Voters decide next week if the "City of Churches" should restore the cross to the Redlands seal.
When the American Civil Liberties Union threatened a costly lawsuit last year if the cross wasn't eliminated, officials decided the cross must be erased from the city logo. Many residents were outraged and voters will now decide Tuesday if the religious symbol will return.
If Measure Q wins, the ACLU will likely go to court.
"This is the first time this has happened, to my knowledge," said ACLU attorney Peter Eliasberg, who tracks crosses on seals statewide. He said it is "highly likely" a lawsuit would be filed against the city if it reinstates the cross.
"The cross is clearly unconstitutional," Eliasberg said. "It sends a message of favor for one religion over others."
Last year, the Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors voted to take a cross off the county's seal under threat of a lawsuit by the ACLU.
Scott Siegel, who led the drive to put Measure Q on Tuesday's ballot, resents that the ACLU forced the city into removing the cross from the city seal.
"What happens in this type of situation is that the ACLU threatens to sue, then the city capitulates on a cost basis, and the case is never decided on its legal merits," he said. "The ACLU is telling us that it's a foregone conclusion that we're going to lose if a suit is filed. That's just a ridiculous statement."
Once again....the Left is trying to force something down the people's throats because they know better....it doesn't matter if 90% of the people want something...the ACLU knows better than the stupid, average American. This happens in many aspects of life...it is nice to see people finally getting so pissed off at the Left that they are finally fighting back...it is time the majority have atleast a little say in this country.....
When did the small minority get all the power?
Posts
12 comments:
1) If the majority is supposed to get its say, Bush never would have won the first election.
2) The ACLU is always doing something stupid. Its what they do.
3) I dont see in that article anything about doing what people want, they are doing what they think is right.
1) That comment makes you look like an ass...there were hundreds of news organizations down there in Florida trying to figure out anyway for Gore to win...they might have found one way . That argument is a joke
2) Correct
3) no idea what you are talking about...the people are going to vote to get what they want.
Scorpion Says---
The majority did get its say- the competent majority- might I add, dud, because Bush did win- but again thanks for the comic relief- great to get a chuckle on Monday morning.
Hahahahaha, he LOST. He didnt win the popular(majority) vote.
I was refering to the ACLU. They dont care about what people want. Its in regards to what you said.
Scorpion says---
Never said the popular vote- did mention the competent voter,however, thanks again--
Saying Bush should have lost because of the popular vote is like saying that in the world series, the winning team should be the one that scored the most runs instead of the most games. That's not how the system works.
The ACLU in this case (and most others these days) is representing an idea known as the tyrany of the minority, where the majority is forced to bend to the will of an insignificantly small minority. Political correctness is the same thing: The most appealing synonym for totalitarianism.
In case you have forgotten your civics lessons, the point of the Bill of Rights is to protect the minority or the individual from the will of the majority.
so the majority can never have what they want?
What a silly response!
The majority usually gets what it wants. However, individuals have rights and civil liberties. When what the majority "wants" conflicts with those rights and civil liberties, judgements must be made by the courts as to whether the majority's will places an undue burden on the rights of the individual or minority. In many cases, the answer is not obvious so both sides must be represented to fairly present their case. Often, the individual does not have the means to hire expensive attorneys and so the ACLU provides representation. It's quite similar to the Thomas More Society which provides representation to individuals or groups on matters of religious freedom and expression.
No, "Majority Rules" does not work in America. If that was the case, Gore would be President, only men would be allowed to vote, blacks would be excluded from the military, interracial marriage would be illegal, and public school children would be coerced to pledge that they are "Under God."
Have any of you heard about the Catholic church filing a lawsuit against WalMart for not having the Merry Christmas greeting in their stores?
Now, there is one case, where I think lawsuits are being taken a bit too far.
First WalMart tries to please everyone, and keep themselves out of the proverbial 'hot liberal water' by using a generic greeting, instead of the Christmas greeting, then suddenly they're in trouble for even that.
Anymore this country is getting to a "damned if you do, and damned if you don't" environment......
I would like to hear some other takes on this one....Game?????
Wouldn't it make more sense just to let whoever owns the business decide what sort of philosophies and religious traditions they choose to observe? If the business owner is Jewish, he/she should have every right to have a Jewish theme in his/her stores. If the business owners are Catholic, they should have every right to have a Christian greeting in their stores.
Everyone who doesn't like the particular greeting, can just shut the hell up, grow up, and NOT shop there. No one should be FORCED to be 'polite' about other's religions in their OWN PROPERTIES. Think about the Constitution here...and the way the Founding Father's meant it to be.
After all, when we go to the trendy little shops in San Francisco's Chinatown....we don't INSIST, BY GOD!, that they hang up greetings celebrating our religions. Part of the draw to these trendy places, is that by and large the culture of these groups is preserved. The same should hold true for every citizen...whether they are from European descent or not. Somehow, things have been so twisted around in this country, so that ONLY WASP's, or White Catholics are expected, no it is DEMANDED of them to include all other cultures when they own businesses. Hey, to me that is prejudice. So DA WHITE MAN is primarily the victimized today.
I believe though, that the same should hold true for schools....if I choose not to send my children to government public schools, then I should receive some compensation...after all, school taxes for districts are very high in some places. So why should I be forced to pay taxes for a system I am not utilizing? If they deny me my right to so, by refusing to compensate me, by means of not charging me the taxes, doesn't that implicate a bias toward my religious culture? Of course it does....after all Hispanics have demanded and won the right to have bilingual teachers in many areas....all at the taxpayers EXTRA expense! So why do I have to pay for the government's cultural sensitivty BS for them, and not vice versa?
The obvious reason is that many people would choose to send their children elsewhere, to an environment that is more sensitive to their religious culture...and the government would lose money. Sorry, NO EXCUSE! It is still violating my rights. If you are 'sensitive' to one ethnic background and not another, then that is DISCRIMINATION.
Of course many minorities don't want to give up the $$ coming into their communities from the white folks either. Then they try to say it is US who are prejudice?! That's hypocrisy. That's a liberal for you.
And in matters such as symbols/logos on flags, ETC., if the founders of that community had historical significance in developing the area, respect should be shown to those pioneers by celebrating their bravery through preserving their heritage, through symbols/logos. Remember the Western states were not exactly easy places to establish communities way back when.
Post a Comment