re: 4th Circuit says towering cross-shaped monument on public land is unconstitutional

Yeah, but it makes you guys look vindictive and stupid not to mention petty when you demand the removal of a cross dedicated to WWI soldiers that died

Hmm, what about freedom of Religion, I just don’t understand how the State and Religion can’t coexist? Stupid!! But I guess morality and the Globalists are enemies of each other.

quote:

---

Just stop asking, nay demanding, that my tax dollars pay for it.

---

What’s funny about this talking point from atheist/liberals is that you have no problem with or legal grounds to prevent the egregious abuses of tax dollars from local, state, and federal government. Yet you guys hang your hat on those soft targets like Christian symbols and claim the moral high ground.

The only thing worse than a fundy christian is a fundy atheist.

quote:

---

Why do atheists get so worked up about a God they supposedly don't believe in? Is it an insecurity type of thing?

---

alAthiests are the most proselytizing group of people on the planet. I've never met another group people who want to talk about religion more than atheists.

quote:

---

I wonder how long before they sue over the crosses at Arlington grave sites

---

The headstones are square, with a religious symbol of the individual's choosing on the headstone. The rows of crosses are Normandy.

quote:

---

They don't give a shite. They are spiteful and only want to do this stuff to piss religious people off. No other reason.

---

This would be a perfect response to the threads glorifying Trump trolling democrats. Half of the responses in those threads are trumpkins saying they love it because it pisses off democrats. Now that I think about it, I believe you've said that multiple times.

quote:

---

No it's because we care about the Separation of Church and State

---

I would say that you're going to HATE the coming Catholic Monarchy, but who am I kidding? You'll love it, because it will be awesome.

quote:

---

Chief Judge Roger L. Gregory, writing in dissent, questioned the legal significance of the cross’s size.

“In the majority’s view, the memorial is unconstitutional based predominantly on the size of the cross, and neither its secular features nor history could overcome the presumption,” Gregory wrote. “But such a conclusion is contrary to our constitutional directive.”

---

At least one judge has common sense. The argument the other 2 used to say it was unconstitutional was that the cross was too big. They are really stretching to come up with any reason to remove it. The cross has secular features, historical significance, and most likely the soldiers that died were Christians.

Well, we can't use that to have it removed so, uh, uh, it's... too... big?... of a cross. Yeah, that's the ticket.