A large crucifix in the San Diego area, prominently displayed on public land, had been ordered taken down by a federal judge.
Yesterday Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy stepped in and ordered an indefinate stay allowing the crucifix to remain while further legal arguments are made.
I've read in some commentaries lately that Kennedy has become some kind of flaming liberal. I don't always agree with his votes, but he seems to have a tremendous amount of integrity and views these types of church/state issues seriously and on a case by case basis.
Other than looking at the picture reading the report in the Seattle Times and the N.Y. Times, I don't know the details. If, as one side is claiming, this was erected to honor the war dead (and if that intention is still clear to visitors) I don't see it as a violation of the Establishment Clause. What do you think?
3 comments:
I think that the seperation of church and state is very important for the U.S. This act could be seen as one small act that could lead to another and another eventually creating alot more controversy and debate. If the government allows this relgious statue to stay in san diego, that could eventually lead to having prayer in school. This statue could offend the people in san diego with different beliefs or no beliefs at all, so trying to place a religious statue on public land without direct permission should not be allowed and should be removed asap.
I think that seperation of the church and state is important in some cases... but i think that in this case of having a cross on public land should not be a big issue...yes i agree it may offend some people but some people are always going to be offended no matter what the case. if we start allowing these kinds of small changes to be made what will be next? changing the statement on the dollar bill that says "in god we trust"...? Because this statement is also made on a peice of "public property." what would be the boundary for what is allowed and is not allowed to be on public property... and who is qualified to make these descisions???
i think that the cross should be taken down, not only is it huge, but i think its inappropriate. sure our dollar says in god we trust on it but its not a piece of paper that says "WE LOVE GOD" on it. there needs to be a seperation of church and state, and i think that maybe if that crucifix was a little more tasteful and small, it wouldn't be that much of a bother. but a 100 foot cross just sitting on some public land is kind of ridiculous.
Post a Comment