HandmaidenOfGod said:
At the risk of being stoned, I must say that for a Federally funded memorial, a cross is an inapropriate memorial for War Veterans.
Jews and non-Christians fought side by side with Christians in the Korean war. Should not their beliefs be honored?
It would be one thing if the Memorial included a cross, star of David, Islamic Crescent, etc., but to exclude the Memorial to only Christian veterans who died for their country is wrong.
The seperation of Church and state means that the same freedom we are given to attend Divine Liturgy every week and wear a St. Andrew's cross is the same freedom that allows people to sleep in on Sunday, or go to a Shabbot service on Friday.
A cross as the only symbol for a Federally funded War Memorial is wrong and insensitive to the soldier's who died who did NOT share the same beliefs as us, but died to preserve our right to practice said beliefs.
If this was a war memorial on private Church property that was funded by a private religious group, that would be one thing. But this is taxpayer dollars we're talking about. That means the Jewish, Muslim, and Atheist taxpayers of San Diego had to pay to put a cross up. That's wrong.
Stone me if you want, but that's how I feel.
~Maureen
Yes, there is a lot of logic and there is a good point of view to understand mentalities, or better said new trends in mentality in the USA. IMHO it is too formalistic.
I would understand if the suer was a relative of somebody comemorated, but although it still can be, that was a general comemorative monument. Theer would be something else if a cross would have been put at the individual grave of a Jew or Muslim.
From an other point of view, this is history I do not se a reason to change old monuments. Only the communists did it. From the same point of view, every other simmilar monument must to be modified like this one and one can go far back applying this new "finding".
The fact is that the Atheists do not have any symbol and if they would for instance add Jewish and Muslim symbolsor simmilar, the atheists would still continue to feel offended and ask the removal. And when a neutral monument would be erected, the Christians or others could fel offended and under this rationing, there would have to be defined symbols that would be accepted by everybody ......
It is ridiculous, becuase in a post-communist country like Romania, even most of the communists (except those in official monuments, but these are very few) have crosses at their graves in public graveyards. I saw only once in my life-time a pole with a star at a grave in a cemetery..
As it was already mentioned why not deny San or Saint in names of towns, why not forbid the public use of the word Christmas etc etc? They can even start to ask to be permitted polygamy. Few people atheists included understand that our nowdays morality was shaped by the Christian Faith with all its roots.
By the way: I just read that Tom Cruise is threathened to loose his American citizenship. The reason is not important here, but the way: there is a law of 1843 that if 50000 sign a petition requiring the withdrawal of the citizenship, it will be withdrawn.... I do not think that it would be difficult to find 50000 Christians in the whole USA to ask this for the suer and for the ruling judge... The Cross is really above-denominational....
But this is your yard, you guys in the USA, I am in Europe...
