Iowa City Council Members Vote to Remove Cross Memorial, City Votes to Remove Council Members

MemorialKNOXVILLE, Iowa — Members of a city council in Iowa voted Monday to remove a veterans memorial that included a cross from a local park, and in turn, members of the community voted on Tuesday to remove the council members from office.

”We warned them multiple times if they let our town down they would be voted out,” Allison Schmitz of Stop the Insanity posted online this week. “They didn’t listen, and look, the people have spoken!”

As previously reported, the display features the silhouette of a soldier bending down on one knee before a cross-shaped grave marker, and was reportedly placed in Young’s Park by a local veteran. The individual had not sought permission from the city, but the city saw no issue with the memorial since it was understood to honor veterans.

In August, Americans United for Separation of Church and State (AU) sent a letter to officials with the Iowa Department of Parks and Recreation to seek the removal of the memorial after it said that it received a complaint about its presence on government property.

“The Establishment Clause of the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution prohibits government bodies from promoting religion on public land, including through the display of Latin crosses—‘the preeminent symbol of Christianity,’” the letter read. “Please remove the Latin cross from government property.”

The demand resulted in an uprising within the community, including a rally in support of the monument. But on Monday, council members voted 3-2 to have the memorial relocated to private property across the street and replaced with another display. April Verwers, Carolyn Formanek and David Roozeboom all voted against the memorial, while Dawn Allspach-Kline and Tim Pitt voted in favor of it.

In turn, on Election Day Tuesday, residents voted for Verwers and Formanek’s opponents, booting them from office. Roozeboom did not seek re-election.

  • Connect with Christian News

“I think they needed to listen to the constituents along with the rallies,” newly-elected council member Rick Kingery told local television station KCCI. “The people put out 2,000 wooden crosses across town. That is a huge number. People wanted their voices heard, and they were not listened to.”

Mayor Brian Hatch defended the city council to reporters, stating that none really wanted to move the memorial, but that in the best interest of the city, some voted to do so in order to avoid a lawsuit.

“I hope it brings some closure to it,” he said. “I hope we can kind of achieve the best of both worlds. We avoid a costly lawsuit and at the same time we still have the silhouette memorial up honoring the veterans, right across the road hopefully, on private property.”

But the Liberty Institute, which is representing the veteran who initially placed the monument, is now considering the available legal options, as it believes removal of the monument is unconstitutional.


A special message from the publisher...

Dear Reader, our hearts are deeply grieved by the ongoing devastation in Iraq, and through this we have been compelled to take a stand at the gates of hell against the enemy who came to kill and destroy. Bibles for Iraq is a project to put Arabic and Kurdish audio Bibles into the hands of Iraqi and Syrian refugees—many of whom are illiterate and who have never heard the gospel.Will you stand with us and make a donation today to this important effort? Please click here to send a Bible to a refugee >>

Print Friendly
  • Rebecca

    More of this type of thing needs to happen!!

    • jmichael39

      more of this type of thing IS happening, Rebecca. Do a google search for a recent message from Billy Graham. It will shock you that he first spoke that message in 1957.

  • Emmanuel

    Love it. These leftist organizations and leaders need to learn that WE THE PEOPLE have the last word. Good your you Knoxville.

    • phil

      Happy Thanksgiving Knoxville—Very refreshing Americans

    • Eric Clark-Sanchez

      Leftist? A Democrat can’t be Christian?

      • Lou9999

        Some are….but the vast majority of the lefty organizations attacking anything to do with religion vote Democrat. I remember God getting booed at the last Democratic National Convention.

      • Worship Dancer

        no a “good” democrat cannot be. a “good” democrat believes in the ENTIRE democratic platform – abortion, homosexuality, islamization of America, spewing hatred and being against Israel – ALL of these proclaim that person is NOT a Christian. and i they are voting democrat they are voting for ALL of the things God is against.

        • Eric Clark-Sanchez

          So you admit you know nothing about democrats, you just know a bunch of blather.

          • Justsomeguy151

            No, you’re admitting that you have NO CLUE what your preferred criminal cartel is all about.

          • phil112

            eric, abortion is part of the democratic platform. A democrat is not and cannot be a christian. A follower of Christ does not kill babies, nor is it okay with a follower of Christ for someone else to kill babies. You don’t know anything about God nor His word.
            You ARE a bunch of blather.

          • Eric Clark-Sanchez

            No YOU are a bunch of blather. Why does someone HAVE TO BE pro abortion to be Democrat or liberal? Such a broad brush you paint with. So I guess by your reasoning I can say all Conservatives are terrorists who only care about life before it is born, and could care less about people after they are born.

          • phil112

            You idiot, that is what they sign on for. You are so clueless you’d vote for obama the third time if you could. There’s no doubt in my mind you’ll be voting for hitlery. You and people of your uneducated stupid ilk, are what is killing America. Do the world a favor and get neutered.

        • Justsomeguy151

          You had me until you said “being against Israel”. Israelis just as hopelessly corrupt as the US. They’ve incited multiple wars, even attacking and killing Americans(USS Liberty) and were instrumental in pulling off 911, aiding Bush/Cheney and the rest of the criminals. Even God has judged Israel harshly because they are evil. This Israel was created by the Banksters/Rothschilds/Warburgs/Rockefellers and is NOT the Israel that God tells you to support. Also, the GOP is hopelessly corrupt and equally as evil. Wake up, this is Satan’s world.

          • Sez Eye

            I would challenge you to name one, just one, war that Israel started since their founding in 1948. we’ll wait.

          • Justsomeguy151

            I originally had included some links but this site wouldn’t let me post them so feel free to google these things.

            The illegal and unending Afghanistan and Iraq wars were started by Israel in collusion w/ the US govt w/ the false flag attacks of 911 by blaming Arabs. In fact, several “dancing Israelis” were arrested after the attacks because they were seen celebrating the fall of the towers. But govt higher ups got them released and they returned to Israel.
            When interviewed on Israeli television, they freely admitted that they were there to document the event.

            On June 8th, 1967, Israel attacked the USS Liberty and tried to sink her in order to blame the attack on Egypt and suck the US into a war. I hope I didn’t make you wait too long.

            Don’t take anything anyone ever says at face value. Do your own research. Now, what is your reason for blindly trusting the Satanists who run the US and Israel? Also, exactly who do you think these Bible verses refer to?

            Rev. 2:9 “I know thy works, and tribulation, and poverty, (but thou art rich) and I know the blasphemy of them which say they are Jews, and are not, but are the synagogue of Satan.”

            Or Rev. 3:9 “Behold, I will make them of the synagogue of Satan, which say they are Jews, and are not, but do lie; behold, I will make them to come and worship before thy feet, and to know that I have loved thee.”

          • Sez Eye

            Major Fail, tin foil hat wearing conspiracy guy. Nothing you have provided answers the challenge. None of these this things equate to Israel starting a war. I have read the conspiracy sites that contain your bogus claims, and was not persuaded then. You bringing up this claptrap again doesn’t persuade me now.
            Your hate of the Jews is obvious, are you a muslim shill or a German socialist party one? I’m sure there are other groups that hate jews for no reason, but none a virulently as these 2 groups. Your hate is destroying you, obvious to all.

          • Todd

            so which Israeli war has what you posted above in FACT started?? I’ll wait. You post from the bible yet you fail to understand it, the JEWS are GOD CHOSEN people, that’s FACT and also in the bible but you never mention that why????. Your clever attempt to use only parts of the bible that SUIT your agenda, has been opened up and pointed out for what it is, an agenda, PERIOD (to coin our muslim leaders famous phrase)

      • LeftCoast

        Its very hard to agree with the Dem platform as a Christian. Or can you?

  • Jean Adams

    What happened to live and let live. Christians can’t have any rights non- Christians can have plenty.

    • acontraryview

      Christians have the same rights as other citizens. They are simply no longer being given privilege over other faiths.

  • 7stvalent9

    We have to make waves publicly. Liberty Institute has the right idea.

  • bowie1

    Their choice was get sued or get fired. I guess they end up getting fired.

  • TheBBP

    LOL, owned.

    • Frank

      I think the correct term is p0w3nd.

  • Leslie

    Liberty Institute said they only have to send a letter back to FFR folks and they back right down, they aren’t willing to go to court and spend money on it. A letter threatening a lawsuit always scares the towns into complying. And in the same way a letter from Liberty Institute makes the atheists say forget it, we don’t want to pay for a lawsuit. Spread that fact around so we can start ignoring these wankers.

    • acontraryview

      “Liberty Institute said they only have to send a letter back to FFR folks and they back right down”

      Given Liberty Institute’s track record on cases like this, that is obviously not the truth.

  • sue cordes

    I’m, proud as a Iowan, and as a American, people stood up against the political creeps who want to take away our freedoms. I’m also proud people stood up for the soldiers. But, let us stand up for especially for God Almighty and his son! We are turning our backs on God in this perverted country, and surely, sooner or later he will turn his back on America, if we as a people do not turn to him, and repent of our sins…

    • LadyFreeBird<In God I Trust

      Amen. We as a Nation do need to repent.

    • acontraryview

      “I’m, proud as a Iowan, and as a American, people stood up against the political creeps who want to take away our freedoms.”

      What freedom was taken away by the actions of the council?

      • Mary Curry

        How about the freedom to express thanks and honor our fallen comrades? The kneeling soldier and the gun, helmets, and boots in the shape of a cross are not to promote religion. Men and women of all faiths have been lost and are still being lost to conflicts, Some come home and some are still missing. These same groups are trying to remove War Memorials on courthouse lawns, say what flag we can display, and even demand changes in our citizenship oath. No longer are new citizens required to swear allegiance to our country and flag. They want to take away the right to display ANY Christian symbols in places other religions may visit, like churches.

        I am not a Christian but if I do not speak out, my life is worthless. If a hundred men and women had stood up to Hitler maybe we could have saved 6 million lives. Being a Shamanic Wiccan, my life and freedom will lie not only with me but with my neighbor. And I will stand with them. We are all AMERICANS. And PROUD of it.

        • acontraryview

          “How about the freedom to express thanks and honor our fallen comrades?”

          Who has been denied the freedom to express thanks and honor our fallen comrades?

          “Men and women of all faiths”

          Hence the issue. This particular memorial only honors those of Christian faith. Therefore, it is not a memorial to all of our fallen comrades. Just the Christian ones. As such, it has no place on property that is owned by ALL the citizens of ALL faiths, including Wiccan. On private property – no issue. Put this is on public property.

          “These same groups are trying to remove War Memorials on courthouse lawns, say what flag we can display, and even demand changes in our citizenship oath.”

          Really? Examples?

          “They want to take away the right to display ANY Christian symbols in places other religions may visit, like churches.”

          Really? Not just spaces that are the property of all citizens? Not just in instances where the only religion expressed is Christian? Examples?

          • Mary Curry

            Many religions use the cross as a symbol. It is not just a ‘Latin or Christian’ cross. Please show me where on that memorial that says it is just a Christian memorial. Muslims have demanded the removal of crosses from the classrooms of a CATHOLIC college because they feel ‘threatened’ and not welcome. Atheists have demanded the removal of all Jewish and Christian symbols from courtrooms, train stations, and many other places. All you have to do is read. And think for yourself. If possible. How far do we have to go and what more do we have to give up to pander to the PC crowd?

          • acontraryview

            “Many religions”

            Many? Really? Which ones?

            “Muslims have demanded the removal of crosses from the classrooms of a CATHOLIC college because they feel ‘threatened’ and not welcome.”

            i wasn’t aware of that. Do you have more specifics? Why would Muslims be attending a Catholic college? Are you against people exercising their right of free speech?

            “Atheists have demanded the removal of all Jewish and Christian symbols from courtrooms, train stations, and many other places.”

            Oh, you mean publicly owned places that provide service to all citizens of all faiths as well as no faith, that are paid for by people of all faiths as well as no faith, and thus have no place is favoring or supporting certain religious beliefs and not others? Is that what you are referring to? If so, that is a far cry from “They want to take away the right to display ANY Christian symbols in places other religions may visit, like churches.”

            I’ll ask again: Who has been denied the freedom to express thanks and honor our fallen comrades?

            “How far do we have to go and what more do we have to give up to pander to the PC crowd?”

            How is it a PC issue to not want the government, government owned property, and government operated institutions, which represents all the people of all faiths as well as no faith, to not advantage one faith?

            Talk about pandering. That’s what we have been doing in the nation for centuries. Pandering to the Christian faith. This is not an issue of freedom of religion. This is an issue of privilege of religion.

          • Mary Curry

            Look up Catholic University in Washington D.C. Also many religions, including ancient Egypt’s Ankh . and the Indian Swastica are crosses. It has been traced back to at least 2000BC. There is nothing in the Constitution prohibiting the display of any religious symbol, unless you are a Christian, then you lose. Muslims can pray in the middle of a busy city street (also a government site), Muslims can have their own prayer room and footwashing stations in schools and other public places such as train stations and airports. This is the government selecting to honor one religion above the others. Christians are not being pandered too. They are not asking for special courts just for their people in violation of US laws and the Constitution. Christians and Jews are not asking for special shelves in food banks to cater to their desires. So yes, there is pandering going on but it is not for Christians and Jews. Anything else, use your own brain and look it up.

          • Cady555

            In America today, the cross symbolizes Christianity. The ankh is similar to the Latin cross but is a different symbol. The symbol on this monument was not an ankh. It was the symbol used by nearly every Christian denomination.

          • acontraryview

            “”Also many religions, including ancient Egypt’s Ankh . and the Indian Swastica are crosses.”

            So you believe that American veterans who died in battle were members of Ankh? The Swastika is not a cross.

            “There is nothing in the Constitution prohibiting the display of any religious symbol, unless you are a Christian,”

            There is nothing in the Constitution which prohibits the display of religious symbols by Christians – within the confines of the law as with all religious displays.

            “Muslims can have their own prayer room and footwashing stations in schools and other public places such as train stations and airports.”

            Anyone is allowed to use those. In addition, you will find chapels in many of those places.

            “Christians and Jews are not asking for special shelves in food banks to cater to their desires.”

            Christians are not under any dietary restrictions. Jews, if they are Kosher, are. As are Muslims.

            “So yes, there is pandering going on but it is not for Christians and Jews.”

            Oh, please! For years Christian prayer was mandatory in schools. The government shuts down for every major Christian holiday. For years most stores were not allowed to open on Sunday. Even today that is the case, and there are still restrictions on certain goods being sold on Sunday. To suggest that Christians have not been pandered to in this country is patently false.

          • Judy McKinney

            I see where you got the “contrary” part of your name. I think you just want to argue. It is plain you don’t want to “live and let live” rather than try to take away freedoms guaranteed by our constitution. America was founded as a Christian nation, but Christians aren’t trying to force others to just accept Christianity. All I am saying–as you obviously just want to argue and debate.

          • acontraryview

            “rather than try to take away freedoms guaranteed by our constitution.”

            What freedoms guaranteed by our constitution are you suggesting I want to take away?

            “America was founded as a Christian nation”

            No, it was not. If it were, we would not have the freedoms we have. Rather than a Constitutional Republic, the nation would have been setup as a Christian Theocracy. It was not.

            “but Christians aren’t trying to force others to just accept Christianity.”

            There are, however, some Christians who want our laws to be based upon the Christian belief system and thus to limit our freedoms based upon the Christian belief system.

          • Keith

            Muslims never demanded the removal of crosses from Catholic classrooms,it was some nutty lawyer that files frivolous lawsuits for no reason. Jesus is revered by Muslims for being one of the three Messengers of God, along with Moses and Muhammed. While the other 2 are dead Jesus is not and He will return to herald the arrival of the end times in islamic prophecy. All that I have written is common knowledge available to all, those who don’t know it have chosen to not know it, but God doesn’t care if someone is ignorant, He just cares that they are intentionally sinning against Him by violating His 9th Commandment.

          • Lou9999

            They revere Jesus, but will cut off your head. Islam is a political movement masquerading as a religion. I have 33 months in the Middle East. Ignore the warnings at your own peril.

          • http://richmondtommy.wordpress.com/ Tommy Tomhan

            I don’t have a problem with this memorial but I do warn them that it opens the door to all believers of every religion or atheism to erect what they want on these public properties.

          • magormissabib

            America is the great whore of revelation. God hates the USA

          • Justsomeguy151

            Either the US or the Vatican.

          • magormissabib

            Yes, I think the woman riding on the beast is false religion riding on the back of government. The catholic whore and america, the beast.

          • magormissabib

            And you wonder why america is going to hell.

          • acontraryview

            No, I do not wonder that.

          • magormissabib

            You should!

          • acontraryview

            Why?

          • magormissabib

            once again the first amendment does not give you the right to ban all religious symbols. So what, its a memorial to all christian fallen. deal with it.

          • acontraryview

            “once again the first amendment does not give you the right to ban all religious symbols.”

            Agreed.

            “So what, its a memorial to all christian fallen. deal with it.”

            So what, it doesn’t belong on public land. Deal with it.

          • magormissabib

            According to the Iowa City Council it does. suck it up . bigot.

          • acontraryview

            Apparently not, as they voted to remove it.

          • watruthinking

            actually — it’s a (possibly Christian) memorial to ALL FALLEN — whether the fallen are Christian or not

          • acontraryview

            With the cross included, it is distinctly Christian.

      • Guy Pinestra

        The 1st Amendment freedom of religion. It reads ‘freedom of’ not freedom FROM… You atheists keep pushing your perverted interpretation and you’ll soon find yourselves in a fight that you cannot win. I’m amazed at the audacity of the Godless to declare war on God Himself.

        • acontraryview

          “It reads ‘freedom of'”

          Really? Here’s the text of the 1st Amendment:

          “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances”

          i don’t see the phrase “freedom of religion” there. Do you?

          “You atheists”

          I’m not an Atheist.

          “I’m amazed at the audacity of the Godless to declare war on God Himself.”

          I’m amazed at the audacity of some people to suggest that because they have chosen to believe in a certain religious doctrine, that they are in a position to state, as absolute truth, what God is and isn’t.

          • MarioRom

            That means the government should not MAKE a NATIONAL RELIGION such as the Church of England which is government supported by the taxpayer. Every state had it’s own religion so if what your argument is true, they would have abolished the state religions and they did not.

            The Capitol building is considered the nation’s first Mega Church because services were held there by several denominations on Sundays and the Bible was the first book ordered printed by the US Congress. 10 paintings hang in the capitol rotunda, 4 religious in nature. Not bad for something that in your opinion should not be there.

          • Cady555

            Yes, the constitution prohibited state religions. The men who wrote and ratified the Constitution had seen the damage caused by linking religious belief and the power of government. The bill of rights exists because states refused to ratify the constitution without a statement of individual rights. One of those rights is freedom from the government showing preference to a religious belief.

          • acontraryview

            That is part of what it means, and I agree.

            “Every state had it’s own religion so if what your argument is true, they would have abolished the state religions and they did not.”

            The 1st Amendment applied only to Congress. Not the states. Every state did abolish state religions.

            Please cite where I said that religious symbols, in all cases, are not allowed on government property.

          • Lou9999

            I guess you have all of the answers.

          • acontraryview

            Far from it.

          • magormissabib

            Be amazed all you want but we will speak the truth. and yes the first amendment does protect freedom oOF religion and does not mean atheists have the right to be free from religion in the sense that they can abolish all religious symbols from the public sphere. This memorial in NO way forces them to believe any particular religion.

          • acontraryview

            “does not mean atheists have the right to be free from religion in the sense that they can abolish all religious symbols from the public sphere.”

            Agreed.

            “This memorial in NO way forces them to believe any particular religion.”

            Agreed. Nor is that the issue. The issue is using publicly owned land to promote a specific religious belief.

          • magormissabib

            No . it is not promoting a specific belief . Try a dictionary.

          • acontraryview

            Given that the cross is a Christian symbol, how would it NOT be promoting a specific belief?

          • magormissabib

            Maybe you would not be confused if you you would use the right words. The constitution says government cannot *establish* a religion. This memorial does not establish any religion as a national one.

          • acontraryview

            Maybe you would not be confused if you were more familiar with various judicial rulings on issues of this nature.

          • Justsomeguy151

            Judicial rulings aren’t worth the paper they’re printed on. They’re simply the opinions or interpretations of black robed unaccountable criminals. Using your logic, abortion, the illegal, fascist Patriot Act, and ObummaCare are all OK because a gang of thugs simply said so.

          • magormissabib

            Notice he did not cite any specific examples. Thats a sign that hes full of hot air.

          • D Guest

            “free exercise thereof” – same thing as freedom of relifion

          • acontraryview

            No, it is not the same thing. The Constitution provides the protection that Congress, and via the 14th Amendment, the states, are not allowed to pass laws that prohibit the free exercise of religion. In other words, Congress could not pass a law that says: “It is illegal to practice the Muslim faith”.

          • magormissabib

            the government cannot pass a law forbidding certain religions or pass laws establishing one religion as a national religion that is freedom of religion. you dolt.

          • acontraryview

            Yes, I’m aware of that.

          • magormissabib

            are you also aware that you just contradicted yourslef?

        • LadyFreeBird<In God I Trust

          Atheist really do seem to try to wage a war on God. Not realizing in the end God wins the war. The war has already been won.but they will not see it on this side of life.

        • Eric Clark-Sanchez

          I’m a Deist, tell me why I should switch to believing in your god? Nobody has ever killed anybody, shunned them, hated on them, or judged them with my current God. Tell me why yours is so much better.

          • Guy Pinestra

            You have the absolute right to believe whatever you like. You do NOT have the right to tell me or anyone else that we can’t pray whenever or wherever we want.

          • Eric Clark-Sanchez

            Your right… Deists don’t do that. Christians do.

          • Guy Pinestra

            Christians tell people they cannot pray? Really?

          • Eric Clark-Sanchez

            No, even worse… they tell them they should pray.

          • Guy Pinestra

            If that bothers you you might consider growing a skin…

          • Eric Clark-Sanchez

            Or invoking my 1st amendment right to be free FROM religion.. Just like the guys who came to America in the first place did. They were escaping British Christian theocracy rule.

          • Guy Pinestra

            You have the right to ignore someone exercising their 1st Amendment right to free speech, what you DON’T have is the right to stifle that speech because it ‘offends’ you…

          • Eric Clark-Sanchez

            Really? Tell that to the cry babies who threaten to assault people who use their 1st amendment protected right to burn the American flag.

          • Guy Pinestra

            I’m a little busy right now telling it to YOU…

      • MarioRom

        The freedom to display the subject matter. Atheists and Liberals are so damned stupid.

        • Eric Clark-Sanchez

          Liberals can’t be Christians?

          • MarioRom

            You tell me. They stand for everything God does not.

          • Eric Clark-Sanchez

            You mean like feeding the poor, healing the sick, loving thy neighbor and all those other liberal things? Tell me all those CONSERVATIVE things gods all about? Hating gays, loving guns, greed and lack of empathy? Seems to me when it comes down to it, the alleged non Christian liberals sure do a hell of a lot more of practicing “GOD’S WORD” then the wannabe Christian Conservatives do.

          • MarioRom

            I’m sorry that you’re so ignorant of reality (and that is based on your other posts). I won’t waste time trying to educate the stupid. Never works out. I’ll be wasting my time and you will still remain stupid.

            I’ll leave you with a Bible verse…
            “The heart of the wise inclines to the right, but the heart of the fool to the left.” — Ecclesiastes 10:2

          • Eric Clark-Sanchez

            Oh, so you don’t have any Conservative things God approves of to tell me about?

          • MarioRom

            God is neither left nor right but since you asked, I will give you a Biblical answer.
            The heart of the wise inclines to the right, but the heart of the fool to the left.
            — Ecclesiastes 10:2

          • Eric Clark-Sanchez

            So no conservative things God approves of to tell about?? Am I in your country legally? I was born in Iowa City and both of my parents born in America, as well as all of my grandparents… YOU TELL ME.I am assuming you are judging me by my last name. First of all, your digressing and deflecting from my question, and second, I can quote bible BS too.. Try Matthew 7:1-3 for starters.

          • MarioRom

            Proverbs 12:16

          • Eric Clark-Sanchez

            And you wanna know what’s messed up.. I’ll tell you how I personally can identify an alleged “CHRISTIAN”. I don’t need to hear anything about their religious views or beliefs to know.. The test is VERY simple… ARE THEY BIGOTED?? Yes=Conservative claiming to be a Christian, No= Actual Christian.

          • MarioRom

            I can identify idiots when they can’t seem to get something and keep pushing an agenda and the leftist agenda that you hold so dearly is an evil. Just saying.

            Now, rather than playing with me, may I suggest that you go and play with yourself? Have a happy day!

          • Eric Clark-Sanchez

            Look at you, not being able to name just 1 thing that is conservative that God approves of. When it comes to the point where you have to dip and dodge answering that and instead must try and slam someone else… one REALLY REALLY should re-evaluate their life and what being a Christian really is… You gonna find out being a Christian does not jive with being a conservative.

        • acontraryview

          Please cite where citizens have the freedom to display any subject matter they want to in any location they want to.

          • MarioRom

            Since I don’t do research for Liberals, the onus is on you.

          • acontraryview

            You made the claim. The onus of proof is therefore on you. If you can’t back it up, then you can’t.

          • MarioRom

            Short answer – First Amendment. So why are we to accept the religion of atheism? Atheism is the “Belief that there is no God” and that defines them as a religion. By the government removing one, it endorses the other.

            Isn’t if funny that atheists don’t believe in things like leprechauns, fairies or unicorns but they don’t hate those? It is impossible to hate something that does not exist, therefore since they hate God, He must be real.

    • jimpim

      He already has started to turn by allowing Obama to be president. He will do the rest if Hilary is elected.

  • phil112

    These idiot people that are elected to be of service to the majority are all gonna get a taste of this. Some of it will be violent reactions in the near future. They are elected to serve us and then cater to the demands of a few rabid people from the lunatic fringe.
    From city hall to the whitehouse….we’re coming for you, you maggots! The people have had enough and you haven’t, and you won’t, listen to us. Well, you’re going to hear us and you won’t like it when you do!

    • Names_Stan

      the majority are all gonna get a taste of this. Some of it will be violent reactions in the near future.

      Nothing like violent threats against other political viewpoints to prove one’s love and respect for democracy.

      “We are at heart so profoundly anarchistic that the only form of state we can imagine living in is Utopian; and so cynical that the only Utopia we can believe in is authoritarian.”
      –Lionel Trilling

      • phil112

        That is exactly how we got America in the first place – rebellion against those that tried to suffocate our freedom to worship as we please….or have you not read that part of our history, Stan?

        • Names_Stan

          That is exactly how we got America in the first place

          You’re a real study in sociology, projecting “lunatic fringe” on people who don’t actually want to kill other Americans.

          The people who “got America in the first place” had no basic right of self-government. And of course that’s the very ideal you have no respect for whatsoever.

          Jefferson, Hamilton and the Democratic-Republicans battled the Federalists far more rabidly than any politics you’ve ever glimpsed. But when Aaron Burr turned to violence, however ostensibly ‘fair’ his duel with Hamilton, he became a pariah.

          You don’t even pretend to favor a fair fight. You just want to kill people.

          Your ridiculous 18th century comparisons would be insulting if there were actually enough other lunatics to carry out your fantasies. Fortunately there aren’t.

          That’s why they call it a “fringe”.

        • Jeff Scism

          Its not a rebellion or a revolt, its REESTABLISHMENT of the Supreme Law of the Land, as allowed in that document, The Constitution. It is lawful to RESTORE law under the Constitution.

        • Robert_Loblaw

          So, let me get this straight… you propose killing the people who don’t vote the way you want to?

          YEAH, FREEDOM!

          • Mary Curry

            No we will fight to get back the freedoms that we all AS AMERICANS are entitled to under our Constitution. I will not allow any group to take my guns, my land, my religion or my life without a fight they will never forget.

    • The Skeptical Chymist

      You write about violent reactions in the future, and yet have the chutzpah to refer to those you oppose as “rabid people from the lunatic fringe”? You should take a look in the mirror, phil.

      • phil112

        Mirror? You should open a book and start studying, start reading the newspaper, start watching news shows. There is a difference between an aggressor and a defender. When the aggressor tries to take away your life, it is time for the defender to get violent if that is the only recourse.
        If you don’t get that, you’re an idiot.

        • The Skeptical Chymist

          Show me an aggressor who is trying to take away your life. This is a story about a city council who made the decision to remove an object from government property that endorsed a religion. How is that an aggressor who is trying to take away your life?

          • mmazzi

            They’re coming in, 1000’s at a time to take our country and our lives. Are you daft? Removing every one of them out of our cities and governments is the answer.

          • Jeff Scism

            It is not unlawful for a religious symbol to be on public land. You do realize that in Washington DC, there is a Congress funded “National Cathedral”? Its open for use by ANY religion. The Establishment Clause is there to prohibit the Government from declaring a Nationally mandated religion.

  • Charlie Lines

    I’M NOT A CHRISTIAN BUT I’M NOT OFFENDED BY SOMETHING LIKE THIS. i THINK IT’S TIME TO FIND THE LEADERS OF THESE GROUPS AND MAKE THEM AN OFFER THEY CAN’T REFUSE.

    • Robert_Loblaw

      I LIKE YELLING! WHAT ARE WE YELLING ABOUT? IS THERE SOMETHING SHINY?

  • La Lummus

    great news lets remove all these liberal crazies. They have done enough damages.

    • Eric Clark-Sanchez

      A liberal is behind this? Liberals can’t be Christians?

  • Joseph Mundru

    Christians should work together to remove the evil laws used
    by the people, who sue to take advantage of the loopholes in the constitution
    and in the judicial system. The constitution should be rewritten and modified.

    • Jeff Scism

      Actually NO. The Constitution is plain and direct, advocating rewriting it is simply making it void. You don’t flush a founding document by advocating constant changes. Its a BASE document, and that means it has leeway built in, and prohibitions installed to prevent tyranny.

    • Adam Scott

      There are no loop holes in the Constitution, save one, we are not allowed to imprison those who seek to destroy, misinterpret, and abuse the document for their own ends. We do not study the Constitution enough in school, and this is the result. Allow too many repeats of a lie, and everyone starts to believe it, unless you already know the truth…

    • Eric Clark-Sanchez

      Sooo… you HATE the 1st amendment?

      • Lou9999

        Very disingenuous statement there slick.

  • JDon357

    The USA’s values – OUR values – are being attacked daily by a handful of activists who have formed groups with cool names like “Americans United Against…” or “Freedom From…” or “Mothers Demand Action” or “Law Center For…” or “……Lives Matter” or “American Civil Liberties Union” or “Democrat National Committee”.

    • Eric Clark-Sanchez

      Democrats can’t be Christians?

  • Ross Blankert

    TIME TO CLEAN HOUSE EVERYWHERE IN THE USA. There is no right for athiest to remove God and Christian symbols from every public place. It is not to be freedom from religion. It is freedom to worship and the state is not to establish a religion. Right now the almighty Obama is trying to establish Islam in the USA

    • mmazzi

      From your mouth, please. Clean out all the rat vermin with super toxic pesticide.

      • LadyFreeBird<In God I Trust

        You may be the one needs it in your filthy mouth. He said nothing wrong. You attack him with hate for nothing????????????????????????? Woe………..

    • Cady555

      There are lots of christian symbols in public. Christian symbols in public places is not a problem. Churches of course can put up monuments to honor vets from their religious tradition.

      In this case, people used a public (government owned) park to honor veterans. All this is about is that government monuments to honor vets should honor all vets, not just christian vets.

      I really do not understand the opposition to honoring all vets.

      • Mary Curry

        How is it not a problem when muslims demand the removal of all non-muslim symbols in a room they may use? And the government does not OWN the park, the taxpayers do. Therein lies the problem. Parks are paid for and maintained by tax dollars that come from the citizens. And since when is this cutout not honoring all vets? Does it say that anywhere?

        I am not going to repeat my above post but I will say I am getting tired of people whining about this. The cross is part of many religions, not just Christianity. And t he old saying still stands…THERE ARE NO ATHEISTS IN FOXHOLES

        • Ross Blankert

          For me I have found a more Christian place to be. I am tired of fighting with athiests and communists and left wing loons and arguing about what I believe and what I do not believe. Here in Panama, there are problems of course but the family unit is still intact and the churchs are full on Sunday. There are many religious things done in public and you don’t have to be ashamed of being a believer. I never was but I am more comfortable here. I moved to Panama to spend my last days. I pray for each of you that you will find your way through that narrow gate.

        • Nate

          Thank You for saying this. Government in and of itself doesn’t own anything. We as taxpayers do and as taxpayers have the right to determine what public(not government) property is used for.

    • Eric Clark-Sanchez

      And how is he doing that?

  • shadow1100

    Do what the Clinton’s and Obama do, just ignore the government. No need for lawyers. Make the feds come into the town and TRY to remove it. stand up and say screw you.

    • Eric Clark-Sanchez

      Clintons? Your just saying that because she is running for President.

      • Lou9999

        Was that Hillary at the Democratic presidential debates? I couldn’t recognize her because the amount of makeup on her face would make a mortician blush.

  • TSF

    Ban Liberalism.

    • Robert_Loblaw

      freedom is over-rated, anyway.

      • Lou9999

        I think she meant ban stupidity.

    • Eric Clark-Sanchez

      What makes it “liberal”?

  • hitechsailor

    It’s call the “establishment” clause for a reason: it forbids the establishment of a government-sponsored religion. The text: “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof;” No where in that text or in the entire Constitution is there a “separation” clause; fire-walling government and religion. Such rulings coming from the illogical minds of Liberal judges and are not based in the Constitution. Politicians unwilling to defend it should be replaced with those who will.

    • Jeff Scism

      Exactly right, no national religion, and no interference with the freedom of worship, anywhere, anytime, by Government.

    • Eric Clark-Sanchez

      Sooo…. “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion,”… ISN’T a separation clause?

      • hitechsailor

        No it is not a separation clause. The only prohibition in that clause is against the state creating an official religion like the Church of England in the UK. The remainder of the clause actually prohibits government interference in the exercise of religion. Prior to the last half of the 20th century this was used to support nondenominational religious involvement in government. The logic for this is implied in the Federalist Papers and made explicit in Madison’s and Mason’s letters regarding the Bill of Rights. Furthermore, the Northwest Ordinance was written by these same group just a year earlier. It included this statement: “Religion, morality, and knowledge, being necessary to good government
        and the happiness of mankind, schools and the means of education shall
        forever be encouraged.” The authors obviously saw the need for religion (not A religion) as part of good government.

  • pma95

    Liberals take notice. The revolution has begun and you are the enemy.

    • Eric Clark-Sanchez

      Liberals don’t practice Christianity? Your fellow Americans are your enemy?

      • LadyFreeBird<In God I Trust

        There are Liberal christians. Most are very Pro-Sin.
        Many Christians do not promote sins.
        So yes there are Liberals who say they are christian.

  • http://conservativechristianvoice.blogspot.com/ Oscar Y. Harward

    Wow! Wow! Wow! What a victory in defeating the ‘left-wing’ who oppose the ‘US Military’ and our ‘God’ in Heaven symbol!

    The City of Knoxville, Iowa voted to remove their City Council members who voted to remove a soldier bending down on one knee before a cross-shaped grave marker.

    • Eric Clark-Sanchez

      So, what makes it the “LEFT WING” who is doing this? Democrats can’t be Christians?

  • mmazzi

    Hell of a headline. Bravo, Iowa. U.S. heed this message. Throw the bums out!

  • Spartacus Maximus

    Religitards are deluded dopes who don’t understand that the US is a 100 percent secular country. Apparently they slept through their American Government classes.

    • Mary Curry

      The difference between the government and the people is that the government may not advocate for one religion over another and cannot force people to have to honor a chosen religion. We, as the people inhabiting this country may or may not belong to an organized religion as we choose. I am not a Christian but I will stand with them to protect what they have. For when we are standing together we all win.

      • LadyFreeBird<In God I Trust

        I am a Christian and I thank you that you are willing to stand with us to protect what we have. Thank you!

    • Guy Pinestra

      Please tell me where you came up with that insane idea? 100% secular? You and your ilk are the only ‘deluded dopes’ I can see…

  • baergy

    Sounds like they got the wrong Mayor, too! He must be some kind of stupid ! ! !

  • wattsupstupid

    1st Amendment; Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances. I hate the way these stupid groups have twisted and misinterpreted the 1st Amendment. What it says is that the gov. will not establish one religion over another ie England had the Church of England and everyone was to belong to it. They forget the next few words that say or PROHIBITING the FREE EXERCISE there of. Meaning we can exhibit what we want, we can pray where we want. The courts have not been doing their job of upholding this Amendment and they all need to be kicked out as well. Time for a house cleaning!

    • acontraryview

      “They forget the next few words that say or PROHIBITING the FREE EXERCISE there of. Meaning we can exhibit what we want, we can pray where we want. ”

      No, that is not what it means. It means that Congress and, via the 14th Amendment, the States, may not pass a law that makes it illegal to practice a particular faith. The 1st Amendment does not provide the protection that people are allowed to practice their faith at any time, in any manner, and in any place they care to. There are restrictions.

      • Guy Pinestra

        A plain reading of the Amendment puts the lie to your statement. A further reading of the Federalist papers and the writings of our nation’s Founders underlines your blatant error.

        • acontraryview

          “A plain reading of the Amendment puts the lie to your statement.”

          Please cite what portion of the 1st Amendment renders by statement a lie.

          Are you suggesting that the 1st Amendment provides the protection that citizens are allowed to express there religious beliefs at any time, in any place, and in any manner they care to?

          • Guy Pinestra

            The very sentence you highlighted.

            And yes, I am suggesting EXACTLY that. Are you suggesting that only SOME religions (Think Islam) has that right?

          • acontraryview

            Which sentence?

            “And yes, I am suggesting EXACTLY that.”

            You are mistaken. Citizens are not allowed to express their religious beliefs at any time, in any place, and in any manner they care to. There are restrictions.

            “Are you suggesting that only SOME religions (Think Islam) has that right?”

            Religions don’t have rights. Citizens have rights. Those rights apply to citizens regardless of the faith to which they hold.

          • Guy Pinestra

            Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof… FREE exercise thereof… FREE exercise thereof… FREE exercise thereof… You get it yet? Name those ‘restrictions’…

          • acontraryview

            “You get it yet?”

            Yes, I do get that. What that means is Congress, and via the 14th amendment the states, are not allowed to pass a law which says, for instance, people are prohibited from practicing the Hindu faith, or Jewish faith, or Muslim faith. It does NOT mean that citizens are allowed to express their faith at any time, in any place, and in any manner they care to.

            “Name those ‘restrictions’…”

            They are numerous. From a big picture standpoint, you are not allowed to express your faith in a manner which infringes upon the rights of others. For example, churches are not allowed to ring their bells at any hour they care to. There are restrictions. You are not allowed to go onto someone’s property and express your religious beliefs. You are not allowed to go out in front of your house at 3 am and express your faith using a bullhorn. You are not allowed to engage in human sacrifice. You are not allowed to stand up in a restaurant and start proclaiming your faith.

            Below is some information on judicial rulings on this issue:

            “Freedom of religion means freedom to hold an opinion or belief, but not to take action in violation of social duties or subversive to good order,” In Reynolds v. United States (1878), the Supreme Court found that while laws cannot interfere with religious belief and opinions, laws can be made to regulate some religious practices (e.g., human sacrifices, and the Hindu practice of suttee). The Court stated that to rule otherwise, “would be to make the professed doctrines of religious belief superior to the law of the land, and in effect permit every citizen to become a law unto himself. Government would exist only in name under such circumstances.”[27] In Cantwell v. Connecticut (1940), the Court held that the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment applied the Free Exercise Clause to the states. While the right to have religious beliefs is absolute, the freedom to act on such beliefs is not absolute.[28]”

          • Guy Pinestra

            In other words, your religious practices cannot violate someone else’s rights. Do you see Christians wanting to perform human sacrifices? No. Does a Christian have the ABSOLUTE right to pray whenever and wherever they want to? Yes.

          • acontraryview

            “Do you see Christians wanting to perform human sacrifices?”

            No, I do not. How is that relevant to the fact that there are restrictions?

            “Does a Christian have the ABSOLUTE right to pray whenever and wherever they want to?”

            Yes, provided that they way they do so does violate restrictions.

      • Lou9999

        Name the restrictions.

        • acontraryview

          In general, you are not allowed to express your religious beliefs in a manner which infringes upon the rights of others. For example, you are not allowed to go out in front of your house at 3 am and express your religious beliefs with a bullhorn.

          • Lou9999

            Well no $hit. You are not allowed to go in front of your house at 3 AM and play rap music either. Weak example.

          • acontraryview

            If you read my first sentence, it covers a broad range of things. I gave you a specific example. It is accurate.

            Here’s a couple of others – you are not allowed to stand up in a restaurant and start sharing your religious beliefs. You are not allowed to stand up in a city council meeting and start sharing your religious beliefs. You are not allowed to go onto private property and start sharing your religious beliefs.

            Are other activities also not allowed in those settings? Yes. But that is unrelated to the fact that there are restrictions on exercise of religious beliefs.

    • Cady555

      Yes. Each and every individual can put up a monument on their own property of a soldier kneeling before a cross. But if government property is used for that display, the monument can’t honor one religion only.

      • Lou9999

        Then get rid of the National Cathedral in Washington DC. That is funded by the US taxpayer. This issue is nothing more than a group of atheists with nothing more to do than cause trouble.

        • Cady555

          The national cathedral is most certainly not funded by taxpayers.

          From cathedral dot org

          “The Cathedral Relies Entirely on Gifts

          “Washington National Cathedral is operated by the Protestant Episcopal Cathedral Foundation (PECF), which is recognized by the Internal Revenue Service as a not-for-profit, educational 501(c)(3) organization. All gifts to the Cathedral and memberships in the National Cathedral Association are tax-deductible to the extent permitted by law.

          “The Cathedral was built and is operated solely on the support of private donations. The Cathedral receives no support from the federal government or any national church.”

          The National Cathedral is an excellent Christian organization. Its mission is to serve as a spiritual resource for our nation. It is an example of church state separation done well and done respectfully.

  • Mary Moerles

    God Bless the people of Knoxville! The lefty socialist/communist need people like you, and more to stand against their plan to fundamentally change America. It’s refreshing and great to know people are awake, catching on, standing up, and speaking out.

  • x_ray_tech

    Thank you American Patriots of Knoxville, Iowa!
    UNITED WE STAND

    • Cady555

      What is patriotic about disrespecting or ignoring veterans who don’t happen to be Christian?

      • x_ray_tech

        1. The People have spoken. The majority voted to leave the cross there. The majority ruled. The way it is supposed to work in America. Political correctness does not represent America or American culture and does not belong in this Free nation.

        2. A cross included on the memorial does not leave out atheists. Christians love all people of all faiths and of no faith. We may not love the non Christian beliefs they practice but we love the person. This IS a Christian nation and is what our Constitution and our laws are/were based on.

        3. As far as I know, atheists have no single established symbol. But all religions have the same freedoms and rights and can also take up a collection of votes and money to erect a memorial too. So why don’t they do that rather than wanting to disrespect and ignore Christian veterans? If atheism, for example, has no specific symbol then for the memorial to not include any symbol at all would be only representing atheists. So we are right back at your original question to me, only this time we would be only respecting atheists and disrespecting and ignoring everyone else.

  • Tom

    If they do not like our christian traditions that made this a great nation they are welcome to move where we are hated, the middle east.

  • Tim Roof

    Let’s be honest here. Who in the world believes that Americans United for Separation of Church and State actually received a complaint? No, they totally make that stuff up because they can; they do not have to reveal the name of the complainant. If there is any complaint at all, you can bet it’s from a current members of that organization who spend time driving around looking for issues about which to complain.

  • Jeff Scism

    The Establishment Clause in no way says its illegal to place a cross on public property. The establishment Clase states that its illegal for the government to establish a national religion, like we had under the Church of England, who acted as the King’s tax collector, requiring everyone, no matter what religion they practiced, to be a member and TITHE to it, as well as Pay all taxes to it in King James’ name. AMERICA was colonized by people who wanted to escape State Religion and worship as they pleased.

    The so Called “separation” between church and state was implemented by the US Supreme Court, from a reference in a letter written by Jefferson. Jefferson was careful to provide for freedom to worship, despite his private beliefs, very altruistic of our founding fathers.

    Too bad justices in later courts didn’t believe in their altruism.

  • acontraryview

    Since no mention is made of the newly elected council members position on this issue, and no information is given as to the reason people voted for who they voted for, it seems quite disingenuous to suggest that the two things are related.

    “as it believes removal of the monument is unconstitutional.”

    What portion of the Constitution is violated by a city council voting to remove a display from public property?

    • Lou9999

      A reasonable person would think that the two incumbents who voted to remove the memorial were beaten due to their vote on the issue. The issue was a hot topic in the town. Ummm, yea, I am thinking they lost because they voted to remove the memorial. I have a doctorate in Common Sense.

      • acontraryview

        An intelligent person would base their conclusion on facts that show a relationship of causality, not conjecture based solely on a relationship of concurrence.

        Apparently you got your doctorate from a diploma mill.

        • Lou9999

          Hahaha….love the SAT words. As I am sure you know, incumbents win the majority of elections. People generally don’t like change unless there is an issue of significant importance. Thus, when not one, but two head down the chute after a fiery issue, then yes, a common sense person knows why they were booted from their jobs. Especially in a town of that size where every vote counts.

          You are just like my wife. If I say the sky is blue, you would say it is aqua blue. I have seen your type before.

          • acontraryview

            What SAT words are you referring to?

            Given that the vote of the council was on a Monday night, and the election was on the next day, it seems unlikely that this issue was the cause of the election results.

            You are like many people. You want to create a statement of fact, when there are no facts to back it up. I have seen your type before.

          • Lou9999

            You must not have lived in a small town. Word speaks like wildfire. I grew up in a town that size. If you sneezed, everybody knew it. If you think that vote on Monday night didn’t affect the elections, I have some prime land in Afghanistan to sell you. What a coinsidence that two incumbents were defeated the next day after voting on a hot topic issue…….in an election where the margin of victory can be 20 votes due to the small voting electorate. Those towns have a healthy “cafe and coffee crowd” that starts at 0500 in the morning. Local, state and national gossip is the norm. I wonder what the topic was on the morning of election day. All it took was 1 member of the Council to tell somebody the board results and everybody in town knew it. Again, the two who voted to take down the monument just happened to be defeated the next day…..what a coincidence. Grow up Slick.

  • Cady555

    The replacement memorial looked great – boots and a rifle and professionally done. It honored all who served.

    I’m extremely confused. Could someone explain why it is so important to use government property to honor only christians who served our country and specifically exclude everyone else?

    Why is it admirable to endorse a monument that disrespects many people who served and died for our nation? Why is it a bad thing to endorse a very nice looking monument that is respectful to all veterans, including christians?

    • Mary Curry

      Show me where it says it is only to honor Christians?

      • Cady555

        The Latin cross is a Christian symbol. It is the symbol used to represent christianity just like the star of David represents Judaism.

        A monunent of a soldier kneeling in front of a star of David would send a message that the person who made the ultimate sacrifice was jewish. Kneeling in front of a Latin Cross indicates the deceased soldier was Christian.

        I really don’t understand why the Christians in this town object to honoring all vets.

  • Mike Dills

    now if only all elections were done this way maybe we could get back on track !

  • Zeke

    Yet the display is still being removed from public property.

    In the end, UA won, the council members who voted to comply with established law and spare the town the cost of defending an unwinnable lawsuit are out of a job, and Christians again demonstrate their lack of understanding of the Establishment Clause and disrespect of the Constitution.

    • Cady555

      Plus, in the end, the town got a really nice looking monument to veterans.

  • gman4691

    priceless! oh, and please don’t feed the trolls…there is at least one in the comments section…

  • Tim

    The more that the actions of the FFRF and the AU to try to write letters removing Icons of the U.S. the more they are seeing the backlash against them by those who respect the symbolism of the cross, and of those that sacrificed their lives for our freedoms of religion, and the constitution. It looks to me like people are fed up with this “politically correct” liberal agenda who keeps trying to remove any group Icons from freedoms our nation was built on, will ultimately fail. These groups are actually waking up the community of believers, in which we say enough is enough.

  • BHarp

    We the people will uprise come next pres election too. Book it

  • Richard

    when the leftist think they are god, the people can & will exercise there rights given to them by GOD

    • Eric Clark-Sanchez

      Leftists don’t practice Christianity?

  • JaneBlacksmith

    “Mayor Brian Hatch defended the city council to reporters, stating that none really wanted to move the memorial, but that in the best interest of the city, some voted to do so in order to avoid a lawsuit.”

    Yes Mayor Brian Hatch, spinelessly appeasing to special interests and nefarious agendas is always in the best interests of your community. Mayor Brian Hatch ought to be the next to go.

  • Roxanna

    “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof . . .” Everyone forgets the last part of that sentence. It is unconstitutional to prohibit anyone or anything from exercising their religious rights.

  • JayJenkins

    I am an Iraq war vet.. I am also an Atheist. I was an Atheist before I joined the Army, I was an Atheist while I served, and I am an Atheist now. There are many people in the military and many different religions. To try and Christianize all veterans is just wrong.

    • Cady555

      Exactly.

      Thank you for your service, Sir. (Or Ma’am)

  • http://richmondtommy.wordpress.com/ Tommy Tomhan

    I am not a Christian but I would have no problem with this memorial but it does open the door for other religions to erect their symbols on public land and that could be problematic for the local government there.

  • Dianne

    They need to VOTE OUT the Mayor next…he is a coward and they do not need him…for those who DENY CHRIST will be DENIED by CHRIST.

  • Mac Sterling

    “The Establishment Clause of the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution prohibits government bodies from promoting religion on public land…..” IT DOES NOT! it says “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof…..” The amendment (for ignorant – which means not educated or enlightened about a subject, not stupid as most “ignorant” people think) says that CONGRESS shall not make a LAW establishing a national religion, or a law preventing people from worshiping as they please.

    First, all of these suits NEVER concern nor involve congress or any law. and do not involve ANY prohibition of someone preventing you from worshiping as you wish.

    Second, the constitution of Iowa (Section 1, Article 3) has the same words as the US constitution except it substitutes “general assembly” for “congress”, and it adds ” nor shall any person be compelled to attend any place of worship, pay tithes, taxes, or other rates for building or repairing places of worship, or the maintenance of any minister, or ministry”. This article, likewise, deals with LAWS and coercion of behavior by the state. Neither of these are happening in this case.

    Americans United for Separation of Church and State – get a life.

  • J R Moses

    If the people would react this way in every like situation………..the bullschidt just MIGHT stop.

  • fuzzi

    Good for them, the voters have spoken.

    • OneStepAway

      Yes, it was a refreshing decision, wasn’t it, in today’s climate? I’m waiting for the day cross-shaped gravestones in public cemeteries become the target because someone gets offended and they’re on public land.

      • Cady555

        It is completely appropriate for a Christian symbol to appear on the memorial of a Christian person. No one is offended at all by a person being remembered according to their own religious tradition.

        Every (modern) gravestone at Arlington National Cemetery has a place for a religious symbol befitting the person. (Gravestones from 100 years ago and more may be plainer.)

        Likewise, there is nothing offensive about a Muslim symbol on the memorial of a Muslim person and a Hindu symbol on the memorial of a hindu person.

        It would be arrogant to place a Buddhist symbol on a memorial intended to honor Hindus and Muslims and Christians. It would be absurd to expect Hindus and Muslims and Christians to interpret a Buddhist symbol as representative of them.

        It is arrogant to place a Christian symbol on a memorial intended to honor all soldiers because not all soldiers are Christians.

        • OneStepAway

          The memorial was placed by a veteran and crosses are often used as gravestones on veterans’ graves. And other graves, for that matter. For the AU to even target this memorial shows just how nit-picky the anti-Christian crowd can get, imo.

      • fuzzi

        The crosses placed by the side of the road for MVA victims have been a target for years. I recall reading about NJ state workers removing them “for safety reasons”, but that was probably about decade ago, maybe a little more recent.

        The cross is offensive to many non-believers, because of what it stands for, God’s mercy. Those who reject it don’t want God’s mercy, because they don’t want to admit they are sinners.

        • Cady555

          Roadside memorials at crash scenes are a safety hazard.

          Think about it. Do we really want a distraction placed at the very spot where a fatal crash occurred? I cannot think of a worse way to honor a loved one than to contribute to another accident at the same spot.

          There is bias in roadside memorials. Some states will remove all memorials except crosses. This is special treatment, in favor of Christians. Christians are allowed to create safety hazards but no one else can.

          My state replaces roadside memorials with a traffic sign “Drive safely in memory of -name- ”

          • fuzzi

            But billboards are not a distraction? Are they being removed for being a safety hazard?

          • Cady555

            Billboards are governed by city and/or state codes that govern where they may be placed.

          • OneStepAway

            It can also have the opposite effect, as a warning: “somebody died here, drive carefully or you might be next.” At least that’s how I look at it, but in Southern Ontario, where I am, roadside memorials are carefully placed so as not to be distracting.

        • OneStepAway

          Ah. Roadside memorials are generally left alone around here, or moved from a potentially dangerous location to a safer one close to the accident location by the road crews who maintain the highways. I don’t recall any local uproars over them, anyway. At least not yet……

          Thing is too, for unbelievers a cross is often associated with death. It’s a recognizable symbol, maybe not a universal symbol, but a well-known one. Those who don’t know the Lord Jesus Christ don’t want to be reminded of their mortality either though, for fear they really will answer to Him when they die.

  • Katharine

    …law…prohibiting the free exercise thereof…? Some?

  • http://thebenevolentthou.com/ Max T. Furr

    This is one of the problems with democracy; a public ignorant of the Constitution can oust a government that attempts to follow the Constitution. Yet any deceptive, self-serving politician, so long as he frequently thumps the Bible and goes to right church, will have the electorate’s support.

  • magormissabib

    A memorial with a cross does not ”promote” christianity. These militant atheists need to be put in place.

    • Cady555

      What does a christian cross used as a memorial promote?

      If it were replaced by the Star of David would you still say the memorial honored all soldiers?

      • magormissabib

        Learn the english language. The cross being there is not the same thing as the governemnt ”establishing ” a national religion.

  • http://www.moadaron.com/ Harold Smith

    So many people like to abuse and mis-interpret the idea of Seperation of Church and State………..The main purpose was for WE THE PEOPLE to NEVER BE HINDERED FROM PRACTICING OUR FAITH by a secular government…………………..Not, the other way around!!!!!!!

  • BayStreetBabe

    Over 3000 crosses on public property would make these guys catatonic; but it makes us proud

  • Lois Johnson-Christians

    WTG Knoxville Iowa from Estherville Iowa

  • Allen Brown

    Sounds to me that Americans United for Separation of Church and State uses terrorist threats (do as we say or else) to get what they want isn’t that illegal

  • jimpim

    A few years ago in Iowa, the high court gave the green light to gay marriage. The voters of Iowa thru the judges off the bench. There is always hope.

  • watruthinking

    blatant lie by blatant liars
    — and Americans are so p*ssy-whipped they roll over and play dead on command.

    … Americans United for Separation of Church and State (AU) sent a letter

    “The Establishment Clause of the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution prohibits government bodies from promoting religion on public land, including through the display of Latin crosses—‘

    THIS IS A LIE. AND THEY ARE THE LIARS

    When will we stop HONORING THE LIE?

    .. nevermind — p-whipped Americans — we got your drift …

    ” please, please, AU — please come TELL US THE LIE AGAIN so we can trash another Christian symbol — we’re not all Christians you know — and we actually HATE THOSE CHRISTIANS… they’re SO ARROGANT and ANNOYING. So you just show up with your BIG LIE and we’ll roll over and play dead in our brains — and GET RID OF THOSE ANNOYING CHRISTIAN THINGS. They’re really not all they say they are anyway — bunch of hypocrites — all of ’em . Screw those hypocrite Christians with the big lie — that’s what we’ll do … YEAH! screw ’em all”

  • Carole

    Knoxville, Iowa a Beautiful Town! God Bless America along with the Heartfelt Monument in your Park! It’s a Gift that should Offend no one! Be Proud!

  • David Hunt, PE

    As a Jew, I have ZERO issues with this monument.
    Seriously, atheists, is your non-faith so weak that you need to do this?