Christians are likely to receive preferential treatment from the UHP," the justices wrote.

* * * *

Any justice who writes such a thing should be immediately disbarred for stupidity. What a dumbass.

"Look! A Christian cross! It's safe to run red lights here!"

I had to actually read the article to get douchechills. Didn't take long.

NO, it isn't. Assuming every officer killed in Utah is Christian is being very biased.

#65 | Posted by kanrei at 2010-08-20 03:15 PM | Reply | Flag:

Considering they received permission from the families... Not really.

I am sure when the Hindu state trooper's family was asked about a cross, they said "I'd prefer a giant golden cow with eight arms"

Seriously, you don't think that any of the troopers were Jewish, the state would have refused to put up a 12 foot star of David?

Not allowing for religious mention on a personal gravestone would violate the Free Exercise Clause of the First Amendment.

NO, it isn't. Assuming every officer killed in Utah is Christian is being very biased.

#65 | Posted by kanrei at 2010-08-20 03:15 PM

If the people erecting the crosses knew the officers' faith, and marked them accordingly, I don't any reason to be offended other than the observer is easily offended.

Did you miss my saying "more importantly, a graveyard?" I mean, you quoted it, but that doesn't mean you read it.

#68 | Posted by kanrei at 2010-08-20 03:18 PM | Reply | Flag:

OK, change from Arlington to Vietnam War Memorial.

Memorial vs. memorial, no one buried under either. There's crosses and little jewish stars all over that wall... I demand they rub them all off!!!!

Seriously, you don't think that any of the troopers were Jewish, the state would have refused to put up a 12 foot star of David?

#70 | Posted by SHEEPLESHEPERD

All they would have had to do was simply not include them in the memorial. Did they even contact non-Christian families? If so what were their responses and did they agree to the crosses?

Seriously, you don't think that any of the troopers were Jewish, the state would have refused to put up a 12 foot star of David?

The article pretty much shows they wouldn't.

The state of Utah did not do this under a religious context, but rather based on a flawed Utah resolution.

In 2006, the Utah Legislature passed a joint resolution declaring the cross a nonreligious secular symbol of death.

Shame the number of people who argue based on headlines without ever actually reading the story.

All officers families approved of the cross. That would mean, I suppose that they were not offended. That is a non issue.

Now, about the land.

I demand they rub them all off!!!!

#73 | Posted by SHEEPLESHEPERD

Sorry, you can't. That would violate those soldiers' First Amendment Rights.

OK, change from Arlington to Vietnam War Memorial.

What is the religious icon there? It is only a list of names of those who died.

"This may lead the reasonable observer to fear that Christians are likely to receive preferential treatment from the UHP," the justices wrote.

Regardless of whether or not one agrees with this ruling, is there anyone that believes what the justices wrote above? I can't possibly believe that a "reasonable" person can believe that, let alone somebody as unreasonable as a donnerboy, celisary, northgay, crappus, or one of those super odd gay dudes with "red" in his name (redrobot or something like that).

Yet another example of intolerance. An atheist group in Texas is offended by crosses on a roadway in Utah, hundreds of miles away. So they get themselves a lawyer.

What a bunch of douchebags.

An atheist group in Texas is offended by crosses on a roadway in Utah, hundreds of miles away.

Sounds familiar doesn't it? Now, about that Mosque.......

Are the Christian symbols in Arlington unconstitutional, or not?

As others have pointed out, Arlington National Cemetery isn't just crosses:

I can't possibly believe that a "reasonable" person can believe that

Yeah, but I can't see how a "reasonable" person would be Christian, so it remains possible.

JUST A TROLL! A JOKE! RELAX! I told a Jewish joke yesterday.

"This may lead the reasonable observer to fear that Christians are likely to receive preferential treatment from the UHP," a panel of judges from the 10th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled.
* * * *

That's the dumbest thing I've ever heard. Do these dumbasses actually believe that a "reasonable" driver can see the crosses, and determine that he'll be let off with a warning for speeding or running a red light just because he goes to a Christian church somewhere?

What a bunch of retards.

First erected in 1998, monuments were paid for with private funds and erected only with the permission of the troopers' families.

In 2006, the Utah Legislature passed a joint resolution declaring the cross a nonreligious secular symbol of death.

That reminds me of the "under God" ruling that claimed the God in "under God" isn't the Christian God. It's pretty weird for Christians to argue that God -- and now the cross -- are not symbols of their religion. What next? Is Jesus not a religious figure because he appeared in South Park?

Sounds familiar doesn't it? Now, about that Mosque.......

#81 | Posted by Manypaths

* * * *

I want the mosque at ground zero. New York used to be chock full of those posters and signs that said "We Will Never Forget." So put the mosque right there, to remind us all about why ground zero exists in the first place, and the people responsible for it.

Then American Atheists, Inc. drove by, got offended ...

God bless American Atheists and any other group that tries to pry religion out of our secular government.

Is Jesus not a religious figure because he appeared in South Park?

#86 | Posted by rcade

Those cocksuckers depicted jesus? LET'S KILL THEM!!!

An atheist group in Texas is offended by crosses on a roadway in Utah, hundreds of miles away.

Sounds familiar doesn't it? Now, about that Mosque.......

#81 | Posted by Manypaths at 2010-08-20 03:25 PM

Rcade,

Here is the real irony. How many people supporting this would support me, or a Muslim, or an Atheist, or Agnostic referring to the Cross as a "symbol of death?"

Go ahead.

Then American Atheists, Inc. drove by, got offended, thought their being offended was more important...

Now, about that Mosque......

Those cocksuckers depicted jesus? LET'S KILL THEM!!!

Posted by 101Chairborne at 2010-08-20 03:29 PM

No, it was just Ted Nugent. Everyone looked at him and said "Jesus Christ what are you thinking?" and the rumor started from there.

God bless American Atheists and any other group that tries to pry religion out of our secular government.

#88 | Posted by rcade

oooooh.... them there is fighting words...I am sure they have a special place in their Hell for the likes of YOU!

Now, about that Mosque......

#93 | Posted by Manypaths at 2010-08-20 03:31 PM

God bless American Atheists and any other group that tries to pry religion out of our secular government.

#88 | Posted by rcade at 2010-08-20 03:28 PM | Reply | Flag:

Pretty sure the government of Utah was never intended to be secular.

That's a fairly recent invention of the incorporation of the Federal governments inability to establish a government religion being superimposed on what had traditionally been a states right to establish and maintain said state churches.

I think the second to last symbol is the one. I was going to chose the last one, but that would diminish my chances of dating a female in biology.

God bless American Atheists and any other group that tries to pry religion out of our secular government.

#88 | Posted by rcade

What is the religious icon there? It is only a list of names of those who died.

#78 | Posted by kanrei at 2010-08-20 03:23 PM | Reply | Flag:

Next to all the little names... thousands of them.

My point is not that they should or should not be there, but why is this a federal constitutional issue?

I guess Utah 2006 declaration that the folks of Utah consider the cross to be a secular symbol of honor, death, etc wasn't enough of a disclaimer for some athiest assholes in Texas....

How does a group of Texans have standing to sue Utah over memorials for Utah state troopers in the first place?

No religion was removed from secular government by tearing down a cross shaped memorial to a dead cop.

No, it was done by removing a cross shaped memorial to a dead cop from a publicly funded road.

Next to all the little names... thousands of them.

My point is not that they should or should not be there, but why is this a federal constitutional issue?

Same reason as Arlington then. There is not just one symbol used for all, but rather each has their own symbol. It is also just a small part of the memorial and not the sum total of it.

#96 | Posted by LIVE_OR_DIE

No, just a slight delay in posting Live. I saw your post after the fact.

The arguements put up by people here really makes me fear for the future of my country. These same people who display their lack of ablility to reason or think are usually the same people who support Home Schooling.

God bless American Atheists and any other group that tries to pry religion out of our secular government.

#88 | Posted by rcade

No religion was removed from secular government by tearing down a cross shaped memorial to a dead cop.

Doesn't the definition of "secular government" mean free of religion?

For the Arrested Development fans:

Maebe: Do you know where I can get one of those "T" necklaces?

Michael: That's a Cross.

Maebe: Across from what?

#104 | Posted by kanrei at 2010-08-20 03:44 PM | Reply | Flag: Was home schooled.

Kanrei, normally I agree with you to the point that I don't even bother posting as you argue the point to well.

On this I am just going to disagree, Utah should be able to commemorate their fallen on Utah's public roads as Utah sees fit. If the people of Utah had a problem with Utah's memorials, the people could/should/would have addressed the issue with the Utah legislature and courts.

I still think the state should challenge the fed gummit to come take down the crosses themselves and then arrest them the moment they try it.

The arguements put up by people here really makes me fear for the future of my country.

Kanrei,

you have no reason to feel that way and yet you do.

Again, you need to take a break from this place. You are clinging to close to these issues and, IMO, you don't see this argument for the progress (that you seemingly want) that it is.

50 years ago, would this country have given a shit about an offended Muslim, atheist, agnostic or whatever regarding a cross planted in a road ditch?

ain't mormons a christian sect?

About as Christian as muslims are jews. Nowhere in the christian Bible does it say only 144,000 believers get into Heaven or that Jesus was in North America.

For the Bill Hicks fans:

"They don't get it dad. Fuck them, I'm not going back until they start using Fishes."

#107 | Posted by ExpsRedemption at 2010-08-20 03:54 PM |

Far worse Exp... I was Miami Schooled.

Far worse Exp... I was Miami Schooled.

#112 | Posted by kanrei

Sunset High?

50 years ago, would this country have given a shit about an offended Muslim, atheist, agnostic or whatever regarding a cross planted in a road ditch?

#109 | Posted by eberly at 2010-08-20 03:55 PM |

I think there was an "All in the Family" episode about that. Imagine what a field day the writers would have today.lol

#108 | Posted by SHEEPLESHEPERD

Actually, I agree with you on this. My problem is that a group from Texas is bringing the suit. IMO they got enough problems with psycho Christians in their own state that they should leave Utah alone.

It's hilarious reading posts from the pro-Ground Zero Mosque group bitch about a cross on the side of the highway somewhere in 'fly over land' where an officer lost his life. How tolerant of you.

No, it was done by removing a cross shaped memorial to a dead cop from a publicly funded road.

#101 | Posted by kanrei at 2010-08-20 03:41 PM

It's hilarious reading posts from the pro-Ground Zero Mosque group bitch about a cross on the side of the highway somewhere in 'fly over land' where an officer lost his life. How tolerant of you.

#116 | Posted by KBM at 2010-08-20 04:01 PM

50 years ago, would this country have given a shit about an offended Muslim, atheist, agnostic or whatever regarding a cross planted in a road ditch?

#109 | Posted by eberly at 2010-08-20 03:55 PM |

Of Course not. That was pre-civil rights era. Minorities knew their place back then. It was a Christian White Male's America and everyone knew it.

The Good Old Days right?

Posted by jdfolkerts

I smell bacon.

The Good Old Days right?

#119 | Posted by Manypaths

Beverly and Crispee sure miss those "Good Old Days"

"Boy, the way Glen Miller played.
Songs that made the Hit Parade.
Guys like us, we had it made.
Those were the days!
Didn't need no welfare state.
Everybody pulled his weight Gee, our old LaSalle ran great.
Those were the days!
And you knew where you were then!
Girls were girls and men were men.
Mister, we could use a man like Herbert Hoover again.
People seemed to be content.
Fifty dollars paid the rent.
Freaks were in a circus tent.
Those were the days!
Take a little Sunday spin, go to watch the Dodgers win.
Have yourself a dandy day that cost you under a fin.
Hair was short and skirts were long.
Kate Smith really sold a song.
I don't know just what went wrong!
Those Were the Days!"

That was pre-civil rights era.

okay....35 years ago then. nobody cared about these "offended" folks and we have progressed a long way since then.......I think.

In any case, my original point to Kanrei is that this debate is an example of progress he seemingly wants and he shouldn't be so down about things because of this debate. He should be happy that the voice of the minority is being heard.

And you knew where you were then!
Girls were girls and men were men.

Sadly, Doooonerboy still doesn't know...

Donboylover sure misses the "Good ole Days" back when he could lure an 8 year old into his ice cream truck and nobody paid attention.

okay...I flagged my #124.

that was harsh.

I don't think you can flag your own posts.

I prefer Weird Al's Donner.

Do you remember sweet Michelle?
She was my high school romance.
She was fun to talk to and nice to smell
So I took her to the homecoming dance
Then I tied her to a chair and I shaved off all her hair
And I left her in the desert all alone
Well sometimes in my dreams
I can still hear the screams
Oh I wonder if she ever made it home....

I tell ya...

Those were the good ol' days
those were the good ol' days
the years go by, but the memory stays
and those were the good ol' days

Good. Christianity must be stamped out.

okay...I flagged my #124.

that was harsh.

#125 | Posted by eberly at 2010-08-20 04:16 PM

Harsh, but one still wonders....

#121

People are too damn obese to pull their own weight now.
And as far as circus freaks, well, that is what we have the Democratic Party for.

THIS is a clear separation of church and state issue.

If people wanna donate to buy land privately to use for a memorial that'd be perfectly acceptable but allowing crosses on private land fer a perpetual memorial is not.

Around Spud's parts there's a lot of makeshift memorials to victims of traffic accidents all over the place and recently there has been a bit of a debate over the things.

On the one hand, they are against most city ordinances and may possibly be a distraction to other drivers leading ironically enuff to another accident, on the other hand they are a sober reminder to drivers to watch their speed and to not get loaded and drive and a source of solace to grieving family and friends.

As a rule the by-laws are rarely enforced, the families are asked to prune them back if they get too large and they are only removed whenever that particular roadside area is scheduled for regular clean up.

Seems a fair compromise.

That all noted, the proponents of the whole "ZOMFG! They r bulding a Mosque on top on Ground Zero while po' li'l Christians are being persecuted!!" narrative is gonna be all over this story like flies on shiat.

Why look, some of them are here already.

Let's build a mosque on top of Ground Zero, but let's not dare put up a cross anywhere.

* facepalm *

God bless American Atheists and any other group that tries to pry religion out of our secular government.

#128 | Posted by jackass

And speaking of circus freaks ...

I've seen crosses at railroad crossings.

Are we going to remove all the signs at railroad crossings?

Petrous, are they shaped like an x or a t?

Maybe this Memorial should have X shapped crosses, that isn't recognized universally as being Christian.

"I've seen crosses at railroad crossings."

"Are we going to remove all the signs at railroad crossings?"

You have to ask yourself, would a reasonable observer....

Actually, since Christians like using murder weapons as symbols, how about using something to signify the way each of these officers died.

You could have a Gun, a Crashed Cop Car and a Hooker with Syphilis.

So put the mosque right there, to remind us all about why ground zero exists in the first place, and the people responsible for it.

The people responsible for 9/11 are all dead*.

/*Excluding the prime movers and shakers of BushCo who sat on their hands and on intelligence that mighta allowed 9/11 to be prevented and assuming that OBL died peacefully in his sleep a coupla years back.

Be Well.

Nowhere in the christian Bible does it say only 144,000 believers get into Heaven...#110 | Posted by northguy3 at 2010-08-20 03:55 PM | Reply | Flag:

Jehovah's Witnesses NG, Jehovah's Winesses.

Las Cruces, New Mexico, they're coming for you, change your name!

Look out Colorado, better change the mountain from Holy Cross to "Secular Steep Ass Hill"....

Maybe this Memorial should have X shapped crosses, that isn't recognized universally as being Christian.

#134 | Posted by mitch at 2010-08-20 04:37 PM

Oh, shit... the alphabet is unconstitutional... the letter "t" is partial to xtians!!!!!! AAAARRRGGHGHHHGGH!!!! They better stop teaching the alpha bet in school!!!!!

You could have a Gun, a Crashed Cop Car and a Hooker with Syphilis.

#136 | Posted by Manypaths at 2010-08-20 04:41 PM

I know just the company to make the signs...

#137 | Posted by dethspud at 2010-08-20 04:41 PM | Reply | Flag: Convieniently forgets Bubba had multiple opps to eliminate OBL.

Tool. Go back to your basement and take a few bong hits to clear your head.

Blaming Bush for 9/11 places you with the obama is a muslim crowd.

Pretty sure the government of Utah was never intended to be secular.

Tell that to the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment.

Tell that to the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment.

Posted by rcade at 2010-08-20 05:08 PM | Reply

The Utah Constitution would be more applicable rcade. To correct myself, Congress "convinced" them to adopt an separation article in their state constitution. So, again, what the hell does the Federal government's inability to sanction a church have to do with a state's ability to do the same?

In this instance a case could be made that Utah has violated it's own separation clause but not the part of the first amendment that says the feds can't start a church. This should be a state case and the Texas group should have been thrown out on their asses and given an Orly fine!

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion"

Does it say "the states shall make no law"? No.

Could Utah have picked a little more secular memorial? Sure.

Barrak has led the MSM & the faar left (including Rachael Maddow) to Jesus . . .

the crosses will be restored by the Obama adminstration

Barrak may even appoint a Jesus czar

kanrei

The cross is a symbol of death. People were killed on crosses. Kinda the point. In for fact it is a terrible symbol to use Christianity. An open tomb much better represents Christianity.

Also whats your beef with home schooling? Our current educational system is failing in almost every area of the country.

In for fact it is a terrible symbol to use Christianity.

Sorry laptop touch pad issues

In fact it is a terrible symbol to use for Christianity.

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion"
Does it say "the states shall make no law"? No.

The linked case is a ruling in the 10th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals. The federal judges have already rejected your notion that this is a state matter.

I wonder what the Utah/Mormon reaction would be if 12 foot tall Stars of David, or 12 foot tall Islamic Crescents were set up at the side of the road to mark the locations.

I wonder what the Utah/Mormon reaction would be if 12 foot tall Stars of David, or 12 foot tall Islamic Crescents were set up at the side of the road to mark the locations.

don't know about the mormons,but the liberals would be all for it,well maybe not the star of david.

Actually, we liberals would oppose pretty much any religious demarcation placed on the side of a public road. Though I will acknowledge that certain items, such as a xmas tree and xmas lights on the public square is hardly offensive in my eyes. After a certain point, a symbols non-religious connotations can blur out whatever religious connotations it at one time originally had. But that is not the case with a cross or a star of David.

or a 12 foot tall Islamic Crescent?

don't know about the mormons,but the liberals would be all for it,well maybe not the star of david.

Ya know, when ya try to sell that "Libs luff Islam and hate Christianity" line of RW bullshiat it just makes you sound racist and stupid at the same time.

Thought you should know.

Be Well.

Actually, we liberals would happily tear down and destroy pretty much anything no matter how slightly religious, even if it's to honor a fallen cop, placed on the side of a public road.

#153 | Posted by moder8 at 2010-08-20 06:43 PM

Sunset High?

#113 | Posted by Manypaths at 2010-08-20 03:58 PM

Palmetto.

JD,

My beef with Home Schooling is the 8 kids I have met that were home schooled. They were far more addvanced in some areas than the other kids I managed (I met most while working in restaurants), but there were a great many areas that they were very weak in. Most of them were the social aspects of growing up, but that is cliche and over sighted.

I found that many of them were lacking basic reasoning skills. They needed everything spelled out and could not make logical progressions on their own.

When discussing current events, I found they often had not heard of what I was talking about or had a wrong impression of it.

Mostly., and probably because they were taught by parents, they were very easily lead, never questioned what I told them, and put up with anything. They were lemmings, not people. Certainly not teenagers.

Just put pictures of dead soldiers there. Like pictures on the abortion van.

Right after they throw these "judges" off the bench for being fucking stupid, they need to fine these atheist retards for bringing a frivolous lawsuit.

There is no case here. It was done on state land because these were uniformed officers of the state. They used crosses because its a symbol of, among other things, remembrance.

This is not an ideological issue. These atheists are working for the breaking down of a memorial to fallen Officers of the Law. The antagonists should be shouted down, because they are wrong.

Disbar the judges and empty the bank accounts of this Texas organization. Hand it out to the survivors in the form of scholarships and pension payments.

Actually, we liberals would oppose pretty much any religious demarcation placed on the side of a public road.

Yep. Every time one of these stories come up, liberal haters claim that we'd be giddy as schoolgirls if the religious symbol was non-Christian. It's a ridiculous statement. How hard is it to figure out that the objection is the same regardless of the religion being endorsed?

I didn't think there were that many christians in Utah. Mormons yes, Christians no.....

#11 | Posted by northdick, northprick, northasshole, northretard,northidiot,northfu
ckhead, northetc..... at 2010-08-20 01:41 PM | Reply |

Every time one of these stories come up, liberal haters claim that we'd be giddy as schoolgirls if the religious symbol was non-Christian. It's a ridiculous statement. How hard is it to figure out that the objection is the same regardless of the religion being endorsed?

#160 | Posted by rcade at 2010-08-21 09:52 AM | Reply | Flag:

Geez, get used to disappointment.

Most Americans are Christians, or are at least adapted to a Christian perspective.

Sorry it sucks for you (well, not really. It's funny to see dickbags screech about decorated trees and related things)

Ha~! HA~!

you lose

Most Americans are Christians, or are at least adapted to a Christian perspective.

Despite this fact, prayer was yanked out of school, graduation ceremony and high school football. Look at the scoreboard, dude. The secularists are winning.

Despite this fact .........

#163 | Posted by rcade at 2010-08-21 11:25 AM | Reply | Flag:

Yep. It's a fact

Chaps, ehh?

you are on the losing side of history. that will chap even more.

I wonder what the Utah/Mormon reaction would be if 12 foot tall Stars of David, or 12 foot tall Islamic Crescents were set up at the side of the road to mark the locations.

Already addressed in post #75 by Kanrei:

In 2006, the Utah Legislature passed a joint resolution declaring the cross a nonreligious secular symbol of death.

Convenient resolution, eh? A nice way to promote Christianity by redefining the single most prominent symbol of the Faith as "nonreligious."

Yep. It's a fact

It is a fact that most Americans are Christian. But it's also true that the number of Christians in this country dropped from 86 percent in 1990 to 76 percent in 2008, while the number of people with no religion rose from 8.2 percent to 14.2 percent in the same period, according to one survey.

You guys are really a bunch of pussies.

#160 | Posted by rcade at 2010-08-21 09:52 AM | Reply | Flag:

Although many of your "secular" brothers did not help against the case you are defending against here in the Dearborn Michigan High School Football Ramadan Case.

Of which you admitted. There seems to be some divide of reasoning. Same with the Muslim and the Hijab.

How does memorial crosses "establish" a religion when the State is not paying for clergy is not being paid?

The Judge couldn't be more wrong.

Public land belongs to all of us. Using private funds to errect something on public land is what the issue is.

Private land and there would be no issue.

#9 | Posted by kanrei at 2010-08-20 11:08 AM | Reply | Flag:

The football team in Mich. is what he was refering to. It is a public school.

I won't bother bringing up your posts.

How quickly you forget your arguments.

there is no evidence in this case that the cross has been widely embraced by non-Christians as a secular symbol of death," they said...

I drive by and see huge crosses on a hillside, I think it's an excessive display of Christian zeal. It doesn't occur to me "somebody died there" like it does to Kanrei unless I happen to be driving through Jack and the Beanstalk country because no grave would be marked by a cross like that, nor would it be outside a graveyard.

These crosses are not purposed to honor the slain troopers. They are so huge and in such number that they convey an inescapably Christian message. These crosses are nothing like the common grave markers we are all familiar with, nor are they placed atop graves.

The Christian element is attempting to cram their religious window-dressing down everyone's throats by putting their up "memorial crosses" on public land. It's as simple as that. I haven't read the court's opinion but I agree with their outcome.

Ask yourself if such huge ridiculous crosses would be allowed in the cemeteries where these troopers are presumably buried. Probably not, they would look tacky and junk up the place. Why then are we compelled to allow them on public land?

I haven't been to Arlington, but the cemetary outside San Francisco in San Bruno has thousands of crosses across hundreds of acres. By this logic Arlington and all the WWII cemetaries will have to be rebuilt. That said, it shouldn't be constructed in any manner that would present an unnecessary road hazard. I don't like organized religion but support the highway partrolman and their families in whatever personal manner they wish to express their grief. That's really what freedom of reigion is about, non-inteference in the personal lives of other people whether it be religious ceremony, idol worship, or boinking a same sex partner.

Liberals are always on the wrong side. These crosses harmed no one. Liberals would stand up for the criminals before they would support honoring these officers.

aclusux cannot read or think for itself. all it can do is repeat Luntz's bullshit talking points.

Liberals are always on the wrong side. These crosses harmed no one. Liberals would stand up for the criminals before they would support honoring these officers.
#174 | POSTED BY ACLUSUX

I would definitely stand up for you being tea bagged by a cankerous goat!

The problem with human feces like yourself is that no matter what the opposing view proposes you would never admit it worked or is a good idea.

That is why you ilk are a blight to the gene pool.

I haven't been to Arlington, but the cemetary outside San Francisco in San Bruno has thousands of crosses across hundreds of acres. By this logic Arlington and all the WWII cemetaries will have to be rebuilt.

Crosses and other religious indicators on the tombs in Arlington or any military cemetery must be selected from a list of I think 33 differeent officially recognized religions. There is one for Eckancar for example. The crosses or any of the symbols are also not twelve feet high and six feet wide. They're about 1/10th that.

There is a difference between a cross marking an actual burial site and a cross that isn't. There is a gray area perhaps on a cross alongside the road marking the spot where a motorist was killed. Unless, however, all these troops lost their lives along the same Dead Man's Curve, that's not even the case here.

These crosses can claim to be a memorial but how can anyone tell that just from speeding by them on the highway?

Keep private religious clutter off public lands. This would never have been an issue had the crosses been placed on private lands. It's painfully obvious they used public land by the highway to amplify the Christian message.

These crosses harmed no one. Irrelevant. They harm the Constitution and the separation of church and state. Again, don't put them on public lands and there will be no complaint... other than "my, what a tacky display of crosses."