Athiests Want Cross Removed From Camp Pendleton. Guess What Marines Said?

[tombogan03884]

Not only was this phrase or statement a part of the Constitution or the First Amendment, but it is only Mr. Jefferson's opinion.  Thomas Jefferson was not a part of writing the First Amendment, yet his single phrase has become the litmus test by which all anti-Judeo Christian "experts" try and regulate our lives.

http://www.usconstitution.net/constamnotes.html

Representative James Madison, who was so instrumental in the creation of the Constitution in the first place, drafted a bill of rights. Though he originally opposed the idea, by the time he ran for a seat in the House, he used the creation of a bill as part of his campaign. He introduced the bill into the House, which debated it at length and approved 17 articles of amendment. The Senate took up the bill and reduced the number to 12, by combining some and rejecting others. The House accepted the Senate's changes, voting on September 24th and 25th, 1789; twelve articles of amendment were sent to the states for ratification.

[PegLeg45]

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.

A lot of folks in this country like to put words into the mix that ain't there.


Does placing a religious symbol equate to "gubmint-sponsored religion" or law?  
IMHO, No.

[Timothy]

Actually, the way I interpret that is if they do something to stop the Marines from putting up a cross they're "prohibiting the free excessive thereof"!

Even though they are Marines, they are also citizens of the United States of America or legal immigrants who are merely employees of the US Government.  They have all the same rights as everyone else in the USA!

[Solus]

A lot of folks in this country like to put words into the mix that ain't there.


Does placing a religious symbol equate to "gubmint-sponsored religion" or law?  
IMHO, No.

Actually, the way I interpret that is if they do something to stop the Marines from putting up a cross they're "prohibiting the free excessive thereof"!

Even though they are Marines, they are also citizens of the United States of America or legal immigrants who are merely employees of the US Government.  They have all the same rights as everyone else in the USA!

The problem I have with this is that if I agree with it, then I have to allow folks who wish to put up a symbol of any religion or belief to do so.  

If a group of government employees want to put up a satanic symbol over the graves of our fallen soldiers, they will be allowed by the same reasoning..

Same with any pagan religion.

[MikeBjerum]

The problem I have with this is that if I agree with it, then I have to allow folks who wish to put up a symbol of any religion or belief to do so.  

If a group of government employees want to put up a satanic symbol over the graves of our fallen soldiers, they will be allowed by the same reasoning..

Same with any pagan religion.

If you have ever filled out a VA 40-1330 (Application for a Standard Government Headstone or Marker) you would have noted the high number of religious choices.

[Sponsor]

[Solus]

If you have ever filled out a VA 40-1330 (Application for a Standard Government Headstone or Marker) you would have noted the high number of religious choices.

Haven't filled one out, but that is a good practice.  I know some would not be on the list, perhaps do to low volume of selection, but would we allow the family to supply a headstone/marker with the symbol of their choice?  

We can eliminate the Swastika because it is a political symbol rather than a religious one, but there might be others not on the list offered.....again, a satanic symbol comes to mind as an extreme example.

Also, if the Marines in the example that started this thread had chooses a satanic symbol (and I know that is very far from likely) would we allow them to put it up?

I ask these questions even though they are way at the extreme of possibility because that is the way I determine if my logic/reasoning is right.  If it does not work for me at the extremes of the situation, I need to think about it some more.

As for "the wishes of the majority"...

Our country may soon have a majority of Hispanic or Muslim population.  

If there is a Hispanic majority, should the national language be changed to Spanish?

And should the majority becme Muslim...and I mean peaceful Muslim, should they be able to take back their religion, should the Pledge of Allegiance read   "...one nation, under Allah.."?      or  Satan, again using that unlikely extreme as a test.

[MikeBjerum]

There is an area for an inscription.  If you write your own you first must stay within the defined number of characters, and secondly it is subject to review.  This review is done regardless of who you are or what you say - every inscription is reviewed, and I have been somewhat amazed by what is allowed.

In a National Cemetery you must use a Government marker or headstone.  However, in a private or public cemetery you can receive a reimbursement amount if you choose to purchase a marker of your liking.

[Solus]

There is an area for an inscription.  If you write your own you first must stay within the defined number of characters, and secondly it is subject to review.  This review is done regardless of who you are or what you say - every inscription is reviewed, and I have been somewhat amazed by what is allowed.

Again, that sounds like a wise practice.  Just seems like this "final statement" should be most fully protected by the 1A.

[Timothy]

The problem I have with this is that if I agree with it, then I have to allow folks who wish to put up a symbol of any religion or belief to do so.  Correct!

If a group of government employees want to put up a satanic symbol over the graves of our fallen soldiers, they will be allowed by the same reasoning..No, only the individual has these rights, not a group or organization IMO!

Same with any pagan religion.  Correct again, no matter how distasteful!

We don't have to like it or agree here, just interpret the Amendment by the literal words written.

[Timothy]

Also, if the Marines in the example that started this thread had chooses a satanic symbol (and I know that is very far from likely) would we allow them to put it up?   Yes!

As for "the wishes of the majority"...

Our country may soon have a majority of Hispanic or Muslim population.  

If there is a Hispanic majority, should the national language be changed to Spanish?  There is NO national language in the United States!

And should the majority become Muslim...and I mean peaceful Muslim, should they be able to take back their religion, should the Pledge of Allegiance read   "...one nation, under Allah.."?      or  Satan, again using that unlikely extreme as a test.  Sticky wicket old chap as Allah is God to a Muslim.  This one is a matter of whom would be the governing body in the US.  I'd suggest that if we were in a Muslim majority, we'd be living under something other than the protections granted by our Creator or the US Constitution.  The "Pledge" is not a Constitutional issue!  As to Satan, if you believe in God, you believe in the Fallen Angel as well.  If one chooses to honor Satan, no matter how distasteful we may find it, it's their right!

It sucks but that's the way I see it.