# Should the Mt. Soledad cross stay or go? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [May 21, 2006, 12:03am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-the-mt-soledad-cross-stay-or-go/357579 "2006-05-21T00:03:17Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 3
**Author:** ![Der\_Trihs](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/der_trihs/32/233_2.png) [@Der\_Trihs](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Der_Trihs)\ **Post date:** [May 22, 2006, 3:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-the-mt-soledad-cross-stay-or-go/357579/41 "2006-05-22T15:34:48Z")
[QUOTE=John Mace] Of course there is value in us discussing alternative interpretations. I’m just saying that a statement that the SCOTUS got it “wrong” is meaningless. [/QUOTE] Do you realize how silly that statement is ? It doesn’t matter if they rule the way they do because of ideology, religion, bribery, coercion or LSD spiked coffee; because _they_ say so, it makes legal sense ? If they make two rulings that contradict without resolving that contradiction, will your head catch on fire like an old Star Trek android ? ---
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [May 22, 2006, 3:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-the-mt-soledad-cross-stay-or-go/357579/42 "2006-05-22T15:44:00Z")
[QUOTE=Der Trihs] Do you realize how silly that statement is ? It doesn’t matter if they rule the way they do because of ideology, religion, bribery, coercion or LSD spiked coffee; because _they_ say so, it makes legal sense ? If they make two rulings that contradict without resolving that contradiction, will your head catch on fire like an old Star Trek android ? [/QUOTE] Got an actual argument to make? Apparently not… OK, answer me this. If there is a way of knowing what the right and the wrong answer is, why do we need the SCOTUS to make a ruling in the first place? ---
**Author:** ![Der\_Trihs](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/der_trihs/32/233_2.png) [@Der\_Trihs](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Der_Trihs)\ **Post date:** [May 22, 2006, 3:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-the-mt-soledad-cross-stay-or-go/357579/43 "2006-05-22T15:49:38Z")
[QUOTE=John Mace] Got an actual argument to make? Apparently not… [/quote] My arguement is that your position is silly. [QUOTE=John Mace] OK, answer me this. If there is a way of knowing what the right and the wrong answer is, why do we need the SCOTUS to make a ruling in the first place? [/QUOTE] Because someone has to; that doesn’t mean we should turn off our brains and ignore egregious incompetence or dishonesty on their part. ---
**Author:** ![AskNott](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/asknott/32/5790_2.png) [@AskNott](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/AskNott)\ **Post date:** [May 22, 2006, 4:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-the-mt-soledad-cross-stay-or-go/357579/44 "2006-05-22T16:25:42Z")
I have perused the Wiki article twice, now. It speaks of several decisions to sell the thing to non-government non-profits, and back to various pieces of the government. I’m still puzzled over who owns the thing now. Either way, it should be an open and shut case. If the government owns it, the cross should come down like Saddam’s statue. If it doesn’t belong to the government, it’s none of their business, and it can stay as long as the owner likes it. ---
**Author:** ![Sal\_Ammoniac](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/8dc957/32.png) [@Sal\_Ammoniac](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sal_Ammoniac)\ **Post date:** [May 22, 2006, 5:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-the-mt-soledad-cross-stay-or-go/357579/45 "2006-05-22T17:39:15Z")
[QUOTE=Revtim] I’m for a very strong SOCAS, and I would prefer the cross to go. But the hassle doesn’t seem worth it. I’d let this one slide, unless someone comes up with an elegant solution. [/QUOTE] Take the arms off it and call it a lingam. ---
**Author:** ![Dob](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/b2d939/32.png) [@Dob](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Dob)\ **Post date:** [May 22, 2006, 5:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-the-mt-soledad-cross-stay-or-go/357579/46 "2006-05-22T17:55:05Z")
The Constitution is clear: “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion” So how is leaving a cross up on a hillside in violation of the Establishment clause? Is there something next to it like a sign that says “Christianity rocks! Others suck!” How we all got from “Congress shall make no law…” to “the government better not even acknowledge religion exists” is beyond me. I will have a problem with this cross when the government tells me I have to bow to it, and say a prayer when I see it. Until then, who gives a shit? ---
**Author:** ![Der\_Trihs](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/der_trihs/32/233_2.png) [@Der\_Trihs](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Der_Trihs)\ **Post date:** [May 22, 2006, 6:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-the-mt-soledad-cross-stay-or-go/357579/47 "2006-05-22T18:45:21Z")
[QUOTE=Dob] The Constitution is clear: “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion” So how is leaving a cross up on a hillside in violation of the Establishment clause? Is there something next to it like a sign that says “Christianity rocks! Others suck!” [/QUOTE] Why do you think there’s a cross, and only a cross ? Besides which, Christianity is based around the belief that is is the only true religion, and all others are false gods. Any Christian symbol carries the message of intolerance. How would you feel if it was a gigantic swastika instead ? And no, given the bloodthirstyness of Christianity throughout history and it’s influence over the Nazis, I don’t think that’s at all unfair a comparison. ---
**Author:** ![tomndebb](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/b9e5f3/32.png) [@tomndebb](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tomndebb)\ **Post date:** [May 22, 2006, 6:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-the-mt-soledad-cross-stay-or-go/357579/48 "2006-05-22T18:55:50Z")
[QUOTE=Der Trihs] If they make two rulings that contradict without resolving that contradiction, will your head catch on fire like an old Star Trek android ? [/QUOTE] If you posted to a discussion of religion without being rude to other posters, would your head catch fire and explode? Stick to the discussion and leave the personal remarks out of it. ---
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [May 22, 2006, 7:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-the-mt-soledad-cross-stay-or-go/357579/49 "2006-05-22T19:12:17Z")
[QUOTE=Dob] The Constitution is clear: “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion” So how is leaving a cross up on a hillside in violation of the Establishment clause? Is there something next to it like a sign that says “Christianity rocks! Others suck!” [/quote] Read the long history of jurisprudence on the subject. But be prepared for many instances of eyes glossing over. In a nutshell, though, the government isn’t supposed to single out any one religion over and above the others. Except when the SCOTUS says it’s OK to do so. 🙂 It does seem that the SCOTUS tends to respect long standing traditions that aren’t overly coercive, but it’s really hard to tell how the decisions are going to come down. > [@](#): > > How we all got from “Congress shall make no law…” to “the government better not even acknowledge religion exists” is beyond me. Well, we haven’t quite gotten there yet, so I think that’s a strawman (except wrt several posters here who think exactly that). ---
**Author:** ![Hostile\_Dialect](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/e495f1/32.png) [@Hostile\_Dialect](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Hostile_Dialect)\ **Post date:** [May 22, 2006, 7:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-the-mt-soledad-cross-stay-or-go/357579/50 "2006-05-22T19:14:31Z")
> [@John Mace](#): > > If we, as a people, decide we no longer want the Supremes to be quite so supreme, we can offload that authority onto someone else or some other institution. But how would Diana Ross feel? > [@AskNott](#): > > If it doesn’t belong to the government, it’s none of their business, and it can stay as long as the owner likes it. Even considering that it dominates the landscape for miles? That seems like a lot of power to give a private religious organization. It’s quite an intimidating statue. I don’t know if you’ve ever been there or near it, but you can see it clearly all the way up the hill and it towers over the surrounding neighborhood like a ginormous Big Brother Is Watching poster. ---
**Author:** ![Hostile\_Dialect](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/e495f1/32.png) [@Hostile\_Dialect](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Hostile_Dialect)\ **Post date:** [May 22, 2006, 7:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-the-mt-soledad-cross-stay-or-go/357579/51 "2006-05-22T19:17:52Z")
> [@Dob](#): > > The Constitution is clear: > > “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion” > > So how is leaving a cross up on a hillside in violation of the Establishment clause? Is there something next to it like a sign that says “Christianity rocks! Others suck!” > > How we all got from “Congress shall make no law…” to “the government better not even acknowledge religion exists” is beyond me. > > I will have a problem with this cross when the government tells me I have to bow to it, and say a prayer when I see it. Until then, who gives a shit? It’s a big frickin’ establishment of Christianity towering over a densely populated piece of the nation’s 6th (or 7th or 8th, don’t remember) largest metro area. To borrow your analogy, it’s not a sign that says “Some people like this God and feel that he’s a nice guy, and that’s kind of cool”. No, it’s a BIG FRICKING STATUE that looms over everything around it. I live here, dude, and I can tell you it’s intimidating and every time I see it I’m reminded of how much power Christian fantasy has over my government. ---
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [May 22, 2006, 7:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-the-mt-soledad-cross-stay-or-go/357579/52 "2006-05-22T19:20:22Z")
[QUOTE=fetus] Even considering that it dominates the landscape for miles? That seems like a lot of power to give a private religious organization. It’s quite an intimidating statue. I don’t know if you’ve ever been there or near it, but you can see it clearly all the way up the hill and it towers over the surrounding neighborhood like a ginormous Big Brother Is Watching poster. [/QUOTE] That sounds like a description of many churches. If it meets the building codes, and is on private land, I don’t see how the court could possibly disallow it. Don’t forget that that the 1st amendment has two clauses wrt religion (my emphasis): > [@](#): > > Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof ---
**Author:** ![Dob](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/b2d939/32.png) [@Dob](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Dob)\ **Post date:** [May 22, 2006, 7:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-the-mt-soledad-cross-stay-or-go/357579/53 "2006-05-22T19:36:43Z")
> [@](#): > > How would you feel if it was a gigantic swastika instead ? And no, given the bloodthirstyness of Christianity throughout history and it’s influence over the Nazis, I don’t think that’s at all unfair a comparison It is a horribly unfair and ignorant comparison, I wish I was shocked you made it. And if you need me to cite reasons why your ignorant making such a comparison, your to far gone for cites to convince you of anything. > [@](#): > > It’s a big frickin’ establishment of Christianity towering over a densely populated piece of the nation’s 6th (or 7th or 8th, don’t remember) largest metro area. So would it bother if you if the cross was 100 feet higher than it is now, but on private property? What does the size of it matter? The government is still not requiring you to bow to it, your not being arrested for bitching about it, hell you can drive by and scream “FUCK YOU” to it and I doubt anyone would even raise an eyebrow. How is this state sponsored religion? ---
**Author:** ![Hostile\_Dialect](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/e495f1/32.png) [@Hostile\_Dialect](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Hostile_Dialect)\ **Post date:** [May 22, 2006, 7:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-the-mt-soledad-cross-stay-or-go/357579/54 "2006-05-22T19:40:03Z")
> [@John Mace](#): > > That sounds like a description of many churches. If it meets the building codes, and is on private land, I don’t see how the court could possibly disallow it. Don’t forget that that the 1st amendment has two clauses wrt religion (my emphasis): Doesn’t sound like any church I can remember passing by any time in recent memory. I could be wrong; I don’t pay much attention to churches. Technically Congress can’t prohibit the exercise of free speech, but pragmatically sometimes it has to. It’d take a legal scholar to say definitively whether the second religion clause plays a part in it, I guess. I’m willing to believe you that there’s already precedent for towering religious symbol on private ground, but this cross–I’m not sure if you’re aware of this–is in the middle of a public park, and a fairly nice one at that. ---
**Author:** ![Hostile\_Dialect](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/e495f1/32.png) [@Hostile\_Dialect](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Hostile_Dialect)\ **Post date:** [May 22, 2006, 7:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-the-mt-soledad-cross-stay-or-go/357579/55 "2006-05-22T19:42:32Z")
> [@Dub](#): > > So would it bother if you if the cross was 100 feet higher than it is now, but on private property? What does the size of it matter? The government is still not requiring you to bow to it, your not being arrested for bitching about it, hell you can drive by and scream “FUCK YOU” to it and I doubt anyone would even raise an eyebrow. How is this state sponsored religion? Yes, it would bother me. I couldn’t tell you definitively whether that’s legally allowed, but it would bother me morally. It doesn’t matter what the government does or doesn’t require me to do when I see it. The walls of every business could be covered in “Big Brother Is Watching” posters with Bush’s face on them and I might not be required to respect the posters but it’d still be fucking creepy, disrespectful and evil. ---
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [May 22, 2006, 7:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-the-mt-soledad-cross-stay-or-go/357579/56 "2006-05-22T19:52:04Z")
[QUOTE=fetus] Doesn’t sound like any church I can remember passing by any time in recent memory. I could be wrong; I don’t pay much attention to churches. [/quote] You clearly have never been to Salt Lake City, or driven the Washington beltway on the Maryland side, or driven I84 thru Connecticut.. > [@](#): > > Technically Congress can’t prohibit the exercise of free speech, but pragmatically sometimes it has to. It’d take a legal scholar to say definitively whether the second religion clause plays a part in it, I guess. I’m willing to believe you that there’s already precedent for towering religious symbol on private ground, but this cross–I’m not sure if you’re aware of this–is in the middle of a public park, and a fairly nice one at that. Well, let’s be clear what we’re talking about. You said that even if it was on private property you think it’s too big. My point is that that’s a building code issue, not a content issue. But if you think you can find a SCOTUS precedent covering that situation, I’d be eager to see it. If it’s on public property, that is different. But I think the SCOTUS has tended to look at these older, “historic” monuments a bit differently than if something were just thrown up today. Read the recent decision in [Van Orden v. Perry](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Van_Orden_v._Perry) to get some context. ---
**Author:** ![Hostile\_Dialect](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/e495f1/32.png) [@Hostile\_Dialect](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Hostile_Dialect)\ **Post date:** [May 22, 2006, 7:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-the-mt-soledad-cross-stay-or-go/357579/57 "2006-05-22T19:57:31Z")
> [@John Mace](#): > > You clearly have never been to Salt Lake City, or driven the Washington beltway on the Maryland side, or driven I84 thru Connecticut.. 1. The closest I’ve been is St. George. 2. I lived in DC suburbs on the Maryland side from birth until age 11. I couldn’t have cared less at the time. 3. I’ve never been in Connecticut. I believe you that there are crosses that big on private property, although I wouldn’t be comfortable driving by them. If I had the power to controll all nine justices’ minds I would make it illegal, but it’s nowhere near as big a deal as crosses on public property and I don’t pretend to be well versed enough in the law to touch it. Just to clarify, if everybody on all sides called me this afternoon and asked me to make the definitive ruling, I would have the thing completely destroyed or shipped to the Vatican. But I would settle for moving it to a private church in the area. Its height bothers me, but its position on the mountaintop bothers me more because of the symbolism and the reality that it really does loom over the entire area in a way that it otherwise couldn’t. ---
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [May 22, 2006, 8:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-the-mt-soledad-cross-stay-or-go/357579/58 "2006-05-22T20:24:38Z")
[QUOTE=fetus] I believe you that there are crosses that big on private property, although I wouldn’t be comfortable driving by them. If I had the power to controll all nine justices’ minds I would make it illegal, but it’s nowhere near as big a deal as crosses on public property and I don’t pretend to be well versed enough in the law to touch it. [/quote] What kind of an argument is that? You want the cross removed because you don’t like it? So what? Give us a legal basis or something! I just don’t understand what point you’re trying to make. > [@](#): > > Just to clarify, if everybody on all sides called me this afternoon and asked me to make the definitive ruling, I would have the thing completely destroyed or shipped to the Vatican. But I would settle for moving it to a private church in the area. Its height bothers me, but its position on the mountaintop bothers me more because of the symbolism and the reality that it really does loom over the entire area in a way that it otherwise couldn’t. Again, what legal argument are you using to justify that position? You seem to be thinking it should be removed even if it’s on private propoert (per your post #50). I don’t know how that legal argument could be made. Do you? ---
**Author:** ![OneCentStamp](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/o/13edae/32.png) [@OneCentStamp](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/OneCentStamp)\ **Post date:** [May 22, 2006, 8:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-the-mt-soledad-cross-stay-or-go/357579/59 "2006-05-22T20:25:44Z")
[QUOTE=Measure for Measure] Can the Supremes make **typographical errors** (regarding Constitutional matters)? Or does their every utterance alter the (constitutional) fabric of space-time? What if they over-rule themselves? Oh, and where in the Constitution does it say that the Supremes are the ultimate arbitrator? (Ya, ya **Maybury vs. Madison** …) [/QUOTE] (bolding mine) You did this on purpose, of course, to show us just the kind of typographical error the SCOTUS might make, if they ever made them. 😉 ---
**Author:** ![Hostile\_Dialect](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/e495f1/32.png) [@Hostile\_Dialect](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Hostile_Dialect)\ **Post date:** [May 22, 2006, 8:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-the-mt-soledad-cross-stay-or-go/357579/60 "2006-05-22T20:45:36Z")
> [@John Mace](#): > > What kind of an argument is that? You want the cross removed because you don’t like it? So what? Give us a legal basis or something! I just don’t understand what point you’re trying to make. I want the cross off public property because I think its presence on public land is unconstitutional and–let’s be honest–I also don’t like it, but again I back that part up with the establishment clause. If I could have it my way, I would have the thing plain-out removed permanently and not displayed in the US–but I have no legal argument to back that up. I thought I was clear about that. Apparently not. > [@John Mace](#): > > I don’t know how that legal argument could be made. Do you? No. I told you that already. I don’t know how it can be made, and if it can’t that’s fine. Just get it off public property. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-the-mt-soledad-cross-stay-or-go/357579.md?page=2) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-the-mt-soledad-cross-stay-or-go/357579.md?page=4)