The ACLU must be bored....

[MrBug708]

Ban the LA County Seal? (http://www.sacbee.com/state_wire/story/9419865p-10344176c.html)

LOS ANGELES (AP) - The American Civil Liberties Union is demanding the removal of a tiny cross that is among historic symbols on Los Angeles County's official seal.
The seal "prominently depicts a Latin cross, a sectarian religious symbol that represents the beliefs of one segment of the county's diverse population" and is an "impermissible endorsement of Christianity" by the county government, the ACLU Foundation of Southern California said in a letter to county officials this week.




"Under clearly established law, the seal is unconstitutional," the letter said, warning that refusal to remove the cross in a "reasonable time-frame" would cause the ACLU to seek a court order.
The cross was incorporated into the seal to represent the area's settlement by Spanish missionaries who, in the 1700s, founded two of California's famous missions in what is now Los Angeles County.

"The cross on our county seal reflects these historical facts," Supervisor Michael D. Antonovich wrote back to Ramona Ripston, executive director of the local ACLU organization. "It does not mean that we are all Roman Catholics or that everyone who resides in our county is a Christian - it only reflects our historical roots."

Supervisor Don Knabe on Tuesday introduced a motion for a vote June 1 that would direct the county counsel to "begin preparations to protect and defend the county seal if such frivolous litigation is brought against the county."

The motion requires approval by three of the five members of the Board of Supervisors to pass.

The cross is in a panel with two stars above a depiction of the Hollywood Bowl. The Bowl was intended as a symbol of culture while one star represents film and the other television.

The panel is one of six around the seal's main figure, Pomona, a Roman goddess of fruits and trees representing the region's agriculture. Pomona is also the name of one of the county's earliest cities.

County spokeswoman Judy Hammond said the seal is in many of the county's 5,000 buildings, as well as on stationery, business cards, flags and many other places. Just last summer the county made a special effort to make sure the seal was widely displayed, and there was no way to put a price tag on changing it, she said.

The seal has been in use for nearly a half-century but controversy arose after the ACLU got the city of Redlands to remove a cross from its seal when two citizens there complained in February.

People read about the Redlands case and then called the ACLU about the Los Angeles County seal, said Ben Wizner, an ACLU attorney.

Wizner said the ACLU was mindful of budget pressures facing the county and was willing to be flexible about a transition period for removal of the cross from the seal. Citing precedents, Wizner said there could be no serious dispute about whether or not the seal was legal.

The ACLU did not object to the Roman goddess or the name Los Angeles, which means "the angels." Wizner said that to do so would push the issue to "extreme limits."

The issue is what a reasonable person looking at the seal would understand it to represent, he said.

The seal was designed by the late Supervisor Kenneth Hahn, father of Los Angeles Mayor James K. Hahn. Drawn by artist Millard Sheets, it was adopted by the Board of Supervisors on March 1, 1957.

The full figure of Pomona stands in the center of the seal in front of the San Gabriel Mountains, with wavy blue lines of the Pacific at her feet. She holds a sheaf of grain, an orange, a lemon, an avocado and grapes.

The seal's other symbols are: a triangle and calipers to represent industry - aerospace in particular; oil derricks; the Spanish galleon San Salvador that was sailed into San Pedro Harbor in 1542 by the explorer Juan Rodriguez Cabrillo; and a tuna and a champion cow named Pearlette, for the once-huge fishing and dairy industries.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

I'm pretty sure that we'll be changing the name Las Cruces to something else because it means "The Cross". There isn't anything more important than having the seal change because it talks about the missions in California?

This is getting out of hand

[korme]

get off the aclu's nuts

[MrBug708]

They first....

[korme]

well played mrbug well played

[MrBug708]

My parents are of the Pat Robertson following so I get a lot of "right wing" information. A lot of it is stuff I dont have as extreme views and taking a bit far, but the ACLU might as well rename itself to the "Anti Christian Living Union" because that seems to be most of the dislike towards. Obviously it doesn't teach the universal tolerance that goes well in the world and some issues like prayer in school i tend to agree with. But the freaking Los Angeles Seal? In another story, there is a Cross that sits on a hill that someone built. While not as publicly popular in the media, the Cross has never been maintained by any government organization, it just sits on a hill in a park. I believe that city is just going to sell the land the cross is on to a private group, wherever the base happens to be. I doubt the ACLU wins the LA case because doing so would probably also call for the 4th grade learning of California history, which has roots in the Spanish Missions.

[FBPro]

ACLU=Morons

[jerem77]

So they don't have a problem with the Roman goddess, but they do with the Christian cross...

[FBPro]

So they don't have a problem with the Roman goddess, but they do with the Christian cross...


No doubt they are selective in who or what they go after.......if it's "Christian" it's a target.

[Sharpieman]

I doubt the ACLU wins the LA case because doing so would probably also call for the 4th grade learning of California history, which has roots in the Spanish Missions.
Just to inform you, I don't think the ACLU would have any problem with 4th grade children learning about the Spanish missions. Learning about missions isn't really pro-christian propaganda. The Missions in most cases were used to force natives into convertion. To over simplify it a bit, the Spanish would built forts and missions in CA and really the natives had a choice to either be imprisoned and/or killed OR stay at a Catholic mission. If the ACLU is anti-Christian, they wouldn't have a problem with that kind of history. Nor the colonization of Spanish settlers in California which is just another story in its own right.

[MrBug708]

Just to inform you, I don't think the ACLU would have any problem with 4th grade children learning about the Spanish missions. Learning about missions isn't really pro-christian propaganda. The Missions in most cases were used to force natives into convertion. To over simplify it a bit, the Spanish would built forts and missions in CA and really the natives had a choice to either be imprisoned and/or killed OR stay at a Catholic mission. If the ACLU is anti-Christian, they wouldn't have a problem with that kind of history. Nor the colonization of Spanish settlers in California which is just another story in its own right.

Well, I said it tongue-in-cheek, and I'm sure you reponse was also just a retort and not quite what you believe about California's history. These are good examples of why I dont think the Government should use religion as the basis of it's advancement and what the ACLU should be worried about.

[dawgfan]

I'm normally supportive of the ACLU and the causes they take up, but in this particular instance I'm having a hard time undertanding why they think this is enough of an issue to raise a stink. Seems to me a cross as part of a city's seal, especially when it's one of many different elements that make up the whole of the seal is a trivial issue with respect to freedom of religion/seperation of church and state issues.

[MrBug708]

The response (http://www.the-signal.com/News/ViewStory.asp?storyID=4723)

“Your May 19th letter concerning Los Angeles County was right out of a George Orwell novel,” Antonovich told the ACLU in a statement Tuesday. “Your failure to understand the history and to rewrite it from the so-called political correctness follows the hate of past book burners.”

[sabotai]

but the ACLU might as well rename itself to the "Anti Christian Living Union" because that seems to be most of the dislike towards.

Total nonsense. The ACLU fights all the time for people's religious rights, including christians. Just because sometimes they get a little carried away with religion in government doesn't mean they're anti-christian.

[MrBug708]

Total nonsense. The ACLU fights all the time for people's religious rights, including christians. Just because sometimes they get a little carried away with religion in government doesn't mean they're anti-christian.

To far and to few between (http://www.aclu.org/StudentsRights/StudentsRights.cfm?ID=15680&c=159)

[sabotai]

Thanks for providing evidence that what I said was true. Wasn't that easy? :)

[MrBug708]

I don't live in Michigan.... :)

[albionmoonlight]

Now is a time when Civil Liberties and their protections are very, very important. People are scared (rightly so) of terrorism--and when people are scared, they tend to allow the state's police powers too wide a bearth.

The ACLU is in a position to help lead the fight against sacrificing freedom for the illusions of security.

However, going after stuff like this is just dumb. It opens them up to all sorts of valid criticism, like that espoused in this thread. A cross on a seal, while possibly technically wrong (I really don't know) is simply not worth fighing about--not right now.

[Schmidty]

The world hates us. I take that as a compliment.

[MrBug708]

I think in this case, it's more of a power thing anyways. Romona Ripston is kind of a loon. She happens to teach at UCLA as well, which gives me an outside vested interest as well. Not that I go there or anything though :)

[Dutch]

It's my understanding that the ACLU has been targetting smaller cities that cannot afford attorney's to battle in court. Los Angeles is a big one to take on.

I like what Bill O'Reilly (a staunch Catholic) said. "Perhaps the ACLU won't leave Los Angeles alone until it's called the City of Non-Denominational Persons". :)

[MrBug708]

You mean like the City of Redlands Dutch?

What makes it even worse off is that Mayor Hahn's father was one of the designers of the Seal.

[Sharpieman]

Well, I said it tongue-in-cheek, and I'm sure you reponse was also just a retort and not quite what you believe about California's history. These are good examples of why I dont think the Government should use religion as the basis of it's advancement and what the ACLU should be worried about.
I'm on the fence about the ACLU. They protect a lot of good people and a lot of good causes, but they also do a lot of things that I disagree with. I guess you have to ask yourself whether life would be better without the ACLU.

Kind of indirectly, the argument about the separation of church and state has been a hot button issue for many. People were outraged in South Carolina (?) when the 10 commandments were taken out of the federal courthouse. The irony of the whole issue is what strikes me the most. For example, if a country in the middle east claims its a democracy and values the separation of church and state, but then puts up the five pillars of Islam in a courthouse I bet many of us in the US would harshly criticize them. It's also interesting that we are trying to push Democracy on many Muslim nations that are and have been Islamic Theocracies, yet there are many Americans who believe that there should be some exceptions to the separation of church and state when it comes to Christianity. The whole idea of this is highly hypocritical.

[QuikSand]

Isn't it at least possible that the reason it seems like every time the ACLU is railing against some sort of church-and-state issue it's them "picking on Christians" is that the only religious symbols, iconography, and traditions that are in any meaningful way adopted into our government, culture, and public establishments are basically from Christian religions?

[Arles]

Isn't it at least possible that the reason it seems like every time the ACLU is railing against some sort of church-and-state issue it's them "picking on Christians" is that the only religious symbols, iconography, and traditions that are in any meaningful way adopted into our government, culture, and public establishments are basically from Christian religions?
That is a reasonable assertion given the high-level information. But, I would suggest reading both of these stories to get a better idea on why Christianity is treated differently by the ACLU. Essentially, in the first the ACLU is against a secular course on the Bible in Florida. Yet, two months later, they come out in support of a North Carolina mandated course where "incoming freshmen read portions of the Koran and commentary by a religious scholar".

http://www.miami.com/mld/miamiherald/news/local/3512992.htm?1c

http://www.opinionjournal.com/editorial/feature.html?id=110002123

[clintl]

The link to the Miami Herald article takes you to a registration page, so I didn't read that (I refuse to register to every single newspaper that requires it). So I can't comment on the circumstances. Personally, I think the public school system would benefit from a secular study of all the major religions (and some of the minor ones, too), but my guess is that would outrage the fundamentalist Christians off in a big way.

However, I don't think that the UNC assignment is something that the ACLU would care about, since it's purpose is obviously secular, and students have an alternative if they do object. In the cases the ACLU gets involved in, there is no opt-out alternative. I think the LA Seal issue here is so trivial that the ACLU would be better off dropping it, but it's not like there's alternative official seal for those that object.

[Easy Mac]

The Establishemnt clause does not usually apply to colleges and universities. They're areas of higher learning and they aren't held to the same standards.

[Dutch]

I don't mind following the communist manifesto regarding atheism as I am not big into Christianity.

However, having said that, I am aware that a vast majority of Americans are Christians, our history is intertwined with Christianity, and our nation was founded by Christians. And we turned out pretty good and managed to take good care of those who aren't Christians along the way.

What's the rush to fight the Catholic and Protestant Churches now? My best guess is it's because the ACLU is running out of "more important" issues to deal with. Which is a good thing, but leave our history alone.

[MrBug708]

Kind of indirectly, the argument about the separation of church and state has been a hot button issue for many. People were outraged in South Carolina (?) when the 10 commandments were taken out of the federal courthouse. The irony of the whole issue is what strikes me the most. For example, if a country in the middle east claims its a democracy and values the separation of church and state, but then puts up the five pillars of Islam in a courthouse I bet many of us in the US would harshly criticize them. It's also interesting that we are trying to push Democracy on many Muslim nations that are and have been Islamic Theocracies, yet there are many Americans who believe that there should be some exceptions to the separation of church and state when it comes to Christianity. The whole idea of this is highly hypocritical.


Not so much as most people want a freedom OF religion, not the the freedome FROM religion that the ACLU seems to think it should be.

[IMetTrentGreen]

you are clueless

[clintl]

Not so much as most people want a freedom OF religion, not the the freedome FROM religion that the ACLU seems to think it should be.

There is no difference between the two. Once you let government favor one religion over another, no religions are safe from persecution.

[MrBug708]

you are clueless

Better clueless then a dumbass


There is no difference between the two. Once you let government favor one religion over another, no religions are safe from persecution.

There is a big difference actually. You have Catholicism, Mormonism, the Jewish faith, and Christianity all with power in different key spots in this country. Which does everyone favor?

[yabanci]

Not so much as most people want a freedom OF religion, not the the freedome FROM religion that the ACLU seems to think it should be.

I'd like to see a city put a star and crecent on its seal and then post a monument in the courthouse or city hall saying, "There is no God but Allah and Muhammed is his prophet." Then you would see these same people who complain now screaming and crying for what this person calls "freedome [sic] FROM religion."

[MrBug708]

I'd like to see a city put a star and crecent on its seal and then post a monument in the courthouse or city hall saying, "There is no God but Allah and Muhammed is his prophet." Then you would see these same people who complain now screaming and crying for what this person calls "freedome [sic] FROM religion."

I must have missed the relevant part of a cities history where Islam was the prevelant ideal when the city was founded.....

[Dutch]

I'd like to see a city put a star and crecent on its seal and then post a monument in the courthouse or city hall saying, "There is no God but Allah and Muhammed is his prophet." Then you would see these same people who complain now screaming and crying for what this person calls "freedome [sic] FROM religion."

If it's historically accurate or there is merit to it, why would we get upset at the truth?

[Axxon]

Better clueless then a dumbass



You know, you really should edit this because, you know, it doesn't exactly help your point very much. :)

[dawgfan]

you are clueless

Let me guess - you've seen the ACLU in person and think it's vastly overhyped and will be a bust at the next level?

[Sharpieman]

However, having said that, I am aware that a vast majority of Americans are Christians, our history is intertwined with Christianity, and our nation was founded by Christians.
The "fact" that our nation was founded by Christians is a very common misconception. In fact it is very debatable whether some of our founding fathers were Christians. Lots of evidence points to some being Deists. Such as Thomas Jefferson.

[MrBug708]

You know, you really should edit this because, you know, it doesn't exactly help your point very much. :)

Ironic isn't it? :D

[MrBug708]

The "fact" that our nation was founded by Christians is a very common misconception. In fact it is very debatable whether some of our founding fathers were Christians. Lots of evidence points to some being Deists. Such as Thomas Jefferson.

Being a Deist doesnt mean you don't have roots in Christianity. And the term "Founding Father" isn't limited just to those who wrote the Constitution

[Easy Mac]

so the Indians then :)

Everyone, lets go smoke some peyote

[Cuckoo]

Let me guess - you've seen the ACLU in person and think it's vastly overhyped and will be a bust at the next level?


LOL - Just wanted you to know that I got a kick out of this. :D

[Sharpieman]

Being a Deist doesnt mean you don't have roots in Christianity. And the term "Founding Father" isn't limited just to those who wrote the Constitution
The fact that I'm trying to show is that our constitution, which is the foundation of our republic, is not really rooted in Christianity, but its origins have many different sources. Believe it or not, a famous French writer, Montesquieu, was a huge source of inspiration for many of our early leaders, such as Thomas Jefferson, John Adams, James Madison and others. The separation of church and state is an essential principle in this country.

[sabotai]

Not so much as most people want a freedom OF religion, not the the freedome FROM religion

Can anyone explain what this even means? So far, the only person who has told me (and I've asked this before) was Bubba, and all I got was some nonsense ranting. So far, all it seems like is a simple cliche that people pull out when they don't have anything meaningful to say or can't come up with a valid counter argument.

[Sharpieman]

Maybe its a term for atheists. They really don't want to see any kind of religious symbols or observe any religious holiday's. Also people who believe that the separation of church and state should be taken to the extreme, so that no religion is even recognized.

[clintl]

I think it essentially means that people don't have the right not to be force-fed fundamentalist Christian doctrine by the government. They only have the right not to be force-fed any other religion by the government.

Either that, or it is an argument that the right to an atheist or agnostic is not protected by the First Amendment.

[Maple Leafs]

So far, the only person who has told me was Bubba, and all I got was some nonsense ranting.You say this as if it's vaguely surprising.

[MrBug708]

The fact that I'm trying to show is that our constitution, which is the foundation of our republic, is not really rooted in Christianity, but its origins have many different sources. Believe it or not, a famous French writer, Montesquieu, was a huge source of inspiration for many of our early leaders, such as Thomas Jefferson, John Adams, James Madison and others. The separation of church and state is an essential principle in this country.

And Hobbs, and Locke, and Robbspiere, and Luther, and a bunch of others.

Well, actually not all of those because some happened during the french revolution.

[MrBug708]

Can anyone explain what this even means? So far, the only person who has told me (and I've asked this before) was Bubba, and all I got was some nonsense ranting. So far, all it seems like is a simple cliche that people pull out when they don't have anything meaningful to say or can't come up with a valid counter argument.

Wow, with a repsonse like that, why bother?

[MrBug708]

Maybe its a term for atheists. They really don't want to see any kind of religious symbols or observe any religious holiday's. Also people who believe that the separation of church and state should be taken to the extreme, so that no religion is even recognized.

A lot of the "Founding Fathers" had roots into the Enlightenment, which isn't to say that a few readers of free thinkers meant they were suddenly deists

[MrBug708]

A simple websearch

http://ffrf.org/index.php

[sabotai]

Wow, with a repsonse like that, why bother?

Well, I asked you what it meant...so why bother? Well because I want to know what you mean by it.

[MrBug708]

But why the insinuation that I'd ccome up with something like Bubba?

[sabotai]

If you took it that way, it's not the way I meant it. All I was saying was that I've asked many people what it meant, and Bubba's ranting is all I received. I didn't mean to insinuate that you all you would give would be that same nonsense he did. (If I did think that, I would not have bothered asking. :) )