Comments about ‘Keep highway memorials’

As a proud member of the "minority" in Utah, I can only thank the individuals who help prevent the majority from self-righteously dictating how we should remember and memorialize officers killed in the line of duty.

The majority of people in Utah believe in obeying, honoring, and sustaining the law. The courts have ruled that it is against the law to have crosses as roadside memorials. But apparently there are some who believe in sustaining the law only when it is compatible with their preferences. Utah = hypocrisy elevated.

Oh good grief. This issue is settled. Use a non-religious symbol or put it on private property. And are you saying the memorials are the letter "t"? If so, now you are just getting silly.

"...Atheists now have more time, and it seems plenty of money, to cause problems for the majority of us,..."

---

Perhaps because the minority is tired of being walked on, over and over again by the "majority".

It isn't only athiests who are opposed to Highway Crosses you know. And as an FYI, I'm also opposed to all those little shrines dotting the highway were someone lost their life.

Instead of giving the Atheists more money THINK before you sponsor a state religion since you know it will get shot down. Crosses are not little "t"s in the Alphabet, otherwise there wouldn't be a problem.

Luanne is absolutely correct. It is time to stop apologizing for the irrefutable fact that this Country was established upon a religious foundation.

Every one of the Founding Fathers believed and taught that America would be a more law abiding and moral nation if it had a religious influence. That is precisely why George Washington added the phrase "so help me God" into the presidential oath of office.

Those who fought against these highway memorials show disrespect for the Founding Fathers, American tradition, and America itself. It is time for the patriotic citizens who compose the majority to stand up for what is right and demand that these memorials remain.

A minority can dictate to a majority..how awful..isn't that how we got George Bush?

And once again the writer distorts the argument with.. shouldn't the families have to take down the memorials they put up. Familes aren't the government. The law prohibits the government from sponsoring religion..not families.

@JCC;

"Demanding" the memorials remain is an attempt to create a "state" sponsored religion (Christianity).

That is against the Constitution, btw. Either you're for or against the Constitution. Your words say you're for but your actions, "demanding a state religion", say otherwise (by their fruits...).

I went to school with a girl who wore one of those letter "t" things on a chain around her neck. I guess it meant her name was theresa. Don't know why she didn't capitalize it. She must have been an e.e. cummings fan or something. And all those buildings with t's on the pointy things on the roof. What's that about?

John Charity Spring would have us waste tax payer money to fight for something that we know cannot win because of our Constitution. Its not patriotic, its a waste of money. Nobody is stopping you from making a private memorial. In fact that is what has been done.

I wonder if this letter writer would have the same opinion if instead of crosses we used crescent moons?

They're not symbolic of Islam! Just a symbol of what rises nearly every night! Right?

How 'bout we all compromise?

We will have The Memorials but instead of a Cross (or a little t... Rolls eyes) We have them in the shape of the Islamic star and crescent...

Wait you say! you wouldn't like that. Don't be silly we aren't endorsing the Muslim Faith!!! They are simple symbols anyone can see in the night sky.

Do you all understand how utterly ridiculous you sound...

Once you realize why you reject all other religions and Gods... you will understand why I reject yours.

Luanne Walters, I appreciate your passion, but I would much prefer that you continue this fight with YOUR money, not mine. I believe my charitable funds can be put to better use helping living persons rather than fighting the government to memorilize the dead.

If America had been founded upon an Islamic tradition, I would have no problem with a star and crescent shaped memorial. However, it was not. America was founded upon the Judeo-Christian tradition.

More importantly, the Constitution absolutely does not prohibit these memorials in their present form. As previously noted, all of the Founding Fathers made religious referrences during public speeches in their capacities of official government leaders. In addition, they specifically allowed displays of the Ten Commandments in government buildings and on government property.

The fact that the Fathers allowed religious displays on government property proves that such displays are Constitutional. It is blasphemy at its most absurd to suggest that the Fathers who established the Constitution completely misunderstood it.

Maybe it is time we stop putting up religious symbols on public property. That way we can actually follow the Constitution and stop spending public money on stupid lawsuits.

'It seems that a minority of people seem to be able to set the limits that the majority of people want.' - Letter

Really?

By what, majority?

Oh, you didn't check?

So, how can you say there is a majority?

Also...

what does a 'majority' have to do with PUBLIC, land?

People here claim they would support any religion...

but they ONLY support, one:

**'Federal judge dismisses Summum suit against Pleasant Grove' - By Dennis Romboy - DSNews - 06/04/10

"A federal judge has dismissed a lawsuit against the city that claim it violated the establishment clause of the US consitution by allowing a Ten Commandments monument by rejecting one showing the the Salt Lake-based religious sects beliefs. The clause in the First Amendment prohibits government from adopting a national religion." - article

So, their ACTIONS betray, their empty words.

Also, we have other examples in human history of what the 'majority' has done.

1) Slavery

2) Missouri executive order 44, October 27, 1838.

So, to support that SAME rhetoric, that the 'majority' should over rule minority fundamental proections and RIGHTS....

is not democracy.

It is tyranny.

On, and on and on and on...

The failure of religion is what makes them seek commercial advertising.

Speaking of minorities...

Let me guess....

The letter writer might a "t" Partier, little "t".

I'm sure she'd be just fine with giant Red Cresents or Bophemets on public land.

BTW - Military Service men died in the line of duty also.
We mark their GRAVES with a plain headstone.
And it they're LDS, we can have a little Angel Moroni engraved on it, but the shape is always the same -- religous neutral.

But I'm sure you already knew that, since you've followed this story so closely.

I didn't know that the majority gets to run roughshod over the minority, regardless of their civil rights. Whew. Thanks for clearing that up for me. I thought I lived in a society of rules and laws, not a "to the winner go the spoils" society.

@LDS Liberal:

"Military Service men died in the line of duty also. We mark their GRAVES with a plain headstone."

You've never been to Arlington Cemetery near Washington, D.C., have you? Religious symbols galore on grave markers. There's even a giant cross on the property.

@Irony Guy:

"Maybe it is time we stop putting up religious symbols on public property."

There are already religious symbols on public property... Power/phone lines are actually crosses.

@John Charity Spring:

"The fact that the Fathers allowed religious displays on government property proves that such displays are Constitutional."

You could be right. There are religious symbols on the US Supreme Court building. Go figure.

@The Real Maverick:

"They're not symbolic of Islam! Just a symbol of what rises nearly every night! Right?"

That's right. And they will get away with it because of PC (politically correct) mentality all too prevalent in this country.