« BACK  |  PRINT

RS

MEMBER DIARY

Liberal 9th circuit court takes aim at Mount Soledad Veterans Memorial Cross

Update 1/7/11 6:00pm. Two San Diego area Congressmen, Rep. Brian Bilbray (R-Carlsbad) and Rep. Duncan Hunter (R-El Cajon) sent letters to US AG Holder & Defense Secretary Robert Gates in defense of the memorial.

Mount-Soledad-200x300

A commanding and dramatic site. A testament to our War Veterans who have given their lives to Advance Freedom and protect our nation. Now in danger from leftist and liberal organizations like the ACLU, Americans United for Separation of Church and State and our own court system.

This time an outrage from the liberal 9th Circuit Court of Appeals, specifically Justice Margaret McKeown who penned the 50 page decision this week, stating the 43 foot tall Mount Soledad Cross which sits on federal land in a park just outside the city of San Diego violates the “Establishment Clause” of the Constitution, noted below:

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

In reaching the decision the 9th Circuit overturned a previous ruling in 2008 by Justice Larry Burns who ruled in a previous lawsuit by Jewish veterans the cross is part of a memorial built for and in memorial of all veterans, not just those of any ethnicity or religion. The Cross now belongs to the Federal Government, specifically the Defense Department, the entity which now must intervene to save the cross from possible demolition. Not only is there a cross, but also 2,700 plaques dedicated to war veterans both living and deceased in 6 concentric rings.

Plaques at Mt. Soledad

The crux of McKeown’s decision states the Cross

“primarily conveys a message of government endorsement of religion that violates the Establishment Clause. This result does not mean that the memorial could not be modified to pass constitutional muster, nor does it mean that no cross can be part of this veterans’ memorial.”

Our national heritage seems to be in the crosshairs of liberal organizations and judges who are chipping away bit by bit at the ideals and religion this country was founded upon.

This Cross controversy has been in the court system for over 10 years, SCOTUS Justice Kennedy intervened in 2006 ruling for a stay after Congressional legislation and the voters of San Diego made their feelings known positively after the ACLU filed suit on behalf of an atheist who was apparently “offended” by the cross. If the “offendee” was “offended” this diarist sees no need for that “offendee” to attempt to limit access to the thousands of visitors who see the cross as a Beacon of Light and comfort for our veterans, those who made the ultimate sacrifice and their families. After all, it just sits there. There’s no coercion of any kind.

Gina Coburn, ironically a spokesperson in the San Diego attorney’s office and once a plaintiff claims the cross will have to be removed unless the 9th Circuit reverses their decision or SCOTUS intervenes.

I had the pleasure of speaking with Atty. Kelly Shackelford of Liberty Institute whose organization is representing the American Legion and has filed a brief asking the court to protect the monument. Liberty Institute also represents over 4 million veterans in their fight to preserve the Mojave Desert Veterans Memorial which also had a cross, pictured below, which was stolen back in May after SCOTUS “saved” it. This is akin to desecrating people’s graves.

mojave-desert-cross

Liberty Institute will be appealing to the Obama Administration and the US Justice Dept to intervene to save the Soledad cross. Their press release is here.

It seems we have an attempt at “religious cleansing” here, my folks. I wonder what the reaction would be had this been a mosque. Attorney Shackelford states:

“The Ninth Circuit’s opinion almost completely disregards the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in Salazar v. Buono, in which the Court said that the Mojave Desert Veterans Memorial should stay,” said Kelly Shackelford, president/CEO of Liberty Institute. “This ruling is a slap in the face to our nation’s veterans, and we hope that the Justice Department will ask the U.S. Supreme Court to set the matter straight.” [snip]This is part of a national trend to remove crosses on federal land, regardless of whether the cross is part of something as sacred as a veterans memorial.”

We’ll have to see how the Justice Dept. and Obama handle this. After all, Obama was “called to task” by members of Congress in this letter for “misquoting history” in his speech in Indonesia last December. In the speech he called our national motto E pluribus unum when in reality it is In God We Trust. A deliberate misquote, an error or no teleprompter in site?

The letter is signed by 42 Congressmen.

As our Veterans Memorial Crosses seem to be toppling like dominoes, what is next to be targeted? The site below?

arlington_cemetery_headstones_rows_big

Crossposted at Conservative Outlooks

Crossposted at Procinct.net

COMMENTS

  • http://www.redstate.com/etcartman Kenny Solomon

    To start and for those reading who don’t know me, I’m Jewish. My dad – 88 years old and not in anything resembling good shape – is a WWII combat veteran (Europe) and a member of The Jewish War Veterans organization.

    I find it beyond difficult to believe that any self-respecting, flag-waving veteran and member of the Jewish faith would be involved in this decade’s-long lawsuit emanating straight from the depths of Hell.

    No, there has to be another source for the ‘Jewish veterans’ anger to file a Constitutional challenge…… and I believe that source is hatred of America, as opposed to some sort of ‘hey, we were there too’ demand for recognition.

    Backtracking on the suit origination is essential for looking into the people behind the people involved…… This is much more than any ‘follow the money’, but rather a ‘follow the leftist’s journey to a takedown of American values and society.

    • ladyimpactohio

      I was told by Attorney Shackelford there are several Stars of David at the site so there has to be more to the lawsuit by some Jewish veterans.

    • grandma

      It sure didn’t set right with me that our Jewish brothers and sisters would bring suit against “the cross.” Sounds like the left wants no more than to divide the Jewish and Christian ties. Because, the Jewish people I know aren’t insulted by the cross any more than I would be to bury my loved ones in a cemetery with a huge Star of David.

  • http://www.redstate.com/etcartman Kenny Solomon

    L.I.O., thank you for bringing this to the forefront.

    From August 24th 2006, a PDF at The Jewish War Veterans website:

    http://www.jwv.org/images/uploads/Mt_Soledad_Complaint.pdf

    From The San Diego ACLU website – undated:

    http://www.aclusandiego.org/news_item.php?cat_id_sel=002&sub_cat_id_sel=000014&article_id=000795

    — — — — —

    The JWV will be hearing from me.

  • http://www.redstate.com/etcartman Kenny Solomon

    Thanks to my friend Janet at The Jawa Report for the link to Canada Free Press……

    The quote is from Mr. Allen Miliefsky, Commander, Post 185, The Jewish War Veterans Of The United States Of America.

    http://canadafreepress.com/index.php/article/31876

    Most local members of Jewish War Veterans aren

  • Lloyd Davis

    What’s next, telling churches to take the cross off their buildings because it might offend someoone passing by???

  • skyhawkfl

    2012?

  • http://www.redstate.com/etcartman Kenny Solomon

    Hi.

    For some reason, my buddy Jeff here in South Florida can’t get RedState to display properly on any of his systems. He joined up a while back, but has since obtained new gear and is using Linux – he’s a techie, so if he says something’s amiss with his stuff, then something’s amiss with his stuff. ( Neil, you want to give it a go for access help ? )

    Anyway, I promised Jeff I’d post his thoughts completely unedited and without commentary of my own…… even though I don’t agree with his idea in the second paragraph of his comment. ;)

    Here goes:

    This site was originally not a memorial, but is now. I am Jewish and a veteran and I am not offended by crosses. I would be upset if someone wanted to put one on my lawn, but it is OK with me for a public location.

    Since this site is now a memorial to fallen veterans, let the memorial be proportional to the number of veterans from each religion. Using the cross to represent all the Christian veterans, build a Star of David proportionally to represent the fallen Jewish veterans, by the number of actual Jewish veterans. Then have a crescent of proportional size to represent the Islamic veterans, etc.

    To the various justices ruling on this case: Please read the constitution.

    There is nothing in the constitution about “separation of church and state”. What is banned is a specific state religion, such as the Church of England. BTW, Christianity is not a specific religion. This country was founded by members of many different churches and the wording of the constitution is to prevent any one church (religion) being supported by the government to the detriment of all other churches (religions). This particular type of cross is a symbol of many forms of Christianity, but not all. If the memorial was set up so that no other religious veterans group could put up an image, then I would be upset, but this is not the case.

    Jeff S., South Florida.

    I will gladly forward all comments to Jeff – if he can’t get them on his systems – and publish his responses verbatim.

    Cheers !

    KLS

  • http://www.redstate.com/etcartman Kenny Solomon

    This is Wikipedia info, so take it as you will.

    Judge McKeown was nominated for a seat on the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit by President Bill Clinton on March 29, 1996 and then renominated by Clinton on January 7, 1997. McKeown was confirmed by the U.S. Senate on March 27, 1998 by a vote of 80-11.

    Judge McKeown also served in the White House as a White House fellow under President Jimmy Carter, working as a special assistant to the United States Secretary of the Interior Cecil D. Andrus from 1980 until 1981.

    There was also speculation of her being on ‘you-know-who’s’ list for SCOTUS.

    Justice McKeown has been involved in more than just this case regarding ‘Congress shall make no law……” Take a wild stab in the dark as to which way rulings sided.

  • bobmontgomery

    ….have been taking an awful beating on the home front of late. The latest salvo is from the CIC himself, whose intent is to cut people on active duty…..with a war in progress. The idea is so absurd that one cannot even comment on it, which I suppose is the genius of the Radical Progressive, anti-American movement these days While on other diaries we are pro-ing and con-ing the potential candidates on social and fiscal policy, there are some statements that could be made by a Commander-in-Chief-to-be that might resonate quite loudly and clearly with a large part of the electorate were he or she to make them. Those statements typically would be about winning wars, defending our allies, maintenance of a military force capable of meeting any threat and multiple threats and reversing the debasement, degradation and dishonor of military service, current or past, but hopefully they would be more blunt and specific than the words I used.

  • bobmontgomery

    You may have also heard about a case in Utah where members of the Highway Patrol had included crosses in memorials to fallen patrolmen. Recently ruled unconstitutional by a federal judge as an example of government-endorsed religion.

    • ladyimpactohio
  • E Pluribus Unum

    Because……THAT’s not a religious symbol that is government-endorsed.

    • bobmontgomery

      Speaking of being offended, have the cross-grabbers exceeded their seventy-times-seven limit yet?