Rhymes With Right - A Cross We All Should Stand Behind
Google
 
Web rhymeswithright.mu.nu

October 14, 2009

A Cross We All Should Stand Behind

I think we can argue about whether or not a cross as a war memorial on public land is appropriate or constitutional – an issue which the Supreme Court is wrestling with right now. But I don’t see how anyone except for individuals or groups with an active hatred of Christianity can object to this one that is causing a dispute in a different part of California.

Before Monterey replaces the Portol -Crespi cross on Del Monte Beach, it wants to raise a war chest to defend the city's action against possible lawsuits — a move an American Civil Liberties Union lawyer calls "a very bizarre decision."

After holding a public hearing on the cross issue Tuesday night, the council came out of closed session saying its members were unanimous in wanting the cross replaced. The council said it marks the historic site where explorer Don Gaspar de Portol and Father Juan Crespi raised a wooden cross in December 1769 as a signal to the supply ship San Jose, expected to arrive from Mexico.

The newer cross, erected on the dunes between Roberts Lake and the beach in December 1969, was set there to mark the bicentennial of that event. Sometime during the night of Sept. 18, vandals sawed the cross off at its base and left it lying in the sand.

The council motion seems to hedge the city's bets in restoring it. It states: "The City Council does not condone vandalism. Because of the historical significance of the cross, it is the City Council's desire to restore the cross. To that end, once a legal defense fund is established by the community and $50,000 is raised, we will proceed with the restoration of the cross."

Got that, folks? This cross was placed on the site for one very simple reason – to the early exploration of the area by Spanish explorers who erected a cross on the site. This would seem to be, from a First Amendment perspective, a no-brainer. There is nothing religious about this cross – it is unquestionably the recreation of a historical event, which makes its erection a bona fide secular act.

But that isn’t good enough for the ACLU cretins who want to keep the cross from going back up. Seems to me that they simply wish to expunge the symbol from public land even when it serves a valid secular purpose – and that they probably won’t be happy until they have banned the letter “t” and the plus sign from all public facilities.





|| Greg, 05:04 PM || Permalink || Comments (2) || Comments || TrackBacks (0) ||

Trackback Information for A Cross We All Should Stand Behind

TrackBack URL for this entry: http://blog2.mu.nu/cgi/trackback.cgi/267075
Listed below are links to weblogs that reference 'A Cross We All Should Stand Behind'.

Comments on A Cross We All Should Stand Behind

This cross doesn't serve a secular purpose that any reasonable person passing by could discern. It's a 20-foot cross visible from the highway, from the beach and from the recreation trail adjacent to it. It took the city historians weeks to research the history of the original cross and they couldn't determine that the spot chosen in 1969 was accurate. It might be approximate. Furthermore, a cross of the size of the one erected in 1969 would weight almost 2000 pounds! There's no way that two tired, malnourished 18th century Spanish soldiers could have put up a cross any where near the size of that one. It's inadequate as an historical marker, because it isn't accurate. It's inappropriate on city land because it's a CROSS. Even if it has a secular purpose, you can't tell what it is by looking at it.

Your analysis not only shows a shallow understanding of this particular situation, it demonstrates a feeble understanding of history.

Were you home schooled?

|| Posted by Jeff W., October 19, 2009 01:44 PM ||

1) Gee, aren't you a condescending little hate-monger.

2) No, I wasn't home schooled. You, on the other hand, were clearly hate-schooled.

3) Are you really suggesting that the failure to exactly replicate what was put up makes the commemoration invalid? that the failure to know the exact spot and the choice to therefore make a good approximation makes the commemoration invalid? If so, take that matter up with the national park service and their reconstructions of the forts at Jamestown and Fort Clatsop, each of which is an approximate placement .

|| Posted by Rhymes With Right, October 22, 2009 04:18 AM ||
Post a comment

Remember personal info?


 

 





AnotherMunublogSmall.jpg





Winner - 2010 Fabulous 50 Blog Awards

Posts by Category

Announcements (posts: 13)
Blogging (posts: 154)
Border Issues & Immigration (posts: 368)
deferred (posts: 4)
Education (posts: 583)
Entertainment & Sports (posts: 405)
History (posts: 301)
Humor (posts: 71)
Israel/Middle East (posts: 13)
Medical News (posts: 51)
Military (posts: 253)
News (posts: 1409)
Paid Advertising (posts: 138)
Personal (posts: 87)
Politics (posts: 3919)
Race & Racism (posts: 188)
Religion (posts: 702)
Terrorism (posts: 793)
The Courts (posts: 278)
Watcher's Council (posts: 318)
World Affairs (posts: 308)

Archives

November 2011
October 2011
September 2011
August 2011
July 2011
June 2011
May 2011
April 2011
March 2011
February 2011
January 2011
December 2010
November 2010
October 2010
September 2010
August 2010
July 2010
June 2010
May 2010
April 2010
March 2010
February 2010
January 2010
December 2009
November 2009
October 2009
September 2009
August 2009
July 2009
June 2009
May 2009
April 2009
March 2009
February 2009
January 2009
December 2008
November 2008
October 2008
September 2008
August 2008
July 2008
June 2008
May 2008
April 2008
March 2008
February 2008
January 2008
December 2007
November 2007
October 2007
September 2007
August 2007
July 2007
June 2007
May 2007
April 2007
March 2007
February 2007
January 2007
December 2006
November 2006
October 2006
September 2006
August 2006
July 2006
June 2006
May 2006
April 2006
March 2006
February 2006
January 2006
December 2005
November 2005
October 2005
September 2005
August 2005
July 2005
June 2005
May 2005
April 2005
March 2005
February 2005
January 2005
December 2004
November 2004
October 2004
September 2004
August 2004
July 2004
June 2004
December 0000



MuNuviana



Licensing

Creative Commons License
This weblog is licensed under a Creative Commons License.

Powered By

Powered by
Movable Type 2.64
AnotherMunublogSmall.jpg

Administrative Stuff

Email Me
Syndicate this site (XML)

Advertising Disclosure

adpolicy.gif

About Me

NAME: Greg
AGE: 40-Something
SEX: Male
MARITAL STATUS: Married
OCCUPATION: Social Studies Teacher
LOCATION: Seabrook, TX
DISCLAIMER: All posts reflect my views alone, and not the view of my wife, my dogs, my employer, or anyone else. All comments reflect the view of the commenter, and permitting a comment to remain on this site in no way indicates my support for the ideas expressed in the comment.

Search This Site


Support This Site



Recent Entries

Student Scolded For Tweet About Governor
Happy Thanksgiving 2011
Best Thanksgving Television Clip Ever
Human Rights Atrocities Constitute Obama Policy Success
Redefining "Victim"
The Definitive #OWS Photo
RIP Anne McCaffrey -- Science Fiction/Fantasy World Loses A Giant
The #Occupy Poster Child
Why The #OWS Movement Won't Work
Russian Newscaster Flips The Bird At Obama

Blogroll


Watchers Council
  • Bookroom Room
  • The Colossus of Rhodey
  • The Glittering Eye
  • GrEaT sAtAn"S gIrLfRiEnD
  • JoshuaPundit
  • The Mellow Jihadi
  • New Zeal
  • The Noisy Room
  • The Political Commentator
  • The Razor
  • Rhymes With Right
  • The Right Planet
  • Right Truth
  • Simply Jews
  • Virginia Right!
  • Watcher Of Weasels

  • Political & Religious Blogs