Separation of Church and State gone amok?

[leatherneck]

Marines fight to protect crosses at Camp Pendleton as atheist groups seek removal | Fox News

 

If this violates the separation, do military chaplains? Does the holding of any voluntary religious services on federal ground?

[theguru]

Marines fight to protect crosses at Camp Pendleton as atheist groups seek removal | Fox News

 

If this violates the separation, do military chaplains? Does the holding of any voluntary religious services on federal ground?

 

Off the top of my head I would think that anything paid for by the military and/or on federal ground that is "religious" probably is a violation.

[leatherneck]

Off the top of my head I would think that anything paid for by the military and/or on federal ground that is "religious" probably is a violation.

 

 

I've got zero problem with the cross being erected or present on the base. The cross was not paid for by the federal govt. No one is forcing anyone to walk up to the cross or to worship the religion represented by the cross. I view those upset with the cross as of the crowd that believes "if I don't like it, no one can do it". Same philosophy as the anti hunters; "I don't like hunting; so no one should hunt".

 

As long as symbols of other religions are also permitted on the base, I don't see how anyone could logically argue that the presence of a cross constitutes the establishment of a religion by the federal govt.

 

A stronger argument by the anti establishment crowd would be on the presence of govt paid military chaplains and places of worship on military bases, etc. James Madison would have likely agreed with them (Government Chaplains - Are Official Government Chaplains Constitutional?).

 

I do not. Big difference between "establishment" and "separation" and I do not subscribe to the theory that "presence" is the equivalent to "establishment". Show me some evidence that those not going up to the cross suffer careerwise, or are disciplined or are treated somehow in a quantifiable negative manner than those that do go, and I'd agree that such indicates "establishment" of Christianity. Absent such, the cross is not much different than a Christian bumper sticker being on a car allowed on base. Surely you wouldn't be in favor of pro Christianity bumper stickers being prohibited on military bases or other federal property, would you? Surely you are not opposed to crosses being engraved on the tomb stones of those buried in Arlington or other national cemetaries, are you?

[Alabama Larry]

Haters, just want to hate. These groups have nothing better to do. Its sad. If they (or anyone) don't agree with a Religion, so be it, but why worry about others? Back to the school prayer before a game anyone?

[theguru]

I've got zero problem with the cross being erected or present on the base. The cross was not paid for by the federal govt. No one is forcing anyone to walk up to the cross or to worship the religion represented by the cross. I view those upset with the cross as of the crowd that believes "if I don't like it, no one can do it". Same philosophy as the anti hunters; "I don't like hunting; so no one should hunt".

 

As long as symbols of other religions are also permitted on the base, I don't see how anyone could logically argue that the presence of a cross constitutes the establishment of a religion by the federal govt.

 

A stronger argument by the anti establishment crowd would be on the presence of govt paid military chaplains and places of worship on military bases, etc. James Madison would have likely agreed with them (Government Chaplains - Are Official Government Chaplains Constitutional?).

 

I do not. Big difference between "establishment" and "separation" and I do not subscribe to the theory that "presence" is the equivalent to "establishment". Show me some evidence that those not going up to the cross suffer careerwise, or are disciplined or are treated somehow in a quantifiable negative manner than those that do go, and I'd agree that such indicates "establishment" of Christianity. Absent such, the cross is not much different than a Christian bumper sticker being on a car allowed on base. Surely you wouldn't be in favor of pro Christianity bumper stickers being prohibited on military bases or other federal property, would you? Surely you are not opposed to crosses being engraved on the tomb stones of those buried in Arlington or other national cemetaries, are you?

 

I am taking a very simple approach lneck.

 

In short, religion is in our lives in so many ways I think groups like this are making a stand. For example, and I am sure most of you will disagree but, IN GOD WE TRUST, has no business being on currency.

[ladiesbballcoach]

@RickWarren: Some churches think the government is the answer to all problems. Biblical churches think the local church is the answer.

[leatherneck]

I am taking a very simple approach lneck.

 

In short, religion is in our lives in so many ways I think groups like this are making a stand. For example, and I am sure most of you will disagree but, IN GOD WE TRUST, has no business being on currency.

 

The phrase might not have any business being on the currency, but is its presence really a big deal? I put that in the "I don't want it there so it shouldn't be there" category. Seems to me that more and more people these days have "a cause" and more and more people want to impose that "cause" on other people. Who gets harmed by having that simple phrase on the currency and who gets harmed by having a cross on top of a remote hill that helps people deal with their grief of losing a loved one defending our country? Really no one.

[mexitucky]

The phrase might not have any business being on the currency, but is its presence really a big deal? I put that in the "I don't want it there so it shouldn't be there" category. Seems to me that more and more people these days have "a cause" and more and more people want to impose that "cause" on other people. Who gets harmed by having that simple phrase on the currency and who gets harmed by having a cross on top of a remote hill that helps people deal with their grief of losing a loved one defending our country? Really no one.

 

It's a deal where the majority have to cowtow to the minority. It's happening everywhere in America. A certain group feels that something the majority does offends them, and they site to the Constitution, find a Circuit Court liberal enough to interpet it the way they need...and boom. I could make an argument for why the crosses should come down, but at some point, enough is enough. If a group holds religious beliefs, and you don't hold any, why does the religious group have to change their behavior to fit your contrarion group? Just don't look at the crosses. Most atheists that I know find religious people to be simple minded superstitious individuals. How can such simple people and their symbols offend people to this point?

[leatherneck]

It's a deal where the majority have to cowtow to the minority. It's happening everywhere in America. A certain group feels that something the majority does offends them, and they site to the Constitution, find a Circuit Court liberal enough to interpet it the way they need...and boom. I could make an argument for why the crosses should come down, but at some point, enough is enough. If a group holds religious beliefs, and you don't hold any, why does the religious group have to change their behavior to fit your contrarion group? Just don't look at the crosses. Most atheists that I know find religious people to be simple minded superstitious individuals. How can such simple people and their symbols offend people to this point?

 

Exactly.:thumb:

[theguru]

The phrase might not have any business being on the currency, but is its presence really a big deal? I put that in the "I don't want it there so it shouldn't be there" category. Seems to me that more and more people these days have "a cause" and more and more people want to impose that "cause" on other people. Who gets harmed by having that simple phrase on the currency and who gets harmed by having a cross on top of a remote hill that helps people deal with their grief of losing a loved one defending our country? Really no one.

 

Same thing on our license plates, no business being there. Do I care one way or the other? Not much, but I see others point when yet another example comes to light and I see why at some point "the minority" as mex put it either stands up and fights or gives up.

 

When it comes to issues like this the non-religious/atheists/agnostics find the religious majority to be condescending and that is the vibe I get from this thread.

[leatherneck]

Same thing on our license plates, no business being there. Do I care one way or the other? Not much, but I see others point when yet another example comes to light and I see why at some point "the minority" as mex put it either stands up and fights or gives up.

 

When it comes to issues like this the non-religious/atheists/agnostics find the religious majority to be condescending and that is the vibe I get from this thread.

 

Really? Since there are only 10 posts, and you've made 3 of them leaving 7 (4 of which I've made) I have to assume that you've included my posts in the condescending category. Help me understand why. What have I posted that is condescending?

[mexitucky]

Same thing on our license plates, no business being there. Do I care one way or the other? Not much, but I see others point when yet another example comes to light and I see why at some point "the minority" as mex put it either stands up and fights or gives up.

 

When it comes to issues like this the non-religious/atheists/agnostics find the religious majority to be condescending and that is the vibe I get from this thread.

 

What's there to fight about? I see a Manora, I don't care. It does not affect me one way or the other. Kwanza celebrations??? I don't know what it is and if it is religious, I am glad that it makes them happy celebrating it. If a cross makes people feel more secure, what is the downfall? Now, if you're hammered over the head by the local good reverend about "Repent for the end is near," I can see making a stand. However, symbols, and only symbols, should not offend anyone if they represent a group's faith.

[Randy Parker]

How far are we going to go in order to keep church & state separate?

 

Are we going to change our method of dating? Because after all, it's the year 2012 because 2012 years ago (approximately) was when Jesus was born.

 

Are we going to de-federalize Christmas as a holiday?

 

Do we take prayer out of the Presidential Inauguration? Out of Congressional meetings?

 

Do we go into Washington, D.C. & remove all the religious symbols, works of art, etc.?

 

Were our ancestors in violation of the church & state idea when they published the New England Primer, which was full of Judeo-Christian stories/teachings & then they had the audacity to use that text in public schools?

 

If someone is going to preach separation of church & state, that's all fine. But you have to be consistent with it.

[leatherneck]

What's there to fight about? I see a Manora, I don't care. It does not affect me one way or the other. Kwanza celebrations??? I don't know what it is and if it is religious, I am glad that it makes them happy celebrating it. If a cross makes people feel more secure, what is the downfall? Now, if you're hammered over the head by the local good reverend about "Repent for the end is near," I can see making a stand. However, symbols, and only symbols, should not offend anyone if they represent a group's faith.

 

Or if the CO was telling Marines they better go climb that hill and pray at the cross, or else. Which he/she hasn't been doing. One of my COs used to have bible study at his home (which was on base and govt provided) each Wed night for the officers in his command. Shortly after I joined his command he told me about it and asked me if I wanted to attend. Not being a big bible person and being very private in my religious beliefs, I politely said thanks but no thanks. He never retaliated towards me at all. It was truly voluntary and I felt zero pressure to attend. Had he pressured me, perhaps I'd have felt he crossed the line. But he didn't. So it was no big deal to me and I moved on. If some attending became closer to their God as a result or became better persons, that's great.

[theguru]

Really? Since there are only 10 posts, and you've made 3 of them leaving 7 (4 of which I've made) I have to assume that you've included my posts in the condescending category. Help me understand why. What have I posted that is condescending?

 

Larry used the term haters, I think mexitucky's posts are a little on the condescending side, and with you... well, you are just being you.