ACLU wants NOLA parish to forget Katrina memorial cross

New Posts

Dark Knight

Dark Knight

Well-Known Member
Joined
Sep 3, 2004
Messages
21,649
Reaction score
82
Alarmed by newspaper reports that a hurricane memorial in St. Bernard Parish will feature a cross bearing a likeness of the face of Jesus, the American Civil Liberties Union of Louisiana is reminding parish officials of the Constitution's separation of church and state.

Never one to back down, Parish President Henry "Junior" Rodriguez has a simple reply: "They can kiss my *advertiser censored*."

In a July 28 letter to Rodriguez and other officials, Louisiana ACLU Executive Director Joe Cook said that the government promotion of a patently religious symbol on a public waterway is a violation of the Constitution's First Amendment, which prohibits government from advancing a religion.

spacer.gif

Rodriguez did not say whether he has responded to Cook's letter, but in an interview, he said he sees nothing improper about the memorial, which will be mounted near the shoreline of the Mississippi River-Gulf Outlet at Shell Beach. The cross and accompanying monument listing the names of the 129 parish residents who died in Hurricane Katrina are earmarked for what the parish says is private land and are being financed with donations, Rodriguez said.

http://www.nola.com/news/t-p/metro/index.ssf?/base/news-16/1154844074102520.xml&coll=1

Doesn't the ACLU have anything better to do? :doh:
 
Okay, I am not a mainstream religion kind of gal and I don't even see what the big deal is. It's private land done with private funds. What right does the ACLU have to even....I mean....I have no words. I think they may have overstepped their bounds on this one.
 
Never one to back down, Parish President Henry "Junior" Rodriguez has a simple reply: "They can kiss my *advertiser censored*."


clap.gif
clap.gif
clap.gif
clap.gif
clap.gif
clap.gif
 
I like that guy.......... ACLU:croc: Parish President Henry "Junior" Rodriguez
 
BhamMama said:
Never one to back down, Parish President Henry "Junior" Rodriguez has a simple reply: "They can kiss my *advertiser censored*."


http://www.websleuths.com/forums/images/smilies/clap.gif[url="http://www.websleuths.com/forums/images/smilies/clap.gif"]http://www.websleuths.com/forums/images/smilies/clap.gifhttp://www.websleuths.com/forums/images/smilies/clap.gifhttp://www.websleuths.com/forums/images/smilies/clap.gifhttp://www.websleuths.com/forums/images/smilies/clap.gifhttp://www.websleuths.com/forums/images/smilies/clap.gif[/url]
Click to expand...
That's great! :D

Next thing you know, the ACLU will be trying to get In God We Trust taken off of our money...There is a lot of good the ACLU could and can do in the wolrd and they waste their time on something like THIS...ridiculous.
 
windovervocalcords said:
ACLU always the villain except when defending your own civil liberties.
Click to expand...
Gee, there's a surprise opinion from you, lol. :crazy: So what does that have to do with this specific case? They have stepped over the line and are taking AWAY some people's civil liberties. It's on private property with private donations. They are going too far.
 
curious1 said:
I like that guy.......... ACLU:croc: Parish President Henry "Junior" Rodriguez
Click to expand...
LOL! I think "Junior" just became my favorite public figure, lol! :D I've read he is someone you DON'T want to mess with! I hope the ACLU does and gets their butts handed to them.
 
Dark Knight said:
Gee, there's a surprise opinion from you, lol. :crazy: So what does that have to do with this specific case? They have stepped over the line and are taking AWAY some people's civil liberties. It's on private property with private donations. They are going too far.
Click to expand...
I don't know DK but I am not surprised lol that you started the thread. How come you did not look into who asked ACLU to do this and why?

The American system of government is founded on two counterbalancing principles: that the majority of the people governs, through democratically elected representatives; and that the power even of a democratic majority must be limited, to ensure individual rights.
Majority power is limited by the Constitution's Bill of Rights, which consists of the original ten amendments ratified in 1791, plus the three post-Civil War amendments (the 13th, 14th and 15th) and the 19th Amendment (women's suffrage), adopted in 1920.

The mission of the ACLU is to preserve all of these protections and guarantees:
  • our First Amendment rights-freedom of speech, association and assembly. Freedom of the press, and freedom of religion supported by the strict separation of church and state.
  • Your right to equal protection under the law - equal treatment regardless of race, sex, religion or national origin.
  • Your right to due process - fair treatment by the government whenever the loss of your liberty or property is at stake.
  • Your right to privacy - freedom from unwarranted government intrusion into your personal and private affairs.
We work also to extend rights to segments of our population that have traditionally been denied their rights, including Native Americans and other people of color; lesbians, gay men, bisexuals and transgendered people; women; mental-health patients; prisoners; people with disabilities; and the poor.

http://www.aclu.org/about/index.htmlhe

The article is vague but mentions that the concern was that the government "endorsed" the memorial. (whatever that means)
 
windovervocalcords said:
ACLU always the villain except when defending your own civil liberties.
Click to expand...

I understand that. But what is wrong with a memorial naming your residents as lost in this terrible storm? I see roadside crosses daily (on public land) where someone has lost their life in an accident. I also see memorials on holidays where citizens have lost their lives in representation of our country.

As long as people are honering each other and respecting the value of human beings what could possibly be the problem?

We need to start showing a little more love and a lot less of upholding special interest groups. The chips will fall as they may and then the laws will follow.This is a democracy and until, if , and when the public decides to change, amend, or vote out, then the decisions will be forthcoming. Awareness is everything.Never take acts of human kindness and lump it with a group who has another agenda...just take human kindness and accept it.

Let us promulgate the future with acts of human kindness and respect.
 
concernedperson said:
I understand that. But what is wrong with a memorial naming your residents as lost in this terrible storm? I see roadside crosses daily (on public land) where someone has lost their life in an accident. I also see memorials on holidays where citizens have lost their lives in representation of our country.

As long as people are honering each other and respecting the value of human beings what could possibly be the problem?

We need to start showing a little more love and a lot less of upholding special interest groups. The chips will fall as they may and then the laws will follow.This is a democracy and until, if , and when the public decides to change, amend, or vote out, then the decisions will be forthcoming. Awareness is everything.Never take acts of human kindness and lump it with a group who has another agenda...just take human kindness and accept it.

Let us promulgate the future with acts of human kindness and respect.
Click to expand...
Everyone doesn't pray to a cross, and the government doesn't have the right to assume that because they like the cross as a religious symbol, as do I personally, that all of these 129 people did. The government has no right to impose religion as a memorial to people who may not have wanted a cross to memorialize their death.
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,207482,00.html

So I would think cp and dk that some do not feel the cross is a kind and respectful memorial to their loved ones.
 
windovervocalcords said:
Everyone doesn't pray to a cross, and the government doesn't have the right to assume that because they like the cross as a religious symbol, as do I personally, that all of these 129 people did. The government has no right to impose religion as a memorial to people who may not have wanted a cross to memorialize their death.
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,207482,00.html

So I would think cp and dk that some do not feel the cross is a kind and respectful memorial to their loved ones.
Click to expand...
Too bad since it is a private memorial. ACLU needs to mind their own business. Of course it faces a public waterway. Churches face public roads, should we force them to take down their crosses too? This is idiotic.
 
Dark Knight said:
Too bad since it is a private memorial. ACLU needs to mind their own business. Of course it faces a public waterway. Churches face public roads, should we force them to take down their crosses too? This is idiotic.
Click to expand...
Of course, you feel that way. That's fine.

There ought to be some kind of memorial. Period. If its on private land, I do not see how it is a constitutional crisis.

It is all context of course. I do not know the context. It is supposed to have an image of Jesus. Do you have any idea what the image looks like?

I really don't have a strong negative feeling for crosses. I do respect the ACLU. They have done wonderful work.
 
windovervocalcords said:
Everyone doesn't pray to a cross, and the government doesn't have the right to assume that because they like the cross as a religious symbol, as do I personally, that all of these 129 people did. The government has no right to impose religion as a memorial to people who may not have wanted a cross to memorialize their death.
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,207482,00.html

So I would think cp and dk that some do not feel the cross is a kind and respectful memorial to their loved ones.
Click to expand...

It is a universal acceptance of a particular incident. It is a way to memorialize without leaving behind the person that is gone.It doesn't mean the person is more christian and less jew or muslim. It means that someone recgnizes the lost.What else could we do? Put a Stop sign...Yield sign....PCrossing. Does that recognize the value of the person who is gone?

No, it doesn't. In the 30 second world of tv commercials and cell phones how do we acknowledge our loved ones? How does one let the public know that something happened here and someone is lost and missed? Sometimes people need a more public venue, especially in the case of missing people.
 
concernedperson said:
It is a universal acceptance of a particular incident. It is a way to memorialize without leaving behind the person that is gone.It doesn't mean the person is more christian and less jew or muslim. It means that someone recgnizes the lost.What else could we do? Put a Stop sign...Yield sign....PCrossing. Does that recognize the value of the person who is gone?

No, it doesn't. In the 30 second world of tv commercials and cell phones how do we acknowledge our loved ones? How does one let the public know that something happened here and someone is lost and missed? Sometimes people need a more public venue, especially in the case of missing people.
Click to expand...
When I see a cross on the highway with flowers I know someone has died and their loved ones miss them and I feel tender hearted.

When some extremely aggressive group angrily erects a 50 foot cross to assert their claim that the US IS a Christian nation I side with those who feel offended.

I have no idea about this NOLA cross other then two articles I have skimmed. There is always more to the story.

And who wants to make it a big political deal? If that's the ACLU for no other reason then the ACLU is in the wrong.

I don't think the facts are all there yet. But nonetheless we merrily carry on with opinions. That's what makes the forum interesting.
 
windovervocalcords said:
Of course, you feel that way. That's fine.

There ought to be some kind of memorial. Period. If its on private land, I do not see how it is a constitutional crisis.

It is all context of course. I do not know the context. It is supposed to have an image of Jesus. Do you have any idea what the image looks like?

I really don't have a strong negative feeling for crosses. I do respect the ACLU. They have done wonderful work.
Click to expand...
And that's why it's idiotic, lol, it's on private land with private funds. The city workers that are involved are not being paid and are working on their own time. I heard there was a Muslim Crescent put on the memorial to Flight 93 in Pennsylvania and that the ACLU never griped about that.
 
windovervocalcords said:
When I see a cross on the highway with flowers I know someone has died and their loved ones miss them and I feel tender hearted.

When some extremely aggressive group angrily erects a 50 foot cross to assert their claim that the US IS a Christian nation I side with those who feel offended.

I have no idea about this NOLA cross other then two articles I have skimmed. There is always more to the story.

And who wants to make it a big political deal? If that's the ACLU for no other reason then the ACLU is in the wrong.

I don't think the facts are all there yet. But nonetheless we merrily carry on with opinions. That's what makes the forum interesting.
Click to expand...
I think it shows the ACLU is on a crusade of it's own to remove any public trace of Christianity that it can.

For your other analogy, if someone did the same thing with a 50 foot Star of David or Crescent, I might be offended somewhat, but I wouldn't sure over it if it is on private land, lol.
 
Does anybody know if the ACLU just gets involved in these situations on their own, or does somebody have to make a complaint and ask them to take a particular case?
 
Reader said:
Does anybody know if the ACLU just gets involved in these situations on their own, or does somebody have to make a complaint and ask them to take a particular case?
Click to expand...
They certainly choose on their own when to get involved, but plenty of times they are solicited.
 
windovervocalcords said:
I do respect the ACLU. They have done wonderful work.
Click to expand...
I respect the ACLU as well and am grateful for their activism on a number of issues. But in this particular incident, I think they have picked a silly battle. Private property, private funds...much bigger fish to fry.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

DNASolves

Who is Escambia County John Doe (1989)?

Members online

... and 181 more.
Total: 4,937 (members: 182, guests: 4,755)

Online statistics

Members online
182
Guests online
4,755
Total visitors
4,937
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
592,362
Messages
17,968,098
Members
228,760
Latest member
Chelsea Briann
Back
Top