Gee, I didn't know Pat Robertson or Fred Phelps threatened to sexually molest someone's kid they disagreed with. Show me the news article.

Mt. Soledad Easter Cross or War Memorial?
Whether the Mt. Soledad Easter Cross is a "War Memorial" or the unmistakable symbol of the Christian Religion, it was a subject of legal debate for the following reasons:

1) Every annual publication of the Thomas Brothers Maps from 1954 to 1989 presented a geographic legal description of the location as the "Mt. Soledad Easter Cross" after which year (cross case was filed on May 31, 1989) the name of the legal location on the map was changed to the "Mt. Soledad Memorial." -- [Paulson v. City of San Diego, 262 F.3d 885 (9th Cir. 2001), Documents on file with the US District Court of Southern California]
2) There was no placard or marker to be found anywhere on Mt. Soledad Natural Park nor at the site of the Mt. Soledad Easter Cross to indicate that it was a veterans' memorial until after November 11, 1989, (See picture below of the Plaque at the base of the cross).
3) Every Easter holiday sunrise since 1954 was an occasion at the Mt. Soledad Easter Cross for local Christian worship services. On Easter Sunday, April 7, 1996, University of California-San Diego Political Science Professor (Emeritus) Peter Irons applied for and was granted a permit and conducted a well-attended secular sunrise rally for people of all religions and for those with no religion. There is no record of a Jewish, Muslim, Hindu, Buddhist or any other major religious sect or denomination having a religious service on Mt. Soledad.
4) The Mt. Soledad Easter Cross was dedicated to "Our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ" in a dedication bulletin by the grandmother of William J. Kellogg, President of the Mt. Soledad Memorial Association on Easter Sunday, 1954.-- [Paulson v. City of San Diego, 262 F.3d 885 (9th Cir. 2001), Documents on file with the US District Court of Southern California]
5) The Mt. Soledad Memorial Association made improvements to the property within Mt. Soledad Natural Park. All improvements were added after the original case was filed and while litigation proceedings were taking place. "Six concentric walls hold 3,200 black granite plaques purchased by donors and engraved with the names and photos of war veterans -- currently more than 1,700 are in place."[4]
6) The Mt. Soledad Memorial Association claims that the site for the Veterans' Memorial on Mt. Soledad Natural Park was dedicated on Easter holiday to commemorate and memorialize those who died during the Korean War era. However, groups who oppose them claim that the cross shows preference for only Christian veterans, and discrimination against non-Christian veterans. The Mt. Soledad Easter Cross is not a sacred symbol for non-Christian veterans, and it has been argued that the presence of the Mt. Soledad Easter Cross demeans non-Christians with second-class citizenship status in their own country.
7) As it currently stands, Plaintiff Philip Paulson (Paulson v. City of San Diego) claimed, and the courts have consistently agreed, that the Mt. Soledad Easter Cross fosters an excessive entanglement by government with religion. In 1916 by Ordinance No. 6670, the Mt. Soledad Natural Park became dedicated city owned parkland. The Mt. Soledad Natural Park was dedicated and intended to be enjoyed by all citizens as a public park. The argument of Paulson and others is that if the City decides to honor veterans with a memorial, then an inclusive veterans memorial ought to display a secular design that is strictly "religiously neutral" to honor veterans of all faiths, and also those with no religious faith. -- [The "Lemon Test" pursuant to US Supreme Court ruling in Lemon v. Kurtzman, 403 U.S. 602 (1971) [1] required government to remain “religiously neutral” with respect to religion. To be constitutional, a statute must have "a secular legislative purpose," it must have principal effects which neither advance nor inhibit religion, and it must not foster "an excessive government entanglement with religion."]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mount_S...ar_Memorial.3F

Why not let the people of San Diego vote on it like the people in Boise,Idaho are being allowed to do on a Ten Commandments monument? Here is a link.

http://tinyurl.com/qk3qo

Well, if the majority of people are Christian, they might vote in favor of keeping it "Mt. Soledad Easter Cross", simply because they want to preserve Christianity in many places. But this would not be fair to a minority of people, who are not Christian, and would not want their graves or their family-members' graves overshadowed by a religion in which they do not believe.

Throughout the whole well reasoned legal argument, one simple and glaring fact remains obscurred and deliberately left out. The park became city property in 1916, yet at the time it became city property a cross was already in place. So it would seem that the city claimed the park cross and all.

Once again the Constitution does not guarantee someone the right to be free of religion. It guarantees that Congress will not establish a religion, and it allows for the free exercise of religion.

The simple fact of the matter remains, that a cross has been on the site long before it became city property. It would seem that this alones proves that there is no entanglement between religion and government.

THus validating the Lemon Test. Furthermore, to settle this case the city has actually recommended donating the land to the Memorial group, yet this has been denied by the courts. THis is clearly a violation of the Consitution by the courts in showing a hostitility toward religion.

dmk

Making an effort to treat all beliefs equally does not show hostility toward any one religion. However, displaying a Christian cross on public property shows a disapproval of all beliefs not Christian.

I do consider this unconstitutional. But let's ignore the Constitution for a moment and think about the effects of this cross. This cross surely conveys a preference toward Christians: it respects the beliefs of Christians alone, and goes against the beliefs of non-Christians buried there and family members of non-Christians buried there. Why preserve this dedication to a single religion? Why not make this place religiously neutral?

A cross obviously favors one particular religion, Christianity. There can be little debate about this.

Why not just make it modern/neutral and use a little electric chair icon? Or a little lethal injection needle symbol?

Okay. Let's tell everyone who won an election because they got the most votes that they are not entitled to hold their office because a minority of people who did not vote for them say it's unfair because they won the election. That is your reasoning.

Okay. Let's take all the crosses off the graves in Arlington Cemetary. That is government land. Right?

If the cross clearly favors one religion, then the city had no business annexxing the land in the first place. Again, the cross existed before governmental control. Obviously then, the cross should be allowed to remain and governmental control should be removed. This was the goal of the city that was then disallowed by the court, that is what is showing hostility to a religion.

dmk