Go to BUILDING A NEW RELIGION FROM THE GROUND UP
- Add a comment
- Go to THE MOUNT SOLEDAD CROSS
so sweet
the two of you
posted by
Xeno-x
on July 3, 2006 at 7:43 AM
| link to this | reply
Gome, my apologies. I fear I was in a hurry and did not
double check my paraphrase. So sorry.
posted by
JanesOpinion
on July 2, 2006 at 7:05 PM
| link to this | reply
JanesOpinion - you are seriously misrepresenting what I said with your own
words.
".....the current anti-Christian sentiment....." . I have never ever said anything remotely close to this. I happen to believe that most of what you call "anti-Christian sentiment" is in the heads of those who just can't grasp that they are equal to all others . . .not more equal. I used the words "modern day religious sensibilities" and "today's religious sensibilities". If you are going to attempt to paraphrase something I have said, try to get at least the sentiment and meaning right . . . or please don't bother.
posted by
gomedome
on June 30, 2006 at 6:22 PM
| link to this | reply
if the cross is kept
then a Star of David os the same size
and a MoslemCrescent of the same size
and other religioius symbols of exactly the same size
and then some symbol for the nonreligious -- of exactly the same size because we wouldn't want any one religion dominating the others now would we?
or wouild we?
sorry -- as far as I'm concerned, either the cross goes, or we respect all religions and non religions equally.
personally I am fed with the tyranny of the small segment of Christians
posted by
Xeno-x
on June 30, 2006 at 2:38 PM
| link to this | reply
On this rare occasion, I actually agree with Gomedome.
Why subject, as he put it, the current anti-Christian sentiment to the people who lived (and died) 50 years ago? This is a memorial that was erected 50 years ago and I would venture to guess there was extremely minimal (if any) opposition then.
posted by
JanesOpinion
on June 30, 2006 at 2:34 PM
| link to this | reply
i guess what i'm looking at
is not the memorial itself --if you will notice by the photographs, though -- the cross itself stands alone -- the memorial would not really be taken away from by removal of the cross. I don't think many war memorials exhibit any religious symbol above others --
this is a photo of the veteran's cemetery here -- the tombstones are a basic rectangle -- the religious symbol is engraved at the top of the stone.
i just did a slight search of other war memorials -- i think the large cross as a centerpiece is somewhat unique to war memorials. possibly the city didn't have too many people of other religions or non-religion at the time.
where there is a large Jewish population, as in St. Louis, I have not noticed a specific religious symbol so prominently displayed as this one.
possibly some design in its place -- or maybe a building -- like a tent in resemblance -- that wouild somehow represent the people who served somehow.
posted by
Xeno-x
on June 30, 2006 at 1:46 PM
| link to this | reply
Xeno-x - I found the information that I was looking for
It was originally built and dedicated as a Korean war memorial in 1954. There have been attempts since 1991 to avoid the legislation that has asked for it's removal. In my mind all of the attempts, which have included transferring ownership etc., are immaterial to the basic premise of subjecting a religious symbol from a previous generation to today's religious sensibilities.
What of the Jewish soldiers or soldiers of other religions, who are commemorated by this cross? It is the right of their families and even their descendants to protest a commemoration that is clearly a religious symbol of one religion but is it the right of others to protest on any other grounds? I think not. There are a number of reasons I feel this way and they are not written in black and white. The very first argument is that the protest itself is taken out of historical context. This memorial was built and dedicated with all of the right intentions nearly 2 generations ago. There is also the contention that commemorating our fallen soldiers is sacred in itself and is a consideration above the religious sensibilities of today. Then we must ask ourselves if we want to open this can of worms. Are all religious symbols to be removed from all war memorials?
Ultimately we can only answer these questions if we consider who this memorial is for. It is in memory of young men that died over 50 years ago. It is the standards of their day in terms of what they were fighting for and their own religious sensibilities that should take precedence in the determination if this cross is appropriate.
I've always said that the protest against this memorial may be right on paper or in theory but it is inherently wrong to deny the fallen soldiers of previous generations a memorial that they themselves would have no problem with.
posted by
gomedome
on June 30, 2006 at 10:19 AM
| link to this | reply
I GUESS I'M LOST TOO
it's an item among local xtians is all I know. justi calls the 9th circuit court (?) there "evil" for ruling that it has to be removed.;
posted by
Xeno-x
on June 30, 2006 at 9:35 AM
| link to this | reply
Xeno-x - I'm a little lost on this one
Was this cross erected as a war memorial or was it deemed a war memorial in an attempt to evade the legislation that would have it removed?
posted by
gomedome
on June 30, 2006 at 8:54 AM
| link to this | reply