No. Power line poles are not religious symbols. If they tried nailing wooden Jesus effigies on them, those would have to go, though.

LOVE YOUR COMMENT. SATAN IF FREE AND ROAMING THE COUNTRY.

YOUR PRESENCE IS REQUIRED: Great comments make sure to show up at the RALLY to see where you really STAND. May 2, 2012 @4:30pm

That's actually the point, Enough.
This group is most likely targeting us because they assume we do not have the money or will to defend this in court.

I'm all for separation of church and state, but to ask a nearly bankrupt town to pay to move a 97 year old historical monument seems distinctly unfair.
If we were constructing a NEW monument on city-owned property and had plans to make it religiously themed, I can see that lawsuit.
But this?
Shenanigans.

Your devious scheme to circumvent the law has been tried before, with the illegal Mojave cross. When its small plot in the Mojave National Preserve was sold to a veteran’s group, the ACLU righteously challenged the land transfer. The Ninth Circuit agreed, and declared it unconstitutional. (Later it was remanded back for further proceedings, but by then the cross had been stolen.)

I'm not saying that Wikipedia is always right, and I don't have the time to do more research right now, but the site says the following about the Mojave Cross, which seems to run counter to Ms Lionheart's point:
"On April 28, 2010, the US Supreme Court ruled on Salazar v. Buono in a 5-4 decision that the cross may stay but also sent the case back to a lower court. The high court ruled there was no violation of the separation of church and state when Congress transferred the land surrounding the cross to a veteran's group. Writing for the majority, Justice Anthony Kennedy wrote, "The goal of avoiding governmental endorsement [of religion] does not require eradication of all religious symbols in the public realm"

As of May 10, 2010, the cross is no longer in place atop Sunrise Rock. It was stolen on the night of May 9–10, 2010.
In April 2012, a land exchange which will remove Sunrise Rock from the Mojave National Preserve was approved by the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California"

Thanks, I had not yet heard about a new development this month. I'll check it out.

I said the same thing a couple of days ago - and without my knowledge at the time - I learn that one of my sons-in-law was saying the same thing to his wife. I said that the city shoyld sell it to me for $1.00, but if the monument stands on 10 square feet, I would be willing to buy it for $1.00 a square foot - Or as suggested earlier HAVE A GROUP OF US BUYING IT...

Here they come........

Billy here is just the beginning!

All of the lunatic Christ haters are about to descend on Woonsocket!

Get the silver crosses out folk!

Don't worry, Joe, vampires aren’t real, just like unicorns, elves, and angels.

Joe, for once, and only once, we agree.
Patch Woonsocket will now be inundated with people not from Woonsocket, who are addicted to Separation of Church and State drama,
as well as Christians who get so caught up in the unfairness of this particular situation that they'll talk in distinctly un-Christian tones.

Please, everyone who is here normally...
discuss, absolutely!
But play nice. Don't feed the trolls.

There are comments about the cross in the Mojave desert - but the difference here is that that part of the desert WAS TRANSFERED - I am talking ABOUT BUYING THE WOONSOCKET MONUMENT SMALL PIECE OF LAND AND MAKING IT A PRIVATE PROPERTY.

@la_mouffette: Careful, with such clear thinking and prediction it to a tee, you may be regarded as a deity by some here on this thread.

Kudos to you :)

Well, that WOULD dismay me,
since I'm devoutly religious, Joe.
=)
But it's easy to predict.
There's a lot of emotions on both sides in these kinds of issues.
Personally, I don't think this is a violation of Church and State, because of all I said above-- we do have secular monuments, this is almost a century old and was a specific monument for four men.

I sincerely hope that, at most, the city will be permitted to hand over ownership of the tiny plot of land to a Veterans' group, or private citizens, because it is 97 years old and may not survive a move, even if we can raise the money to move it.

I don't think it was constructed with the intention of offending anyone, or promoting any one set of beliefs. Nor is it particularly visible. It's in a parking lot of one of our many fire stations-- because that is where at least the first of the four veterans it memorializes probably worked.

I think it was a sincere attempt to honour a few men in a fashion appropriate to them. I hope this can be worked out.

@William Carlucci

Thanks for slightly bitter/moderately condescending reply to my post. Take digs all you would like (assumptions from a stranger are meaningless anyway), my position stands firm. This statue (and the prayer dedicated to a profession that I am sure you wouldn't have the balls to work, even on your best day) should be a non-issue. If the city of Woonsocket decided to paint biblical versus in the streets and strategically place statues of the pope in every park and playground, then yes - that would be a matter worth discussing. But this? It is a memorial, to honor the brave men of our city who fought for our freedom... and the prayer? Is as common to a FD as a Saint Florian medal.

With so many problems today (in Woonsocket and nation-wide) it almost amazes me what battles people choose to fight. I am of the opinion, supported by you or not, that you show respect to these men and women - you do not attack them. I'm sure if you look hard enough, you can find some other group to take issue with.

Hammond maybe if we didn't rely on God to back up our money it would actually be worth something and we wouldn't be in the financial mess we are in right now. God doesn't seem to be doing a very good job propping up our currency it's a miracle people accept it at all. The Gold standard seems a lot better then the God standard.

Maybe these people do not mind the "IN GOD WE TRUST" on the dollar bill BECAUSE MONEY IS THEIR GOD.

my sentiments exactly

A. T. Cross manufactures those pens. Even if those pens were religious, A. T. Cross would not be breaching church-state separation, since they’re not a government agency,

Robin.
Come on.

He's yanking your chain.

Been tried. See my response to Ask A Stupid Question above.

That's it, let this great idea SNOWBALL - we need to fight this before they get to the time when they will try to get the cross off my tombstone - one day - because it will be seen from the CITY street

Robin, you need to do a little more research before you comment further. The WFD is not dishonoring non-Christian veterans. The monument in question is not a memorial to all veterans, it is a memorial to one specific WWI veteran and 3 WWII veterans, all of whom were Christian. In a case prominently cited by the FFRF, the 9th Circuit Court states: "Simply because there is a cross or a religious symbol on public land does not mean that there is a constitutional violation.". They ruled against a cross on public land which, much later was turned into a war memorial, but they were careful to emphasis that: "We are not faced with a decision about what to do with a historical, longstanding veterans memorial that happens to include a cross." I would argue that this monument is indeed a historical, longstanding veterans memorial that happens to include a cross. How exactly is honoring 4 veterans with a traditional symbol of their beliefs dishonoring other veterans of other faiths?

You should get a few facts straight. First of all, it is not the WFD's monument. Secondly, when that monument was erected in 1921, it was actually on the street. Back then Cumberland Hill Rd ran right where the parking lot is today. Lastly, I am a veteran, and I think is shameful that some people would want to destroy a memorial for brave men who made the ultimate sacrifice for this country and city. I don't think there is a veteran out there who would take offense to this memorial. In the end all veterans are brothers. Something people who haven't served would not understand. Maybe you should take a ride down there and read the plaque on the memorial and educate yourself. Semper Fi and GOD bless the USA.

Chester is right. This monument was for the specific men from the Woonsocket fire department who died in one war.

This is not a government endorsement of religion for all,
(which would indeed be inappropriate)
It's a historical monument for several men, who were Christian.

The larger general memorial for fallen firefighters is nearby, and appropriately for a public monument meant to honour ALL our fallen firefighters,
it has no theme related to any specific religion. The beautiful-- and much more prominent-- memorials for various war veterans in Woonsocket are the same.

Additionally, the age of the monument may be a factor as well.
There is legal precedent there.

This is nearly a century old, and it's not indoors.
It is, at this point, a historical item,
like the multiple sculptures of Moses and the ten commandments, Solomon and Mohammed on/in the Supreme Court building. Those sculptures are presented in the context of the history of law, and thus, the Supreme Court has decided they will stay. In a similar vein, this monument respects the particular beliefs and culture of the four men it honours.

Additionally, as I have said, those sculptures are now historical items.
The Supreme Court building was constructed, if I remember right, in the mid 30's, which actually makes it newer than this particular monument.

But, we'll have to wait and see.

@Chester

Oh, really? The Providence Journal article seems to have misled me. ProJo didn’t mention that it was dedicated to four specific Christians. If that’s the case, then I take back what I said about dishonoring Jewish and other non‐Christian vets.

A veterans memorial which happens to include a cross might indeed pass muster in court. Woonsocket may have skirted close to the line here, but not crossed it.

@AxeAdcox

To my knowledge, no one has proposed “destroying” this memorial. The FFRF just wants it removed from city property; they would favor moving it to private property.

Their issue was not “offense” but neutrality. Our government may not favor any particular religion over others. That bedrock American principle safeguards our religious liberty and makes this country great.

And there is the point why None is better, just like going to school with candy, the teacher says, if you dont have enough to share with the class, then leave it home.

Thats just what Id like to see, every monument littered up with symbols of every possible religious denomination to not OFFEND anyone. What about atheists, how do we include them?

So the smart thing is take the secular approach and stay out of the religious business.

Robin, WHO TOLD YOU that the WFD dishonors these other people? This monument has a cross because t was erected by Christians - and I am sure that if Muslims, Jews or other groups would want to erect monuments to honor their people that the WFD would not object - In a French family, we speak French, in an English we speak English, in a Spanish family we speak Spanish - it does not make us ANTI AMERICAN - neither does a Christian monument make the WFD anti Muslim or anti-Jews or any one else - THEY ARE NOT ANTI ANYTHING - BUT PRO SOMETHING.

@Kathleen A. McKenna

My misapprehension was based on a mistaken impression that this memorial was intended to memorialize all our fallen soldiers in World War I, not just four Christians.

Robin Lionheart, apparently you did not read my entire post. Take a ride down there and familiarize yourself with this monument. Or are you to cowardly to face the veterans that are sitting out there. Keep in mind that not all the vets that sit out there are christian. And for that matter if it was a Star of David atop that monument, they all would still be out there. Do you honestly think that it would be a piece of cake to move a 91 year old monument made out of concrete. It WOULD be destroyed. Keep in mind this is not a religious monument, but a monument for veterans. I urge you to go down there and open your eyes.

@AxeAdcox

No fear, just too long a trip. Maybe you or another reader here could post some photographs of this monument and its plaque.

I never suggested it’d be easy to move, but far larger monuments than this have been successfully relocated. Since Rob tells us the weatherbeaten cross’s base has been crumbling, if it were rebuilt elsewhere with a new foundation, it might endure longer than left alone to fall apart where it is.

I don't carry any currency it's 2012 not 1950 I carry a debt card of write a check and God is not on either one.

@RI Politics

No hatred, just patriotism.

When I do use US currency, a marker pen takes care of that discriminatory, divisive affront to our freedom of religion that has debased our dollars since 1957. We should go back to our original, inclusive national motto, “e pluribus unum”.

If the atheists BELIEVE IN NOTHING - THEY SHOULD HAVE NOTHING AS THEIR MEMORIALS.

@Kathleen A. McKenna

I support all the troops, not just the theists. You should too.

Alot of squeeky wheels here, you have much patience, Robin and The Shill, kudos to you.

@ Kathleen, I am a Veteran and your comment below disgusts me.

Kathleen why do you need the threat of eternal damnation to do what is right instead of just doing what is right because it is the right thing to do. If you read your bible yes it does have some moral teachings but there is far more vile and immoral stories in there then good ones. Do you think it is moral to stone your child to death for disobeying you if you don't you may be going to hell. Do you think abortion is immoral your God doesn't he orders that in the bible also. Christians do not have a monopoly on morality.

Two other commenters here already suggested selling the land. That has been tried with other monuments like the Mojave cross. See my response to Ask A Stupid Question above.

Rather than auction off city land, better they should move the monument to private property. Perhaps a local VFW would be happy to accept it.

@Robin - and what backs your credit or debit card? Gold? And when the Declaration of Independence stated "that all men were CREATED EQUAL -who do you suppose they believed had created them so - WALL STREET?. How many atheists signed that document?

@Kathleen A. McKenna

I don't know about all the signers of the Declaration of Independence, but its writer, Thomas Jefferson, was a deist who rejected Jesus's divinity. Our letter severing ties with England was an important historical document, but it has no legal import. The supreme law of our land is our _Constitution_.

The Declaration of Independence also makes it clear that governments created by humanity derive their powers from the consent of the governed, not from any gods. This is why the Constitution does not make any mention of any gods. There is no reason to think that there is anything illegitimate about an interpretation of any of the rights outlined in the Constitution merely because it runs contrary to what some people think that their conception of a god would want.

@Robin - IF THE CITY MOVES THAT MONUMENT - WILL YOU PAY TO HAVE IT MOVED - WITH YOUR PLASTIC CARD - which does not have that "In God We Trust" on it? Your card does not have that motto on it - BUT DOES IT PUT YOU MORE IN THE HOLE THAN IF YOU WERE USING CASH? With cash, which says that we trust in God, you cannot buy more than what you can afford. DO YOU OWE MORE ON YOUR CREDIT CARD THAN YOU WOULD USING CASH? No need to answer this last question - but don't lie to yourself - at least.

Kathleen A. McKenna: "@Robin - and what backs your credit or debit card? Gold? And when the Declaration of Independence stated "that all men were CREATED EQUAL -who do you suppose they believed had created them so - WALL STREET?. How many atheists signed that document?"

Really? Im guessing you still believe in the Easter bunny and Santa Clause. What are you implying backs credit cards? There are probably a few pagans and athiests who signed the Declaration of Independence.

Youre comments on Athiests shows you have no tolerance for anything but your own beliefs so you may wish to read those documents you reference with a bit more empathy and understanding. Just cause you believe in an invisible man in the sky who knows your future, past and what your wearing, doesn't mean everyone does.

"IF THE CITY MOVES THAT MONUMENT - WILL YOU PAY TO HAVE IT MOVED - WITH YOUR PLASTIC CARD - which does not have that "In God We Trust" on it? Your card does not have that motto on it - BUT DOES IT PUT YOU MORE IN THE HOLE THAN IF YOU WERE USING CASH? With cash, which says that we trust in God, you cannot buy more than what you can afford. DO YOU OWE MORE ON YOUR CREDIT CARD THAN YOU WOULD USING CASH? No need to answer this last question - but don't lie to yourself - at least."

Rather than issuing financial advice you probably should ratchet it back a bit. The air must be pretty thin in your vicinity...

@Joe

We had a nice contrast between snide, insulting atheophobes and civil, rational atheists. Wouldn’t you rather maintain that a while longer?

"We had a nice contrast between snide, insulting atheophobes and civil, rational atheists. Wouldn’t you rather maintain that a while longer?"

@Robin: Thats why I gave you kudos and admire your patience. I try but after a while the dogma just wears on me. I just ask my self at what cost and for how long is it smart and healthy to have this status quo with atheophobes. When I try to apply logic to this, it makes my head hurt. Too bad Galello isnt around for all the changes ;) And, like I said in another post, there is another story on this patch: http://patch.com/A-sKsP, that has zero commentary by these same folks. Wheres the priority?

*raises hand*
very civil, very rational Christian here, not afraid of anyone based on their personal religious or irreligious beliefs.
I'm not engaging in this lower debate, for those reasons.
I hope I'm not part of your "contrast", Robin =)

I respect the separation of Church and State, and think it is of great benefit to both sides.
I just don't think this is something that should be a big Church-State issue.
Since it represents four specific Christian men,
this is more like one of the cross-shaped memorials in a military cemetery.
This isn't something to go to court over... at most, the small parcel of land should be legally transferred to a veteran's group.
Perhaps a small plaque can be placed, indicating who is responsible for it?

BC/AD has been replaced with BCE/CE.

@Still Hope

Days of the week have been thoroughly secularized by now.

Let me offer you a better example: Many courthouses throughout this nation have reliefs, statuary, and other images of a goddess wearing a blindfold and bearing scales and sword. No one calls for removing these images of the Greek goddess Dike. Why not? Because her image does not have an effect of endorsing paganism. She’s a mere symbol, like Asclepius’ staff.

We don’t oppose religious symbology, we oppose government endorsement of religion. Does that help you understand?

At what point does a symbol stop being an endorsement? You are assuming there is no religious value in displaying a Greek goddess. A little ignorant perhaps?

My wish would be that you strong minded christians go after catholic sex offenders with the same amount of vigor. Why do they walk free when the non priest pedophiles are locked up and put on Sex offender lists? Why arent you people picketing and boycotting that? Seems like that would raise more emotion but for some reason, theres nothing but apathy towards that. How come non of you are posting on this story http://woonsocket.patch.com/articles/woonsocket-priest-defrocked-for-sexual-misconduct-allegation, asking for justice?

"What does the Constitution say? That congress CAN NOT MAKE LAWS ABOUT RELIGION - IT CANNOT EVEN ABOLISH ANY RELIGION - unless it would be harmfull to the public, like one that would practice HUMAN SACRIFICE."

Too bad it didnt include Pedophilia, if so youd have to pray to something else..

May can you explain why thes same people who said We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness where slave holders if they really didn't beleave that ALL MEN were created equal probably were not too concerned with a creator either. It also never states who that creator was and never mentions Christ because most of the founders were not really Christians or they would acknowledged him.

But it does me no injury for my neighbor to say there are twenty gods or no God. It neither picks my pocket nor breaks my leg.
-Thomas Jefferson, Notes on Virginia, 1782

“And the day will come when the mystical generation of Jesus, by the supreme being as his father in the womb of a virgin will be classed with the fable of the generation of Minerva in the brain of Jupiter. But may we hope that the dawn of reason and freedom of thought in these United States will do away with this artificial scaffolding, and restore to us the primitive and genuine doctrines of this most venerated reformer of human errors.” —Thomas Jefferson, Letter to John Adams, April 11, 1823

Shill, if you really want to be a shill, you can't label yourself as "the Shill".
That blows your cover, man.
Either you're a shill and label yourself as something else,
or you're not a shill.

Not picking on you...just a fan of Carniespeak ;)

Dial berth if you go, would you please introduce yourself.

Dilberth, I'm afraid you don't know enough Christians.
Catholics, for example, are perfectly free to believe in evolution. it is considered a legit scientific theory that we can use our reason to judge.
A member of my prayer group has a degree in biochemistry.
I just love Logic --but of course, I mean actual Logic, the philosophical activity.
Not sure if that's what you're talking about.
You're really only describing certain individuals, or certain kinds of very fundamentalist Christian.

I do think it's a VERY GOOD IDEA, though, to remind people that they'll be in front of a very active fire station.
Perhaps this could be set up like the political pre-election rallies for Councilman Moreau were, since they also took place in front of that station but did not hamper its activity.

@Jim

Atheists have no trouble at all remembering that the church is not God. Churches exist.

@Robin
agreed. But its the religious that seem to forget that the church is not God. Look at the Catholics who put the pope on such a high pedastal. The Catholic church, several hundred years ago, even went as far as to say that he is infallible. I am sorry but he is still a man who can very much make mistakes. He is not Jesus.

Jim,

the infallibility of the Pope doesn't mean he's always right,
or perfect,
or free from sin,
or that everything he says or teaches is correct.

Nope.

It means that if he chooses to solemnly establish a teaching "ex cathedra"-- a very specific action-- that Catholics believe he is especially guided in that situation, and his teaching must be considered legitimate to the entire church.

And it's not ancient.
At all.
It's actually quite new, just over a century old.

If you watched the Colbert Report, you would know this already, lol.

Now, do you have to believe this?
Of course not!
But, it is a common misconception. Even most Catholics don't seem to know what it means. Just thought I should clear it up.

Oh, and p.s.

Popes almost NEVER invoke Papal infallibility.
It's very rare.

la_moufette,
Thank you for clearing that up (I mean that sincerely). Just wanted to add one additional thing....the topic of infallibility did become one of the factors that caused groups of catholics to separate from Rome forming their own denomination of catholicism.

We do not have a right not to be offended. If the “mere presence of something” “offends anyone”, too bad for them.

Offensiveness was never the issue. It's about violating separation of church of state. Our government may not show favoritism toward any religion.

In this case we have a memorial, and the people who are memorialized were, as far as anyone has reported, Christians. So, the memorial to those specific people has a Christian symbol. Could it simply have a symbol of an eagle or something? Sure, but that's not what happened when it was constructed. At that point in our country's history, all of the same founding documents existed, but the interpretation was different.

The interpretation of these issues is what has changed. It has changed in part because precedent was set in other cases, when people said that they were aggrieved or offended by the presence of religious iconography on government property. It has also changed because more people have come forward to point out what they see as violations of the separation of church and state. In some cases it is very clear that the line is crossed - obligatory prayer in schools, for example. In others, it seems that there is a level of hyper-sensitivity that is afoot, and the altered interpretation of the line between church and state is sliding to reflect that sensitivity.

If the government cannot express favoritism, this goes to the definition of favoritism. Doesn't someone have to be aggrieved to make favoritism an issue?

wait, there's more coming. I'm almost out of characters.

That's where people being "offended" (my word) comes in. Maybe I should have chosen "aggrieved" instead. If the government were to do something that financially favors one religion over another, or over a non-religious group, then a group has been aggrieved. In this case, I presume, and please correct me if I am wrong, that the people promoting the non-religious stance (I won't blanket them with the Atheist tag because I'm sure there are some who are not Atheists), that this is seen as the government promoting Christianity. I doubt very much that a memorial with a cross on it is convincing people to become Christians. So why are the non-Christians feeling aggrieved?

Someone, in this case, is feeling like they are aggrieved. I just wonder why.

I think that a lot of the resentment that you're seeing is because this is a group from out of state pushing the issue (though it might be that someone from within the cty went to them for help), and because it's a memorial, which is quite different from a banner painted on a wall in Cranston.

In the long run, it makes sense for the City to move the memorial, if for no other reason than to put this behind them. It will just create work and financial responsibility for a city that doesn't need to deal with this stuff right now. I think it's unlikely that the City will give the land at the fire station away. It's more likely that they'll give land away someplace else or donate this to a private cemetery in the city.

Deb you are using the wrong approach the correct thing for you to do is to hold a prayer vigil and pry to God that he intervine and keep the monument where it is and then leave it in his hands. If it is Gods will that the monument stands then it will stay if it is not his will it will go. If you don't want to back off and leave it to a higher power then you really have no faith in your God.

Proverb 22:29
Seest thou a man diligent in his business? he shall stand before kings;
he shall not stand before mean man. (KJV)

In layman's turn; mean people suck:)

Mean atheist suck most.

5And when thou prayest, thou shalt not be as the hypocrites are: for they love to pray standing in the synagogues and in the corners of the streets, that they may be seen of men. Verily I say unto you, They have their reward.

Matthew 6:6-7
6But thou, when thou prayest, enter into thy closet, and when thou hast shut thy door, pray to thy Father which is in secret; and thy Father which seeth in secret shall reward thee openly.(KJV)
In layman's turms: Keep your religion to yourself and out of public

While I think it's common courtesy, and almost always the right thing to do,
not to forcefully push your opinions, ideas or beliefs on other people,
Shill, you're misunderstanding this quote.
I don't think it really applies to this question anyway, since I don't think this is a religious monument. If it were, it wouldn't belong on government property.
But I can't help chiming in regarding this quote...

He is telling his followers not to make a large show of their faith out of egotism.
Don't be ostentatious about prayer (or charity, as he specifies in Matthew 6:3) just because you want people to think you're SO pious and a fantastic guy.
Prayer should be personal and sincere, and charity should be done out of Love.

But, really, this is Jesus you're quoting.
"Go and make disciples of all nations" Jesus. The guy the religious authorities of his time think is TOO public about his teaching.
He never, NEVER tells his followers to harass or hurt anyone who won't convert-- the harshest thing he says is: Dust off your sandals and move on.

But he's pretty public about his religious actions.
He never says "keep it to yourself". He says the opposite.