Reply With Quote
eh, these are the fights that aren't worth fighting imo
The case regarding whether or not a Maryland war memorial in the shape of a cross goes against the separation of church and state was accepted for final review by Supreme Court justices on Friday. (Algerina Perna /The Baltimore Sun via AP, File)
The case regarding whether or not a Maryland war memorial in the shape of a cross goes against a separation of church and state was accepted for final review by Supreme Court justices on Friday.
The controversial memorial, which stands in Bladensburg, Maryland, was previously deemed to be in violation of the Cons ution by a federal appeals court in Virginia, who determined that it “has the primary effect of endorsing religion and excessively entangles the government in religion.”
In pe ioning the nation’s highest court to take the case, Maryland officials who maintain the monument, otherwise known as the “Peace Cross,” insisted that what it’s meant to honor proves that its purpose is to portray a secular message of remembrance, not one of religion.
Should the appeals court’s decision be allowed to stand, it could potentially affect hundreds of similar monuments across the country and would force “the removal or dismemberment of a cherished war memorial that has served as a site of solemn commemoration and civic unity for nearly a century.”
The cross, finished in 1925, was erected in remembrance of 49 local men who died in World War I. A plaque on the cross' base lists the names of those soldiers, and both faces of the cross have a circle with the symbol of the American Legion, the veterans organization that helped raise money to build it.
The memorial’s location is roughly five miles from the Supreme Court.
Those in favor of the statue argued that earlier Supreme Court rulings determined that monuments, particularly longstanding ones, which incorporate religious symbolism to send a secular message did not go against the Cons ution.
The shape of the “Peace Cross,” which they maintain falls into that category, was picked as a means to bare a likeness to cross-shaped grave markers used for soldiers buried in American cemeteries overseas, supporters said.
The American Humanist Association, the group against the memorial who, along with three local residents, filed a 2014 lawsuit against Maryland officials, argue that the symbol "discriminates against patriotic soldiers who are not Christian, sending a callous message to non-Christians that Christians are worthy of veneration while they may as well be forgotten."
The organization attempted to persuade the Supreme Court against hearing the case, arguing that the appeals court's ruling is specific to the Bladensburg memorial and doesn't threaten any other monuments.
Arguments for the case are expected to be heard in early 2019.
https://www.foxnews.com/politics/supreme-court-accepts-case-of-maryland-war-memorial-shaped-like-cross
eh, these are the fights that aren't worth fighting imo
Obviously a Christian crucifixion cross, promoting Christianity, excluding non-Christians who fought, died in the war.
To pander to Christian supremacy as key to the oligarchy's duping of Christians to screw themselves, and to screw separation of church and state (right wing / Christian power politics s the Cons ution), SCOTUS 5 s will OK it, opening the floodgates to such all over the USA
you need GOD in your life. what a sad existence you lead.
i'd argue the inverse. it's a sad existence if you need to need some external reason to justify it
People are not usually worshiping alone. Faith is the entire package.
irrelevant to what i just said, tbh
Meh.
It is difficult for an American to comprehend when the religious figure looks like and unites the nations people. In Poland he is one of us, like a family member in the distant past that we all respect.
Sounds like a a recipe for oppression and repeated foreign occupation.
Bend over, I'll show you a recipe for oppression and repeated foreign occupation.
What a sad, pitiful piece of .
Most "open minded" nation in Europe at one point. All those non-Poles enjoyed themselves and bailed when it was time to rebuild.
LOL. The Poles are a bunch of meat headed, pirogi eating surrender monkeys. The French would beat them in a war at any time in history...if they havent already.
You're doing the troll thing.
Polaks were Napoleon's best foreign division
Doesn’t matter. You’re just saying a bunch of things that are irrelevant to my earlier comment.
That's called a joke.
You're posting on a sock account doing the troll thing.
But you're doing the troll thing, Chris.
Ya, what's up with that. Just use 1 account try hard.
this isn't your only account.
They also were professional Islam ass whoopers
The Battle of Varna was the first battle in which Polish arms crossed those of the invading Ottomans. Responding to the appeals of help from the Serbs and Bulgarians and a general appeal from the Pope to all Europeans to rush to the aid of Bulgaria which was being ravaged by the Ottoman Jihadis, the Poles joined in large numbers to challenge the Ottoman at Varna.
newcastle keg and infinitelimit want a word with you
I was once the Caravan
Waste of the courts time.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
