May 31, 2012
Print This Post
A Boston attorney is demanding that a Massachusetts town remove a 53-year-old cross from a traffic island because it overhangs a state right-of-way by approximately six inches and therefore he claims it represents a violation of the separation of church and state.
FOLLOW TODD ON FACEBOOK! CLICK HERE!!
The cross was erected by the Middleboro Kiwanis Club in 1959. The 12-foot statue is made of brick and includes the word “worship”. It serves as an unofficial welcome sign for travelers entering Middleboro along Route 28.
A spokesperson for the Massachusetts Dept. of Transportation confirmed to Fox News Radio that the attorney supplied photographs of the “religious symbol” and filed a complaint demanding that the cross be removed.
The attorney happened to be driving through town, saw the cross and reportedly became offended.
State officials reviewed the matter and determined that one arm of the cross overhangs the state right of way by about six inches.
“MassDOT engineers determined that the cross does not pose a safety hazard,” the spokesperson said, noting they have offered to assist the town in relocating the cross off public property.
Al Rullo, chairman of the Middleboro Board of Selectmen, told Fox News Radio that the statue is actually anchored on town property – and said he’s dumbfounded that someone would have a problem.
“We don’t think it’s offensive to anyone,” he said. “This is not hurting or embarrassing anybody.”
The American Civil Liberties Union told television station WBZ that even if a fraction of the cross was on state property it would violate church and state separation laws. The ACLU told the television station that there are two options – either remove the cross or open up the traffic island to all forms of expression.
Rullo said the state has not officially contacted the town – so for now – the cross is staying put.
“That cross has been there for 53 years,” he said. “It’s fairly generic in nature. It doesn’t specify one religion over another. It just has the word worship on it.”
Local residents are overwhelmingly in favor of keeping the cross — and many believe the attorney is just making a mountain out of a mole hill.
“I’m not a Constitutional lawyer, but this issue of separation of church and state has been carried to an extreme,” Rullo said. “The government can’t give preferential treatment to one religion over another. They didn’t want a state sponsored religion.”
He said the Kiwanis Cross does not constitute a state-sponsored religion.
“As far as I’m concerned, local policy has never been influenced by the presence of that cross,” he said. “Local policy has never favored one religion over another.”
FOX News Talk
Take this lawyer and some day laborers and remove all the white crosses over the military burial graves over all the U.S. (state) paid funerals that were held on the state owned military plots in Arlington Cemetery and every other veteran's cemetery in the country. Do it now. Use tax payer's dollars to fund the exercise. Celebrate the gift of 'sanity' when you are done.
All those clamoring about being offended by religious symbols, parties, celebrations and the such – read the constitution VERY carefully. It guarantees Freedom OF religion. Not Freedom FROM religion.
I don't believe in Santa Claus. Should I be offended when the kids leave out milk & cookies? Here's a more noble for effort for this ACLU man to pursue: One of the first piece of legislation passed by Congress was the Judicial Act of 1789. I've never actually counted, but I'm certain the word "God" is used at least six times. You would have thought our forefathers might have applied "separation of church and state" while actually making laws but apparently they didn't – so why are we?
if you dont beleave in the Bible maybe you should read it. in the end times it will be like sodom gomorrah. seen any guy marrages. earthquakes 323 twe weeks ago one world order. how many thought obama was god. if you dont beleive in something why would it bug you.
America does have a separation of church and state.
I never said that we didn't. My observation was simply that of why did our forefathers not apply it in the same fashion as we try to today. The original notion of "separation of church and state" is derived from a letter from Thomas Jefferson to the Danbury Baptists and while it is quite often quoted by many who do so out of pure ignorance of the meaning and intent. While George Washington was President, he made several proclamations as did his Vice-President and successor, John Adams. When Thomas Jefferson ran against John Adams in 1801, Alexander Hamilton, John Adams' biggest supporter, used his Federalist Papers to decry Jefferson as an atheists. When Thomas Jefferson won the election, it struck fear into many denominations and religious organizations, including the Danbury Baptists, that he would use his power to undermine religious freedom. The Danbury Baptist wrote to then President Elect Jefferson and asked him, "if those who seek after power and gain under the pretense of government and religion should reproach their fellow men–should reproach their order magistrate, as a enemy of religion, law, and good order, because he will not, dare not, assume the prerogatives of Jehovah and make laws to govern the kingdom of Christ." In response, Jefferson wanted to clarify that he would not make proclamations similar to those of Washington and Adams not because he did not believe but because he considered the practice to be British and offensive to the young Republic. In his letter, the actual wording he used was "I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their legislature should "make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof," thus building a wall of separation between Church & State." While the ignorant quickly jump on the band wagon and say, "See, right there it is" they fail to realize that the majority of the founding fathers did not share this sentiment as exemplified by Washington and Adams. Jefferson also wrote in the original draft of that letter, "Congress thus inhibited from acts respecting religion, and the Executive authorised only to execute their acts, I have refrained from prescribing even those occasional performances of devotion, practiced indeed by the Executive of another nation as the legal head of its church, but subject here, as religious exercises only to the voluntary regulations and discipline of each respective sect." In other words, he saw no conflict of government officials voluntarily exercising their faith while in office, only if they did saw as a legal head of the church. Today we take the phrase out of context and try to make it the law of the land, which it is not. Today, we attempt to exclude religion from all aspects of public life, which was the fear of the Danbury Baptist that Jefferson was addressing. His intention was not to drive out religion from America; only to ensure religious practices were not dictated by the federal government.
Carl Hofacker, so you believe the bible is true and correct because it says so in the bible?
Clarence=very good post!!!!!
I'm offened by these atheists, freedom from religion people. How about I file a suit for trying to deny me my freedoms. Can you say "Civil Rights"? I forgot, that doesn't apply to me.
You do not have the freedom to force your religious beliefs onto others.
haven't been to your page in a while – saw this post and wanted to mention that I saw something in the Maryland news that the atheist groups are trying to force the state to remove the Peace Cross in Bladensburg. Can you imagine them winning and taking something that has been a community icon for decades? Hell, I'm not even religious but I find that offensive! http://www.washingtonpost.com/local/md-politics/honoring-veterans-but-interfering-with-religion/2012/09/13/480be192-f8d9-11e1-8398-0327ab83ab91_story.html
I remember a quote that goes in a line as this: "When you allow yourself to be offended and go out of your way to remove the offense, you make yourself more important than the people you're being offended by."
It's probably not an exact quote, but I do feel this is what some people do when go this route.
Can someone please tell me where in the Constitution it says separation of church and state? I know what the courts have said, but how did they come to that conclusion? Seems too me that it is nothing more than liberal, left-wing garbage.
It's actually pretty simple, John. There is the establishment clause of the first amendment which prohibits federal sponsorship of religion. The fourteenth amendment extended this prohibition to state and local governments. The key Supreme Court case is Everson versus Board of Education.
It says zero about seperation of church and state, just like it does not say that voting is a right
I am always susprised at people who believe in nothing are so offended by something they so often assert is not real.
Does the Court first need to astablish if the State of Massachusetts owns the air space. Reading the article it would appear that the cross does not touch (ground) the States right a way.
Separate Church and State! Keep the Liberal Church out of the public square. The Progressive Tabernacle and their worship of their god named Self. The god Self who must destroy all that scares them. Crush all they don't understand. Remake into something that FEELS good.
Separate Church and State! Keep the Liberal Church out of the public square. The Progressive Tabernacle and their worship of their god named Self. The god Self who must destroy all that scares them. Crush all they don't understand. Remake into something that FEELS good.
Separation of Church and State DOES NOT exist in the United States Constitution.
What DOES exist are the limits of CONGRESS in making laws relating to religion.
When are you Liberals going to get that through your heads?
So you don't mind if your child's teacher converts your 5-year-old to Islam with threats of hell then? And yes, America has a separation of church and state.
Tim-you are uninformed .
Tim, Steven was stating that there is no reference of a division between Church and State int eh Constitution, never was. It does however state that the government will not adopt any form of relgion. Big difference, and if my child was being tortured or threatened I would first remove my child from the school. But then, I would never allow my child to attend a public school as long as there is a teachers union and teachers push their agenda.
Paul Ray, Well then it seems The Supreme Court, in their ignorance, has interpreted the law of the land all wrong then? What do you make of The Treaty of Tripoli?
again, you are ill informed,
It's becoming time for Christians to become militant. Stop hiding behind the Idea that you are to be victims to be Christians. Then Jesus asked them, "When I sent you without purse, bag or sandals, did you lack anything?" "Nothing," they answered. He said to them, "But now if you have a purse, take it, and also a bag; and if you don't have a sword, sell your cloak and buy one. It is written: `And he was numbered with the transgressors' ; and I tell you that this must be fulfilled in me. Yes, what is written about me is reaching its fulfillment." The disciples said, "See, Lord, here are two swords." "That is enough," he replied. (Luke 22:35-38, NIV).
Wow, some of you people are idiots. First off, the separation of church and state that the founding fathers wanted was meant to keep any one church from ruling the government or making the decisions. It has nothing to do with anyone within the government expressing their religious views. It also has nothing to do with disallowing state sponsored religious events, gatherings, buildings or icons. Thirdly, each state is allowed under their own constitutions to do as they wish, with each county in their state doing as they wish and each town with in each country doing as they wish with concern to displaying religious icons. What they means is, if it is on town property, the country, state and feds can't do shits about it. If it over hangs a road, the sate might complain, but if that road is still with in the town limits, they can do very little about it.
Fact of the matter is, all of you people crusading against Christians in this country lately are only doing so because it is the hipster thing to do. you are only trendies trying to get on the newest bandwagon. In other words, you are all douchebags. And this coming from someone who does not believe in a god. I do not call myself an Atheist anymore since those libtards are annoying the hell out of me, but I still do not believe in god but respect others religions and their icons.
Wow, some of you people are idiots. First off, the separation of church and state that the founding fathers wanted was meant to keep any one church from ruling the government or making the decisions. It has nothing to do with anyone within the government expressing their religious views. It also has nothing to do with disallowing state sponsored religious events, gatherings, buildings or icons. Thirdly, each state is allowed under their own constitutions to do as they wish, with each county in their state doing as they wish and each town with in each country doing as they wish with concern to displaying religious icons. What they means is, if it is on town property, the country, state and feds can't do shits about it. If it over hangs a road, the sate might complain, but if that road is still with in the town limits, they can do very little about it.
Fact of the matter is, all of you people crusading against Christians in this country lately are only doing so because it is the hipster thing to do. you are only trendies trying to get on the newest bandwagon. In other words, you are all douchebags. And this coming from someone who does not believe in a god. I do not call myself an Atheist anymore since those libtards are annoying the hell out of me, but I still do not believe in god but respect others religions and their icons.
One more thing, if that cross over hangs the DOT area by 6 inches now, $100 says it did NOT in 1959.
You know they are now using lawyers instead of lab rats for research?
It's true. Several reasons:
1) there are more lawyers than rats now.
2) the grad students don't get attached to them as the experiment goes on.
3) there are still some things that even a rat won't do!
Do people realize there really was no intention for there to be a separation between church and state. Our constitution was founded with the opening of scripture reading and prayer. The congress STILL opens each session with a scripture reading. I know it's just done out of tradition and these people don't actually practice what they preach but that just the pudding. Our country was founded on the church.
Have you read the Treaty of Tripoli?
I hope to God The ACLU and this lawyer come and try to take it down. When are we going to stop rolling over everytime someone is offended? Why is the lawyers name not mentioned here?
that is just more bs, there is other things to be fixed besides a cross
Enjoy hell Mr. Boston Attorney!
I would like to see an America that is ran by it's citizens, not the ACLU or the Federal Courts.
I have a fantasy Frank. Let's split the country in two between the Libs and the Conservatives. They keep all the Govt programs and regulations, wealth redistribution to their hearts content. A real Lib nirvana. We leave their regs and welfare, have real free market enterprise AND we take all the Govt debt. I think that's fair, taking all $15 trillion dollar debt because we are such greedy bastards. Then, we compare notes in 35 yearsand see how their Utopia panned out.
and not raped by lawyers? We elect them, the likes of Obama, Edwards (the scum bag almost became VO), we let them in our houses on TV altering our views on what we are entitled to, allow them to rip down signs because they were passing through a town. Pathetic creatures who literally pray on the weak
Such a load of crap. There is no such thing as separation of church and state laws. "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof".. This town did not pass any law supporting this cross so, this is not an infringement in any way.
It is way past time for the eternally offended PC crowd to be slapped down hard. No wonder Boston and the rest of the NE remains a pathetic mess. Someone who knows this mouth piece, please tell him just to not drive through that town—just disgusting and plain wrong—-
@ Betsy- Please explain how an erected cross is "shoving a way of life down your throat".
I posted this on my Blog masculinepolymath on blogspot a few weeks ago…. it's a rather appropriate response to this story…
As a staunch practicing Theist, I find the incredible support of the Atheist Religion by the government to be repulsive and in violation my First Amendment Rights assuring the separation of church and state.
It's vital to understand, the First Amendment assures me, the government will stay the hell out of how/if I practice MY Faith and to not favor ANY specific religious belief or practice.
The reasoning was the “Official” status the Church of England enjoyed back when we were “The Colonies.” The Pilgrims came here seeking religious freedom, the government in the old country was oppressive, forcing them to change or hide their faith.
Like most of the Constitution, it was a pretty good idea; the hubris of modern people and disingenuous politicians “protecting us” are the problem. After all, we're much smarter than those old guys.
The word Atheist is from the Greek “Athe” translating as godless…. Any Godless structure, event or creature is therefor Athiest.
Religion is a set of beliefs concerning the cause, nature, and purpose of the universe. The concern of Atheists is their denial of the existence of a supreme being responsible for the cause, nature and purpose of the universe.
By acting as an organized group furthering their set of beliefs, they have made Atheism a religion. The Atheist Religion is functioning in the same way as any other religion, spreading their beliefs to others not sharing them. Is the “Atheism, we devoutly believe in not believing.” billboard far behind?
I'm more than happy to respect the Atheist Religion and grant them the same respect I grant any other religion. I am outraged by the government's support lent their religious non-beliefs over the beliefs of other Religions.
The Atheist Religion wants symbols of ALL other religions removed from government, replaced by a void. The Athiest Religion wants children to NOT be taught about or even mention a supreme being, they want the supreme beings denied.
A government structure without a symbol representing another belief set is therefor a monument to the Atheist Religion and violates MY RIGHTS guaranteed by the First Amendment. The framers didn't assure me of a Godless state, only one where I could pursue MY FAITH and Beliefs without government interference.
All over this country I see Atheist monuments erected and maintained by the government.
The White House and Capitol building are perfect examples. These are Atheist Monuments as they have no representation of theism anywhere to be found. Not a Cross, Star of David or Crescent; nothing on either structure or their surrounding grounds. Athe, godless.
Atheism is actively promoted in public schools as children are expressly prohibited from praying to God, Allah, Jesus, Buddha, The Bab, the Wind or even the Gods of Baseball. They are however allowed, even encouraged to remain silent and actively pursue not pursuing spiritual guidance; to remain godless.
Every road, sidewalk, park, structure and natural feature not bearing a symbol some faith is a monument to Atheism, when such locations are erected, maintained or protected by the government my rights are being infringed upon.
Every event taking place under the umbrella of the government that does not start with some sort of prayer was started under an Atheist invocation.
Atheism is quickly becoming the “State Religion of the United States.” The US Air Force has now bowed before the altar of Atheism by allowing them to covertly remove bibles from lodgings on bases. The Atheist Religion is attempting to pressure the US Marine Corps to remove a cross erected by individual Marines in an isolated spot on Camp Pendleton as a memorial to their fallen brothers. The Atheist Religion is attempting to force the desecration of a near 100 year old War Memorial in Rhode Island.
The First Amendment states: “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof…” What happened to THAT PART?
The Atheist Religion is pressing for the removal of crosses on War Memorials in Rhode Island and on Camp Pendleton. I think the fairest solution to the problem is that the Government follow the Constitutional course of action and stay out of it.
If the Atheists want to dismantle the cross on Camp Pendleton, let them find a way to deal with the Marines who put it up and if they can tear it down, so be it. Marines have a pretty good track record of assisting opponents in meeting their maker, in the case of an Atheist they can go nowhere, be met by nobody and spend eternity wondering if they were right or are just being snubbed because Supreme Beings don't like being denied.
The Woonsocket Firefighters might be a bit more civil, but the reception will likely be heated. Let the Atheist Religion take it up with the firefighters, if they prevail with them, take it up with the local veterans and their families. If the win those arguments, so be it.
The Constitution assures me of nothing less…. Good luck Atheists; you're likely to find Fire Fighters, Veterans and Marines a bit more difficult push around than the wussbags we call politicians.
Thanks, Atheism is in fact a religion.
Tell you one thing betsy, every knee will bend, including yours, it will be interesting to watch you squirm when HE asks you what your problem is. HE loves you too, you know!
To take it a step further, I am TIRED of atheists complaining of getting religion "shoved down their throats" Do atheists have this special aura around them that Christians everywhere are coming up to them and forcing them to listen to them? Sad to say, but as a Christian, I have NEVER had anyone besides a Jehovahs Witness or Mormon knock on my door or even approach me with the Gospel! Signs, symbols, and /or holidays are not shoving a way of life down anyone's throat! In this country (or so I thought) Majority Rules…we need to quit bowing down to these "few" that are offended and let the majority rule!
Why not just ban the lawyer from town?
Sorry, Daryl. You can't do that. He has rights and you have yours. Ignoring his absurd rant is one of yours. Being a damned fool is one of his.
Daryl,great idea!!
I am affended by attornys, can we have them removed?
"The attorney happened to be driving through town, saw the cross and reportedly became offended."
If that's your reaction to a religious symbol, I'm sorry but you've got more problems than a lawsuit can solve. God save us from people so easily 'offended'. Know what offends me? This guy.
ACLU- Anti Christ Leftist Union. Separation of Church and State misinterpreted once again!
But it's OK for others to tell us what to do and what to believe, huh? NO WAY! THAT is the true interpretation of separation of Church and State. The government cannot not compel a belief , or nonbelief system!
Funny I thought it was just a t with the sign worship on it, how can he tell whether it's a cross or just a t? I'm offended by large number of t's all over the place, especially at Arlington Cemetary, I mean the nerve!
First, find out who this attorney is and boycott his practice. Interesting that he's not named. Second, Betsy, whay don't you mount a campaign to have every reference to God on or in any government building or facility removed, including removing the crosses serving as headstones for our military dead all over the world. That should keep you busy and make you feel good all over. And finally, here in So. California, at Marine Base Camp Pendelton, Marines erected a cross to honor their comrades who have given the last full measure of devotion. This cross is on a hill accesible only by making a hike that most civilians wouldn't even want to do. Yet, because it is on the base and therefore on government property, some atheist is pushing to have it removed. This ongoing attempt by the few to trample the rights of the many is starting to get old.
The First Amendment to the United States Constitution provides that "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof…."!
It's not "Oh that offends me remove it!"
What will he and his buddies do when they realize that the seven-day week has a religious basis? There is no astronomical basis for our 7-day week.
ANOTHER TWO BIT ATTORNEY FRM BOSTON THAT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH HIS TIME OR LIFE BUT JOIN IN WITH OTHER VERRY FEW PEOPLE THAT WANT TO DISTROY A MEMORIAL THAT WAS PUT IN PLACE SOME 50 YRS AGO IN MIDDLEBORUGH. ALL I CAN SAY TO THIS ATTORNEY IS PICK UP YR FAMILY GO TO AN ISLAND ALL ALONE AND THEN U CAN DO WHAT THE HELL U WANT AND NO ONE WILL BOTHER U( LOWLIFE) R MY MISSING SOMTHING OR IS THIS COWARD HIDING HIS NAME.
Is your caps lock broken again, Joey? You can buy a new keyboard for about $10. Also, you should know that a spell checker is free.
HAY DOn't GET UPSET I HEAR THAT BETSY HACKMAN IS DATING THIS TWO BIT LAWYER. ANOTHER ONE THAT WHEN SOMTHING HAPPENS TO HER WILL B THE FIRST TO ASK FR A PRIEST OR GOD FR FORGIVENESS.
Wow, Al Rullo sure spewed a lot of BS. Here are a few choice ones:
"The cross… doesn't specify one religion". I always thought that the cross stood for Christianity.
"Local policy doesn't favor one religion over another". I assume Rullo won't mind if I put up a big ol' Buddha or a satanic symbol on the same property.
A few things are certain here. The locality will lose this case as they always do (or move the cross to private land or make the land open to all views before this happens), Christians will foam at the mouth over it (this is already happening), and politicians will use the case to get votes.
Don't get all bent out of shape Erick, God diden't make u a miserble person, u made youreslf one.
Betsy Heckman and this so called Attorney, what do they have in common…both have nothing else to do with there lives and time but to try and take down Croses and Monuments that were put in place for our poor men and women who gave there lives for there country, or for someones beleafs in certain Religion. A word to Betsy…get on your horse, pick up your lawyer boyfriend and ride off to another country where you have no freedom.
I’m excited to uncover this great site. I want to to thank you for your time for this particularly fantastic read!! I definitely loved every part of it and i also have you bookmarked to look at new information in your blog. I wanted to share with you that, I bookmarked Attorney Wants Town to Remove Kiwanis Cross | FOX News & Commentary: Todd Starnes at Delicious so my family will read it as well. If you don’t mind I would also share a tip. Getting into Medical school can be very tough. I find it most effective to talk with a specialist. Their chiropractors can make an enormous big difference into you getting right into a pain free lower back or not. Seek out a hot men ass to be sure your headaches and lhot man ass are a thing of the past. Thanks.