Supreme Court rules in favor of Mojave Cross

Post Reply
Sandman
Posts: 703
Joined: Thu Apr 09, 2009 10:06 pm

Supreme Court rules in favor of Mojave Cross

Post by Sandman » Wed Apr 28, 2010 11:12 am

"Washington (CNN) -- The Supreme Court narrowly ruled Wednesday that a white cross, erected as a war memorial and sitting on national parkland in the Mojave Desert, does not violate the constitutional separation of church and state.

The 5-4 conservative majority said Congress acted properly when it tried to transfer land around the Mojave Memorial Cross to veterans groups, an effort to eliminate any Establishment Clause violation. The land then would have been declared a national memorial. A federal appeals panel had blocked that land swap.

"It is reasonable to interpret the congressional designation as giving recognition to the historical meaning that the cross had attained," Justice Anthony Kennedy wrote. "The Constitution does not oblige government to avoid any public acknowledgment of religion's role in society."

http://www.cnn.com/2010/CRIME/04/28/moj ... google_cnn

User avatar
Plays In The Dirt
Posts: 872
Joined: Sat Mar 28, 2009 5:51 pm

Re: Supreme Court rules in favor of Mojave Cross

Post by Plays In The Dirt » Wed Apr 28, 2010 11:29 am

GREAT NEWS!

What troubles me about this is these two words: "narrowly ruled." There shouldn't have much of a question to it at all.

Plays - (Greg)

LeeVW
Posts: 195
Joined: Mon Mar 30, 2009 9:16 am

Re: Supreme Court rules in favor of Mojave Cross

Post by LeeVW » Wed Apr 28, 2010 1:55 pm

Fantastic! Although I am not a religious person at all, I have NO problem with the cross, especially since it is a war memorial! To the individual or individuals who tried to get the cross removed - GET A LIFE!!!!

User avatar
Mrs.Oroblanco
Posts: 230
Joined: Thu Feb 04, 2010 5:40 pm
anti-spam detector: No
The middle number please (4): 4

Re: Supreme Court rules in favor of Mojave Cross

Post by Mrs.Oroblanco » Wed Apr 28, 2010 4:36 pm

That should help in some other states, to be sure.

I have seen many states have issues with crosses, flowers, etc., where a loved one has died on the roadways. In some cases, someone - don't know who - but people have vandalized the crosses, etc., and broken them off and what not.

I'm glad that the ruling was made - the next step probably would have been to take crosses off churches where the public could see them.

A good call, imo.

Beth (Mrs. O)

Post Reply