Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
this ones interesting, they should of argued that if the cross is ordered to be taken down in its explained objection, the judgement could not be kept from attaching an obligatory removal in the name of the city, Los Angeles , city of angels. ( ha ha.
The judicial system only rules on the matter before them. The name of the city, Los Angeles, was not being heard before the court. If you live there and want to try, go for it. This ruling was about the Easter cross of Mount Soledad.
The judicial system only rules on the matter before them.
The name of the city, Los Angeles, was not being heard before the court. If you live there and want to try, go for it. This ruling was about the Easter cross of Mount Soledad.
Did you not realize that judges rule on the cases before them? A judge can not take a case and make a ruling on a completely different matter. That is the way the system is supposed to work.
Did you not realize that judges rule on the cases before them? A judge can not take a case and make a ruling on a completely different matter. That is the way the system is supposed to work.
your right its not LA its La Jolla , I thought the article said LA.
so these guys go to war fight for freedom, have an honorable burial location for decades, and some group comes in who would not be family or relative complaining about the statue, and a judge says hey take it down.
Wow, what business is it of others not related to family ? All its saying is the accommodating area for the honor of hero's is begrudged -not given with both hands , but one tied behind the back with terms and conditions.
Last edited by alexcanter; 12-16-2013 at 12:46 PM..
your right its not LA its La Jolla , I thought the article said LA.
so these guys go to war fight for freedom, have an honorable burial location for decades, and some group comes in who would not be family or relative complaining about the statue, and a judge says hey take it down.
Wow, what business is it of others not related to family ? All its saying is the accommodating area for the honor of hero's is begrudged -not given with both hands , but one tied behind the back with terms and conditions.
This would be outright theft. Theft because the gesture from the outset did not ALLOW any of family or other to understand a subjectivity to these degrading terms.
Cross theft. Possession equals ownership is a very easy thing to argue. All you guys can do is sue, for the narrow self absorbed begrudged cost in dollars for the cost of the statue. The item has a value , that means $...It does not belong to the general public once given, unless the general public or group wants to buy it back and Im sure family members would not even honor an answer. So...it may not have a value related to some but that has nothing to do with the material value in the statue itself as a spirited remembrance to all in memory esp family who lost loved ones.
Except for the fact that the cross was known as the Easter cross, and had not marker showing anything to do with war veterans, or even has a single veterans day or memorial day event UNTIL the 1989 lawsuit came up. THEN they put up a plaque. They also have Easter services there every year since it was built, but only started any type of memorial day event to cover their butts when threatened with a law suit.
The case has been decided, and the cross will be removed. There is no cost of statue involved. The cross is on state property, so yes it does belong to the general population. You might want to review the case.
A cross on state property, belongs to the state.
The cross was dedicated on Easter Sunday to "our Lord and savior Jesus Christ"
There was nothing even mentioning war memorial or veterans until 1989 After a lawsuit was brought.
It wasn't until the year 2000 that the war memorial wall was started.
Except for the fact that the cross was known as the Easter cross, and had not marker showing anything to do with war veterans, or even has a single veterans day or memorial day event UNTIL the 1989 lawsuit came up. THEN they put up a plaque. They also have Easter services there every year since it was built, but only started any type of memorial day event to cover their butts when threatened with a law suit.
The case has been decided, and the cross will be removed. There is no cost of statue involved. The cross is on state property, so yes it does belong to the general population. You might want to review the case.
A cross on state property, belongs to the state.
The cross was dedicated on Easter Sunday to "our Lord and savior Jesus Christ"
There was nothing even mentioning war memorial or veterans until 1989 After a lawsuit was brought.
It wasn't until the year 2000 that the war memorial wall was started.
If you want to honor ALL of the veterans, then honor all of them, not just the Christian ones.
I'm not reading your thing or arguing because this is no different then OJ. Not my fault atheists pic and choose what suites because there is no grounds for right vrs wrong. Don't even know what wrong is, wrong has to do with the nature of a contradiction.
Last edited by alexcanter; 12-16-2013 at 01:26 PM..
I'm not reading your thing or arguing because this is a fix no different then OJ. Not my fault atheists pic and choose what suites because there is no grounds for right vrs wrong.
That's awesome. If I were you I wouldn't want to read it either considering it points out all of the flaws in your argument. You haven't even shown a decent understanding of what is happening.
That's awesome. If I were you I wouldn't want to read it either considering it points out all of the flaws in your argument. You haven't even shown a decent understanding of what is happening.
I guess what OJ prob said to one of his new girlfriends.
I'm not reading your thing or arguing because this is a fix no different then OJ. Not my fault atheists pic and choose what suites because there is no grounds for right vrs wrong. Don't even know what wrong is, wrong has to do with the nature of a contradiction.
So you want to argue about a case that only exists in your head, rather than read the facts of an actual case.
Go argue with yourself then, because I am discussing the actual case, and the facts around that case.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
