Cross talk

Re “San Diego cross OK, judge says,” July 31

Apparently U.S. District Judge Larry Alan Burns is a dolt. For his ruling to make sense, the establishment clause of the 1st Amendment would have to be repealed, and the preamble to the Constitution would have to be changed to “We the Christians.”

For the judge to write that “it does not follow the cross has no other meaning or significance” is a ridiculous ruse and is a shallow attempt to hide the true meaning of the cross as a Christian religious symbol. It’s a kick to the groin to all people who have served in our military who are not or were not Christians.

If this ruling stands, I believe that all non-Christians and secular Christians should never have to pay taxes, and should never be compelled to serve in the military again. I will not pay taxes to pay for a religious symbol on public lands. I believe in America.

Paul Silverman

North Hollywood

Christians should not rejoice in the recent decision allowing a cross on government property at Mt. Soledad.

The reason the symbol was allowed to remain was not that religious displays are now permissible on federal property, but rather that the cross sends “a primarily nonreligious message.”

In other words, the holy cross is a symbol no more powerful than a smiley face, and its message is no more potent than “have a nice day.” Christians cannot find a reason to celebrate in a ruling so debasing to the cross.

John Hamilton Scott

Sherman Oaks