No God is Welcome in San Diego.......per U.S. District Judge Larry Burns

R&R

Member
May 12, 2011
465
126
Murrieta
Name
Rob
Boat
CABO 226
Here in America we don't have the kind of history that many other countries do I'm not a religious person, but if that cross has been there for 100 years we should respect it as part of our American history and leave it for people to see. We shouldn't try to erase the little bit of history we have in this state/country.

As as far as the Gov. Funding a religious symbol for 100yr, at what point does it become a symbol of our history that should be respected for just that even if you believe in a different religion. When I visited Virginia and the original colonies that was a cool learning trip when I was young. I got to see our original ships, blacksmiths, theaters, learned about slavery and even church's that the original settlers built. Crosses were very common to see not just in the church's, I can only assume that these museums and property are owned by Gov. or at least most of it.. Should these places be taken down? Our history doesn't go very far back we should show it more respect or there won't be any left.
 
Upvote 0

SALTYDAWG

Advertiser
Advertiser
Aug 1, 2003
15,633
1,974
65
Casa DE Oro
www.saltydawgcustomrods.com
Name
Bill
Boat
sold it
Thanks Maggie :boobies::Pelvic_Thrust:

nunya bbobs.jpg
 
Upvote 0

Rauterki

The worst fisherman on the boat
Oct 8, 2009
1,089
357
53
San Clemente, CA
www.crossfittothecore.com
Name
Jon
Boat
I'm in the market. Make me an offer I can't refuse.
Voting is not the only criteria. It wasn't until the 14th amendment (post civil war) that women were even granted constitutional rights under the equal protection clause, and even then they were not allowed to vote and were excluded, in writing, from many activities that we would now include in our idea of freedom.

Thread may be getting off topic and I don't really want to get into an arguement, just pointing out some inaccuracies in people's idea of where our laws came from, and the people who created them. A constitutional law professor gave me some good advise that I still use today, and that was to define where you stand with regard to the constitution (strict versus activist, or somewhere in between), and then apply that consistently versus cherry picking your arguements based on the issue. You'll be surprised where you end up sometimes.

Going off topic??? Shit, I'm surprised it lasted this longLOL

I can't agree with your assertion that women weren't free though; not treated equally - yes, but not free???? Trying to equate today's norms to yesterday's is an illogical stretch especially within the context of slaves and slave-owners. In any event, I do not understand how erecting a cross to honor war veterans is an establishment of religion.

It seems as if there are simply too many groups out there searching for things that are "offensive."

You just don't have the right to NOT be offended....
 
Upvote 0

BiggestT

I Post A Lot But I Can't Edit This
Sep 8, 2004
12,122
8,185
Fullerton
Name
SM
Boat
Salsipuedes & Czech Mate
Frank, here are other grave markers that are not crosses used for US servicemen:

View attachment 487872

The cross, star of david, etc. represent that persons faith. So yes the cross is a symbol of religion. If you look at headstones that are your typical gravestone shape the religious persuasion of the soldier is signified by a cross, star of david, etc.



Teddy Roosevelt did not swear in on a bible.

John Quincy Adams swore in on a law book.

Had Romney won, he would have sworn in on The Book of Mormon, dum da dum dum dum!
 
Upvote 0

BiggestT

I Post A Lot But I Can't Edit This
Sep 8, 2004
12,122
8,185
Fullerton
Name
SM
Boat
Salsipuedes & Czech Mate
If the cross on Mt Soledad was a crescent and star instead what would your feelings be? (Not being inflammatory or trying to infer anything with this question, just want to get an honest answer)

If public funds were being used for it then the people fighting against the cross would have the same argument for removing it.

If that were the case, I'd go Tuna Jihad on it and burn it down while raping white women reporters.
 
Upvote 0

yakergreg

I Should Upgrade My Account
Apr 10, 2006
1,602
211
So. Ca.
Name
Greg
Boat
Crestliner Angler
Going off topic??? Shit, I'm surprised it lasted this longLOL

I can't agree with your assertion that women weren't free though; not treated equally - yes, but not free???? Trying to equate today's norms to yesterday's is an illogical stretch especially within the context of slaves and slave-owners. In any event, I do not understand how erecting a cross to honor war veterans is an establishment of religion.

It seems as if there are simply too many groups out there searching for things that are "offensive."

You just don't have the right to NOT be offended....

This...
 
Upvote 0

gonzo25

GOT A BIG ONE
  • Nov 20, 2008
    3,606
    2,023
    san diego calif. usa
    Name
    george
    Boat
    18' Invader CC 15' bayliner son of a beach
    Never seen Frank put so much into a post before.... I like you even more than I did before

    Things were established based on the bible, god or whatever.... is there a problem with the ten commandments? it is just common sense or a sense of right and wrong. The country was established so that man could practice any religion or no religion... but things were still influenced by the bible, or that sense of right and wrong. Personally I think that as the loss of reference to the bible and god in our society has grown, so has the loss of people's values. I am not a religious nut, but I don't have a problem with whatever anyone wants to believe... as long as it isn't based on hate and the new religion of today where people have made money their god, where anything is except able if it puts money in your pocket... the term I like the most, "that's business" as the guy fucks someone else by lying and cheating anyway he can to make a buck, NO IT'S NOT.

    What kind of values do you teach your kids? with no church influence of right and wrong, just what they see on T.V. and of course what they see from you. Remember it isn't do as I say not as I do, that shit doesn't work.

    When I was a kid growing up we said the pledge to the flag, had a moment of silence for prayer and people didn't have alarms and cameras and bars on the windows and doors, most people didn't even lock their doors when they left the house unless it was for an extended amount of time.

    I teach my kids the same things that I practice... There is only one thing that you and you alone are in control of, that is what kind man you are, you are the only one who is in control of that... what is your word worth, are you a thief, a liar.
    The people who really know me. know they don't have to worry about leaving their money, woman, drugs, kids or whatever with me, that if i say i will do something it isn't questioned... do your friends really think that about you?

    Off the subject? Not really, because I think this is what gets undermined by this stuff... ever noticed the ten commandments on government buildings? should we do away with this to make these assholes happy? Is that religion, or just a common sense right and wrong we would all like to live by? Hey it's in the bible, it must be religious, shit can that shit. I think we should make it like the movie, "the purge" and it would solve all of these problems. That's my story and I'm stickin to it. JUST LOOK AT MY SIGNATURE... I'll take my dog any day.
     
    Upvote 0

    kindafishy

    I Post A Lot But I Can't Edit This
    Jul 21, 2010
    4,301
    2,048
    hemet/ca/riverside
    Name
    SCOTT
    Boat
    bayliner cierra express 2452 "RYLEE'S WAVE RYDER"
    This should be an interesting topic on this board.
    I'm willing to bet that the people who express outrage over this are the same ones expressing outrage over perceived infringement on the 2nd amendment.
    If you're a Constitutional fundamentalist on the 2nd then you should support rigid separation of church and state as well. But, I'm betting the loudest voices will be from those who want it both ways, or whatever suits their personal bias on a given issue.....


    Of course, narcissistic sycophant stairmen will chime in. :D

    you may be right, but as for me i like a don't ask won't tell policy. religion... i won't push my beliefs (or lack thereof) whatever the case may be on other people, and hope they reciprocate. and as for guns let me have what i want, you can have what you want. and you'll never see mine unless your pointing yours at me or mine. i agree and believe in the separation of church and state and tax dollars should not be used for the construction, or maintenance of any religious icons or symbols, unless a equal amount of $ is used for each and every religion (which would be ridiculous). government and faith are 2 words that do not belong together.
    with that said why hasn't some private organization bought this, or the feds selling it to a a non profit??? veterans group or something?

    so i guess i'm a constitutional fundementalist that would like to see a private group take control of this memorial.

    oh, by the way when i use the word "you" i'm not calling you out Carl.....just generally speaking.
     
    Upvote 0

    Professor

    I Should Upgrade My Account
    Dec 17, 2003
    1,134
    213
    San Diego
    Visit site
    Name
    Yale
    Boat
    32' Blackman Sportfisher "Riley"
    If that was the way it was originally erected I would feel the same way I do about the cross.......

    Yep and that goes for the children's pool as well. Both were built with private $ and given to the public to enjoy or so the givers thought. Let's see what am I going to want to give to the government? OK if I had something would I want to give it to the government? I know my Bloodydecks membership. I can see it now.... this thread has be reviewed an approved by the State of California. "THREAD CLOSED"
     
    Upvote 0

    Johnny J

    Formally INOXicated
    May 10, 2008
    4,985
    1,606
    Idyllwild, CA USA
    www.bluepacifictackle.com
    Name
    John
    Boat
    not mine
    you may be right, but as for me i like a don't ask won't tell policy. religion... i won't push my beliefs (or lack thereof) whatever the case may be on other people, and hope they reciprocate. and as for guns let me have what i want, you can have what you want. and you'll never see mine unless your pointing yours at me or mine. i agree and believe in the separation of church and state and tax dollars should not be used for the construction, or maintenance of any religious icons or symbols, unless a equal amount of $ is used for each and every religion (which would be ridiculous). government and faith are 2 words that do not belong together.
    with that said why hasn't some private organization bought this, or the feds selling it to a a non profit??? veterans group or something?

    so i guess i'm a constitutional fundementalist that would like to see a private group take control of this memorial.

    oh, by the way when i use the word "you" i'm not calling you out Carl.....just generally speaking.

    Who would want to purchase the Capital Building with all it's references.
     
    Upvote 0

    ConSeaMate

    Legend in my own mind
    Sep 6, 2005
    2,685
    287
    65
    Escondido
    Name
    Buster Brown
    Boat
    28' Silverton "ConSeaMate"
    you may be right, but as for me i like a don't ask won't tell policy. religion... i won't push my beliefs (or lack thereof) whatever the case may be on other people, and hope they reciprocate. and as for guns let me have what i want, you can have what you want. and you'll never see mine unless your pointing yours at me or mine. i agree and believe in the separation of church and state and tax dollars should not be used for the construction, or maintenance of any religious icons or symbols, unless a equal amount of $ is used for each and every religion (which would be ridiculous). government and faith are 2 words that do not belong together.
    with that said why hasn't some private organization bought this, or the feds selling it to a a non profit??? veterans group or something?

    so i guess i'm a constitutional fundementalist that would like to see a private group take control of this memorial.

    oh, by the way when i use the word "you" i'm not calling you out Carl.....just generally speaking.

    How do you separate Church and State when all the principals of this Country were Founded on it?......
     
    Upvote 0

    eric harner

    Caliente Tuna
    Oct 7, 2009
    1,919
    1,095
    63
    Phoenix Hellazona
    Name
    Azlandlocked
    Boat
    RRII, PV, the Big X
    So a group of rich slave owners who believed that inalienable rights were actually only meant for male/white/protestants qualify as "ethically-minded?" Interesting.
    RIGHT ON !!!! Finely a post in this thread the rings of truth. Thank You Sir !!
     
    Upvote 0

    ConSeaMate

    Legend in my own mind
    Sep 6, 2005
    2,685
    287
    65
    Escondido
    Name
    Buster Brown
    Boat
    28' Silverton "ConSeaMate"
    RIGHT ON !!!! Finely a post in this thread the rings of truth. Thank You Sir !!


    A brief history lesson.

    At the time when the US Constitution was in the process of being ratified, there was already a severe divide growing among the colonies over the subject of slavery. The authors of the Constitution were shrewd. They knew that if they included language critical of slavery or suggesting that it would be abolished, there would be no hope for unification of the colonies or the formation of the republic they envisioned. Slave owners at the time were wealthy men with real political power, so the issue had to be handled with kid gloves.

    In 1807, the United States Congress, acting on Jefferson's request, passed the Act Prohibiting Importation of Slaves. Jefferson signed the act and it went into effect January 1, 1808, the EARLIEST DATE PERMITTED by the United States Constitution for any law regulating slavery. This was their sneak attack and the first major step towards abolition. The act equated slave importation or exportation with Piracy, which was punishable by death.

    Jefferson himself was a slave owner, this is true (via inheritance from his late wife's family). But his views on slavery were complex, and he opposed the practice, especially later in his life. This is evidenced by his relationship with Sally Hemings as well as the actions he took as president to criminalize the practice of slavery.

    I know it's hip and cool these days to bash the founders as racists, but unfortunately it's such an oversimplification that it's not even accurate. First of all, not all slaves were black, and not all slave owners were white. Look a little closer, and you will see that the founders were fighting an uphill battle against a deeply entrenched culture. Their goal was to establish a new form of government, never before seen in history, that enshrined and protected the Natural Rights of all men. This was a revolutionary idea and they (more or less) succeeded!

    I'd like to see any of you try accomplishing something like that today. What did you do this morning to fight against the institution of slavery?

    Are you even aware of the types of slavery that existed back then, or the types of slavery that exist today
     
    Upvote 0

    ConSeaMate

    Legend in my own mind
    Sep 6, 2005
    2,685
    287
    65
    Escondido
    Name
    Buster Brown
    Boat
    28' Silverton "ConSeaMate"
    The Constitution and Slavery

    We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.
    — Declaration of Independence, 1776
    bhmDeclarationindependence.jpg
    Thomas Jefferson presented the Declaration of Independence to the Continental Congress in 1776. (Wikimedia Commons)

    <tbody>
    </tbody>
    When the American colonies broke from England, the Continental Congress asked Thomas Jefferson to write the Declaration of Independence. In the declaration, Jefferson expressed American grievances and explained why the colonists were breaking away. His words proclaimed America’s ideals of freedom and equality, which still resonate throughout the world.
    Yet at the time these words were written, more than 500,000 black Americans were slaves. Jefferson himself owned more than 100. Slaves accounted for about one-fifth of the population in the American colonies. Most of them lived in the Southern colonies, where slaves made up 40 percent of the population.
    Many colonists, even slave holders, hated slavery. Jefferson called it a “hideous blot” on America. George Washington, who owned hundreds of slaves, denounced it as “repugnant.” James Mason, a Virginia slave owner, condemned it as “evil.”
    But even though many of them decried it, Southern colonists relied on slavery. The Southern colonies were among the richest in America. Their cash crops of tobacco, indigo, and rice depended on slave labor. They weren’t going to give it up.
    The first U.S. national government began under the Articles of Confederation, adopted in 1781. This document said nothing about slavery. It left the power to regulate slavery, as well as most powers, to the individual states. After their experience with the British, the colonists distrusted a strong central government. The new national government consisted solely of a Congress in which each state had one vote.
    With little power to execute its laws or collect taxes, the new government proved ineffective. In May 1787, 55 delegates from 12 states met in Philadelphia. (Rhode Island refused to send a delegation.) Their goal was to revise the Articles of Confederation. Meeting in secret sessions, they quickly changed their goal. They would write a new Constitution. The outline of the new government was soon agreed to. It would have three branches — executive, judiciary, and a two-house legislature.
    A dispute arose over the legislative branch. States with large populations wanted representation in both houses of the legislature to be based on population. States with small populations wanted each state to have the same number of representatives, like under the Articles of Confederation. This argument carried on for two months. In the end, the delegates agreed to the “Great Compromise.” One branch, the House of Representatives, would be based on population. The other, the Senate, would have two members from each state.
    Part of this compromise included an issue that split the convention on North–South lines. The issue was: Should slaves count as part of the population? Under the proposed Constitution, population would ultimately determine three matters:
    (1) How many members each state would have in the House of Representatives.
    (2) How many electoral votes each state would have in presidential elections.
    (3) The amount each state would pay in direct taxes to the federal government.
    bhmcnstitutionalconvention.jpg
    In 1787 after months of debate, delegates signed the new Constitution of the United States. (Wikimedia Commons)

    <tbody>
    </tbody>
    Only the Southern states had large numbers of slaves. Counting them as part of the population would greatly increase the South’s political power, but it would also mean paying higher taxes. This was a price the Southern states were willing to pay. They argued in favor of counting slaves. Northern states disagreed. The delegates compromised. Each slave would count as three-fifths of a person.
    Following this compromise, another controversy erupted: What should be done about the slave trade, the importing of new slaves into the United States? Ten states had already outlawed it. Many delegates heatedly denounced it. But the three states that allowed it — Georgia and the two Carolinas — threatened to leave the convention if the trade were banned. A special committee worked out another compromise: Congress would have the power to ban the slave trade, but not until 1800. The convention voted to extend the date to 1808.
    A final major issue involving slavery confronted the delegates. Southern states wanted other states to return escaped slaves. The Articles of Confederation had not guaranteed this. But when Congress adopted the Northwest Ordinance, it a clause promising that slaves who escaped to the Northwest Territories would be returned to their owners. The delegates placed a similar fugitive slave clause in the Constitution. This was part of a deal with New England states. In exchange for the fugitive slave clause, the New England states got concessions on shipping and trade.
    These compromises on slavery had serious effects on the nation. The fugitive slave clause (enforced through legislation passed in 1793 and 1850) allowed escaped slaves to be chased into the North and caught. It also resulted in the illegal kidnapping and return to slavery of thousands of free blacks. The three-fifths compromise increased the South’s representation in Congress and the Electoral College. In 12 of the first 16 presidential elections, a Southern slave owner won. Extending the slave trade past 1800 brought many slaves to America. South Carolina alone imported 40,000 slaves between 1803 and 1808 (when Congress overwhelmingly voted to end the trade). So many slaves entered that slavery spilled into the Louisiana territory and took root.
    Northern states didn’t push too hard on slavery issues. Their main goal was to secure a new government. They feared antagonizing the South. Most of them saw slavery as a dying institution with no economic future. However, in five years the cotton gin would be invented, which made growing cotton on plantations immensely profitable, as well as slavery.
    The Declaration of Independence expressed lofty ideals of equality. The framers of the Constitution, intent on making a new government, left important questions of equality and fairness to the future. It would be some time before the great republic that they founded would approach the ideals expressed in the Declaration of Independence.
     
    Upvote 0

    stairman

    ......
    May 16, 2009
    5,387
    3,653
    ramona /ca/usa
    Name
    doug
    Boat
    yak and lowe duck hunting skiff but they identify as sportfishing crusiers
    good job frank....victims of the public schools need a history lesson now and then
     
    Upvote 0