3 of 19

Write now Article Tools

A Roman Catholic citizen in America is offended by a lonely desert cross. He appeals to the Supreme Court to make it right. For the moment a plywood box covers the plain Mojave Cross to hide the offense - the offense of the cross - the offense of God in America.

As America the Beautiful free falls into the vomitories of ancient Rome it becomes very clear that the final nail in the coffin might hinge upon this important Supreme Court case: "Salazar vs. Buono". A domino effect would begin if the high court decides in favor of the gentleman who lives hundreds of miles away from the offensive cross. Crosses could soon begin disappearing from Arlington National Cemetery to Jefferson Barracks and beyond.

The offense of the cross according to the plaintiff represented by the American Civil Liberties Union is that it sits atop a hill on government property in the California desert. This causes a supposed conflict between Church and State.

Fair enough. Even Jesus said, "Render to Caesar the things that are Caesar's, and to God the things that are God's". Hence the appeal. But Jesus didn't say, "Render everything to Caesar". Hence the problem. Even Paul the Apostle appealed to Caesar, not as a Christian but as a Roman citizen postponing his death for a season. Not everyone attributed deity to Caesar.

On which side will the Supreme Court divide? This should be the landmark case whereby the Supreme Court halts the monopolizing effect of Atheism upon our country. The constitutional pendulum must be freed allowing it to swing back to the center of sanity where the majority of American citizens reside.

True, it can be argued that no one in America wants a Theistic State and rightly so. But no one in America wants an Atheistic State either. Time and time again the justice scales favor the State slowly dismantling the Judeo-Christian principles our country was founded upon.

When discussing separation of Church and State the word "state" poses little problem being easily defined and generally agreed upon. But the definition of "state" refers to our country and not a European socialist country. Shouldn't the word "state" in regards to "separation of church and state" include our Judeo-Christian foundation as part of our "state" before it becomes totally dismantled brick by brick by our new "state" of Atheism? Things become even less clear when "church" is defined. Would a Church of Satan worship the Cross? Hardly. A pentagram is their symbol. Might one find a progressive Church

• 1
• 2
• next page >>

Add your voice

Know something about The case against separation of church and state?
We want to hear your view. Write now!