Another Case Of Eminent Domain Gone Wrong... For Religious Reasons
US House Votes to Seize San Diego Cross Property at Center of Court Dispute
The cross displayed at Mount Soledad in San Diego has become a clarion call for the Christian Right. The US House of Representatives has now made a grab for the property so that the venue for the legal battles surrounding the display of Christian dominance in our society can be given a better chance of success due to less stringent rules regarding the display. In a similar misuse of the eminent domain provisions of our governmental structure and powers, the House is proposing that we turn the property over to the fed.
However, this doesn't resolve the basic problem involved in the First Amendment's establishment clause (see previous posts on the issue). Instead of the fed taking the property and delaying the inevitable court battle through ineffective and costly legal maneuvers, the government entity owning the property on which the cross sits should sell just the property where the cross sits (maybe 10-20 square yards of land) to a religious group, grant them a permanent easement and right of way to provide maintenance and care for the land and cross, covenant in the deed a commitment to its upkeep and care, and then contract with the group for the actual maintenance of the grounds as part of their normal landscaping activities.
This has the elegance of making just the property where the cross occupies space private. There is no law that precludes the erection and maintenance of a religious symbol on private property. But, the folks on the Christian Right are more interested in a legal showdown that will establish a precedent that gives them a right to display their religious ideas within our government. While they claim that Christianity is under attack and that liberals want a government that endorses the "religion" of secular humanism (Ann Coulter's "godless religion"), the reality is that the agenda and ulterior motives of the Christian Right--according to their own statements--is to force their version of Christianity upon us all.
Again, I am a Christian. I believe in God and pray daily. But my understanding of God, Christianity and my role as an American citizen is quite different than the version of Christianity offered by those that constantly push for their religion to be elevated to a national standing.
On the other hand, I think Phillip Paulson's opposition to the cross is an asinine ultra-liberal demonstration of social idiocy.
The cross displayed at Mount Soledad in San Diego has become a clarion call for the Christian Right. The US House of Representatives has now made a grab for the property so that the venue for the legal battles surrounding the display of Christian dominance in our society can be given a better chance of success due to less stringent rules regarding the display. In a similar misuse of the eminent domain provisions of our governmental structure and powers, the House is proposing that we turn the property over to the fed.
However, this doesn't resolve the basic problem involved in the First Amendment's establishment clause (see previous posts on the issue). Instead of the fed taking the property and delaying the inevitable court battle through ineffective and costly legal maneuvers, the government entity owning the property on which the cross sits should sell just the property where the cross sits (maybe 10-20 square yards of land) to a religious group, grant them a permanent easement and right of way to provide maintenance and care for the land and cross, covenant in the deed a commitment to its upkeep and care, and then contract with the group for the actual maintenance of the grounds as part of their normal landscaping activities.
This has the elegance of making just the property where the cross occupies space private. There is no law that precludes the erection and maintenance of a religious symbol on private property. But, the folks on the Christian Right are more interested in a legal showdown that will establish a precedent that gives them a right to display their religious ideas within our government. While they claim that Christianity is under attack and that liberals want a government that endorses the "religion" of secular humanism (Ann Coulter's "godless religion"), the reality is that the agenda and ulterior motives of the Christian Right--according to their own statements--is to force their version of Christianity upon us all.
Again, I am a Christian. I believe in God and pray daily. But my understanding of God, Christianity and my role as an American citizen is quite different than the version of Christianity offered by those that constantly push for their religion to be elevated to a national standing.
On the other hand, I think Phillip Paulson's opposition to the cross is an asinine ultra-liberal demonstration of social idiocy.
The US House of Representatives on Wednesday approved a measure to seize land on Mount Soledad in San Diego to resolve a dispute over whether a 29-foot cross honoring Korean War veterans on the property is a government endorsement of religion under the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment. The House agreed to transfer the land to the Defense Department before an expected appeal to the US Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit this fall because federal law has been more permissive toward religious displays on public property than the California constitution. San Diego City Attorney Mike Aguirre said the House measure, if it becomes law, would merely set the stage for another court challenge because the federal government has no basis seize the city property.
Earlier this month, US Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy ordered the continuation of a temporary stay against the removal of the monumental cross pending the Ninth Circuit appeal. Kennedy issued the original stay after a district court ordered in May that the cross be removed by Aug. 2 and that the city be fined $5,000 a day if it was not, finding that the cross constitutes a state endorsement of religion. Philip Paulson, an atheist and Vietnam War veteran, has been challenging the cross for more than 16 years. AP has more. The San Diego Union-Tribune has local coverage.
posted by Jim Downey at 4:49 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home