Atheists & Agnostics

yortsed snacilbuper

(7,939 posts) Mon Dec 8, 2014, 08:12 PM Dec 2014

Ask your Senators today to vote against land transfer of unconstitutional Mt. Soledad cross

The 43-foot cross atop Mount Soledad, a prominent public park in San Diego, has long been ruled unconstitutional, but political maneuvering has kept the government from dismantling or moving the cross. Last week, the U.S. House of Representatives voted to transfer the public land on which the Latin cross sits to the Mount Soledad Memorial Association. This is just the latest maneuver by the government to circumvent the Constitution.

The U.S. Senate is expected to vote on the measure any time this week. Please take action immediately! Scroll for contact information or read more about the case below.

link
http://ffrf.org/news/action/item/21906-ask-your-senators-today-to-vote-against-land-transfer-of-unconstitutional-mt-soledad-cross

3 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Ask your Senators today to vote against land transfer of unconstitutional Mt. Soledad cross (Original Post) yortsed snacilbuper Dec 2014 OP

That's a bit of a stretch FBaggins Dec 2014 #1

Looks to me like pandering to the religious. Curmudgeoness Dec 2014 #2

Pandering to voters really FBaggins Dec 2014 #3

FBaggins

(26,727 posts)

1. That's a bit of a stretch

Reply to yortsed snacilbuper (Original post)

Mon Dec 8, 2014, 08:27 PM

Dec 2014

It has "long been ruled unconstitutional" ignores the fact that other rulings said the opposite... and a final ruling is still pending. The USSC denied dert (twice), but only because there was no ruling to review yet (because the appeal was still pending).

It certainly isn't unconstitutional to transfer ownership to a private entity to avoid government entanglements (the ACLU says as much). The only real debate is whether that transfer should take the form of an auction sale where anyone could purchase the property (including people who intended to remove the cross). That seems preferable, but I can't think of a legal obligation to do so.

Curmudgeoness

(18,219 posts)

2. Looks to me like pandering to the religious.

Reply to yortsed snacilbuper (Original post)

Mon Dec 8, 2014, 08:47 PM

Dec 2014

I don't think that it would be so easy to transfer other public property to any other group.

FBaggins

(26,727 posts)

3. Pandering to voters really

Reply to Curmudgeoness (Reply #2)

Mon Dec 8, 2014, 09:16 PM

Dec 2014

Public opinion has been overwhelmingly in favor of keeping the cross there... but court opinions have leaned the other way. What politician wouldn't look for a way out?

Reply to this discussion