My owner is a marketing & business consultant in San Diego.Many of you might have heard about the United States Supreme Court weighing in on the Establishment Clause of the United States Constitution as it might apply to a large cross in the Mojave National Preserve.

The cross was built after World War I to honor the fallen soldiers. Since a cross is internationally recognized as a symbol of Christianity, and since I'm sure more than just Christian soldiers died in World War I, I've never understood why a Christian cross was used to honor all soldiers. If I remember correctly, the military uses boots, rifle, and a helmet to honor its fallen, which seems much more fitting for soldiers of all religions, or no religion.

Personally, I like the Establishment Clause because I really don't want to live in a religious theocracy like Iran, Afghanistan, Saudi Arabia, and others. I love my religious friends, and if they want to build a huge cross on their land, as long as it meets the zoning requirements, go for it. But when any religious symbol shows up on public land, to the exclusion of all other religious symbols, I do have a problem with that.

In the case of the Mojave cross, a group wanted to build a Muslim shrine near it but was refused by the National Park Service, which resulted in the lawsuit.

Here in San Diego, we have our own version of the Mojave cross called the Mount Soledad cross.

Mount Soledad cross in San Diego

The land used to be city land until a lawsuit resulted in the City giving just the small piece of land that the cross actually sits on to a private veterans group. Courts found that to be an end-run around the Constitution and voided it. Since 1994, San Diego citizens have voted several times on what to do with the Mount Soledad cross, and each time the Court found the decision to be less than satisfactory.

Finally, a few years ago, a couple of our Congressional representatives got legislation passed transferring the city land to the federal government, which doesn't really resolve the issue with the Establishment Clause and the separate of church and state. All it does is make it a federal issue instead of a city issue, a good thing since the City of San Diego cannot afford the legal fees, what with a $2 billion pension deficit and an annual budget deficit now over $200 million.

The end-run tactics to save the Mojave cross are exactly the same as those used to save the Mount Soldedad cross, so it might be interesting to hear how the United States Supreme Court rules next Spring.

Of course, there is a very easy solution to this problem: Simply remove the cross arms and make it a memorial obelisk, similar to the Washington Monument in Washington, D.C.

Those are my thoughts, and my solution, and I'm sticking with them. For views of forever from the top of Mount Soledad, click here.

 

We are ActiveRain!

**********

Fifteen recent blog posts

  1. Guerrilla Marketing: How do you set the right price for your services?
  2. How would you like an $11,000 fine for blogging? - Featured
  3. Learning something new.... - Winfield Scott
  4. Learn to think like your prospects
  5. Speechless Sunday: The power of flowers
  6. A simple ten-question psychological profile test
  7. Speechless Sunday at the San Diego Zoo: Spread those wings!
  8. Persistency and consistency
  9. Learning something new.... - Daniel Webster
  10. Do you have some spare time? Try updating your contact information
  11. Clients' morning at the San Diego Zoo
  12. Look what I just did!
  13. Here they are Folks! The winners of the ActiveRain Nature & Marketing contest!
  14. Marketing is just like politicking but you don't have to kiss lots of babies
  15. Don't have time to get all your weekly blogs done but still need (want) the points?

Helpful blog posts for ActiveRain newbies

  1. How to get 500 points with your ActiveRain success story
  2. Free help for Active Rain newbies
  3. 10 ways to get a featured post at ActiveRain
  4. How to keep people from reading your Active Rain blog
  5. How do you get people to comment on your blog?
  6. Using Active Rain more effectively by finding Power Partners
  7. Quit putting huge, gigantic, monster pictures in your blog. Now! (Help on resizing them)
  8. Using YouTube videos without slowing down page loading
  9. How to use the Active Rain system more efficiently

Subscribe to my blog

Need help with marketing? Join the Guerrilla Marketing Tactics Group.

Inspired by nature? Join the Inspired By Nature Group.

Classical music lover? Join the Classical Music Group.

Want to share a good book? Join the Active Rain Book Club

 
This post has been included in California Information San Diego County, CA Information
Post is included in group: Voice of Reason
Post is included in group: POSITIVE ATTITUDE for the Weary Soul
Post is included in group: Inspiration !!
Post is included in group: FRIENDS AT ACTIVERAIN
Post is included in group: EXPRESS WITH WORDS AT ACTIVERAIN

15 Comments on The U.S. Supreme Court gets its feet wet with the Establishment Clause

OCT
08

While I am a strict constitutionalist, I sometimes think we go a bit too far in reacting to religious iconography like this cross. The cross is surely a christian symbol, but it is not there to symbolize christianity, its there to honor the dead who gave their lives in service to their country. Was it the wisest choice for a memorial? Probably not. But we cannot go around constantly tearing down every religious artifact that may or may not have represented the religious views of every individual its supposed to honor. 

Jason Burkins

10:49am • #1
102,365 Points Outside Blog

Establishment of religion and freedom of religion are two DIFFERENT concepts.  If the people of the nation want to build something that expresses their religious views, it is protected under the Constitution.

Similarly, if Congress wanted to pass a law that said everyone had to attend worship services of a specific religious body (The Church of England?) every Sunday or suffer legal penalties, that is prohibitted.  Allowing religious symbols on public property is not establishing religion, it is allowing the freedom of religion and speech. 

Having any ordinances or laws either mandating or prohibiting religious practice or express is by its very nature, establishment of religion.

Glad you love your religious friends.  The idea of outlawing any public expression of religion is repugnant and un-Constitutional.

 

10:57am • #2
349,563 Points 4 Featured Posts Outside Blog

Hey, Jason - We don't have to tear things down. Just remove them from public lands. There are many, many non-profit groups that would love to take care of these types of things.

Hey, Michael - Indeed, they are two different concepts. However, building one religious symbol on public land to the exclusion of other religious symbols on that same public land is not allowed under the Constitution, so you're partially right and partially wrong. As the Supreme Court ruled a few years ago, having several religious symbols from different religions is not prohibited. Excluding a religion, especially when excluding all religions except for one preferred religion, is, indeed, establishing religion. No one is suggesting "outlawing any public expression of religion," only building one religious symbol on public land to the exclusion of all other religious symbols. The Mojave Cross problem could have been prevented by allowing the Muslims to build their shrine nearby. Not allowing that seems to be establishing a preference for the Christian religion, represented worldwide by a cross.

11:05am • #3
131,147 Points

Russel: I've been to the cross in San Diego .. I have photos of my son sitting on the steps. That is really all I have to say ... thanks for your post!

12:20pm • #4
336,486 Points 3 Featured Posts Outside Blog

I guess I am not offended...and the real point is the honor we pay to the people who deserve it.

3:04pm • #5
Outside Blog

Hey, Russel. This is a timely post. Every school child is familiar with the poem In Flanders Fields where crosses mark the graves of war dead and honor them. I think the Mojave Cross is probably the wrong thing for the right reason but I agree that what appears to be a religious symbol should be removed from public land. Why not just put up the boots/rifle/helmet since that is a universal war memorial?!

4:37pm • #6
OCT
09
208,570 Points 5 Featured Posts

Russel,

I don't know what the hell is going on these days; everybody seems to be protesting everything. People need to sit back and think a bit...I think.

12:39am • #7
OCT
11
107,214 Points 1 Featured Post

I'm with Terry on this one; there are so many more important issues to worry about. Besides, it's much cheaper to erect a cross than a helmet, rifle and boots. Another thought is where does it stop? Do we have to change the logo of the Red Cross as well? At some point cooler heads must prevail or we're going t have to redo the entire world just to be politically correct.

5:18pm • #8
349,563 Points 4 Featured Posts Outside Blog

Hey, Susan - It's not necessarily cheaper to erect a cross than a helmet, rifle, and boots, but if the expense is all you're concerned about, do away with the arms on the cross. That should save some expense and not offend anyone. Right.

I know you know there's a significant difference between the type of cross that the Red Cross uses and the type of cross that is used on graves and so-called memorials.

Just because something was done and has existed for a long time doesn't make it right. Slavery, illegal mixed race marriages, women's suffrage, and many other things come immediately to mind.

If we have the opportunity to correct injustices, why don't we? Seems like that would be the right thing to do.

5:48pm • #9
107,214 Points 1 Featured Post

A cross on public land is some how as great an injustice as slavery etc.? Now you're just messing with me right? Russel, to be honest with you I really couldn't care less what's there as long as the fallen are honored for their service. I would just like to just stop wasting time and money and focus on the problems currently facing our nation.

11:08pm • #10
349,563 Points 4 Featured Posts Outside Blog

Hey, Suesan - The problems facing our nation are not going to go away unless we can all get along with each other. And when religious fanatics want to exert their mind control over everyone else, well, it creates problems. Whose God is the most powerful? Yours or mine?

Actually, if you read the U.S. Constitution, a cross on public land is actually more of an injustic than slavery. Slavery was in the U.S. Constitution as each slave was worth 3/5ths of a person. A cross on public land has never been in the U.S. Constitution.

11:21pm • #11
OCT
12
107,214 Points 1 Featured Post

I don't think my God is any stronger than anyone else's. I respect all religions and bow to none, but I do believe in God. I think that's where the difference is, I believe in God, but I do not believe in most of the teachings of any one religion. I would no more desecrate the Koran than I would the Torah or the Bible. Not because I believe in the teachings of any one book, but because I respect the rights of others to believe in those teaching. Just as I respect the right of those who prefer not to believe at all.

I don't believe in slavery, or the superiority of one person over the other or one political party over another. I do believe that we are facing some real serious problems and have some very hard times before us and that we need to focus on those problems first before we can correct the past. Tell me something, how much time and money has been spent on the argument over that cross? I just think that we could have spent that time and money on some more important issues facing us today.

I also believe that it's not really all that hard to get along. All that's really needed is the will to do so.

 

12:05am • #12
349,563 Points 4 Featured Posts Outside Blog

Hey, Suesan - In answer to your question, not near as much money as has been spent invading foreign countries and creating the longest war in the history of the United States. We all have our priorities. That's part of what makes America great.

12:10am • #13
107,214 Points 1 Featured Post

Hey Russel, Actually Vietnam is the longest so far. Johnson declared war in 1965 and we got out in 1975. It lasted 10 years before our guys came home. I graduated from military school (Army JROTC) in 1977 and entered ROTC.

I never thought we belonged in Iraq, nor do I believe in preemptive strikes... that's Dick Cheney thing not mine. As far as Afghanistan goes it seems that even President Obama feels we have a job that needs to be finished there. As far as I'm concerned there's no such thing as a smart war or a good war. War's just war. On that note I'm going to take nap, it's almost 2:00 AM here and I have an early appointment tomorrow.

Nice talking with you Russel.

12:59am • #14
349,563 Points 4 Featured Posts Outside Blog

Hey, Suesan - Johnson never declared war. President's cannot declare war. Only the Congress can do that, and the Vietnam war was not a declared war. Additionally, you're confusing the length of the Vietnam war with direct military involvement in the Vietnam war. Direct U.S. military involvement ended on August 15, 1973. I also graduated from a military school -- Texas A&M University, which continues to place more officers into the military services than any school outside of the five military academies. I'm also an Air Force brat. Some would say just a brat.... LOL

2:35am • #15

Leave a response…



(optional)
What does the graphic say?
 
Img_9343 Rainmaker_large

Russel Ray, San Diego Marketing & Business Consultant

La Mesa, CA

More about me…

Russel Ray

Address: 7000-31 Saranac Street, La Mesa, CA, 91941-3315

Office Phone: (619) 341-0173

Cell Phone: (619) 341-0173

Email Me

Tips, tricks, ideas, and suggestions for marketing yourself or your small business.


Links

Archives

RSS 2.0 Feed for this blog

Find CA real estate agents and La Mesa real estate on ActiveRain.