Buckshot
10-19-2005, 01:23 AM
...........The city seal of Redlands, when it was incorporated in 1888 looked like a postmark. Just a circle with Redlands on top, California on the bottom and Incorp 1888 in the center.
In 1963 a new city deal was adopted by the city counsel. Basicly like above except the Incorp 1888 was put on the rim also. The inner circle was divided into 4 equal pie shaped pieces. The city has a website, so you can access it and see what the seal looks like. Naturally there won't be a cross on it.
Bottom left had mountains in the background, a plowed field, a shining sun and an orange tree (Redlands was bigtime citrus ). Upper left had some city type buildings with a gearwheel superimposed to represent progress and manufacturing. Upper right has an open book, a set of balance scales over that and then superimposed a flaming torch, to signify education (University of Redlands and etc).
The issue that came up a bit over a year ago was when the ACLU sailed into town and said that the cross in the bottom right section had to come off, or they would sue the city. In that section is the representation of a church with a steeple and the cross is shinning in sky above and to it's left. Now Redlands has quite a few churches. And many of them are really nice fancy old churches.
Redlands was developed as a wintertime escape for people from back east (Read wealthy people from back east). As a result there were lots of churches. On the corner of Cajon and Fern there is a church on 3 corners and the 4th is the YMCA. They call it "The Lords Corner".
I digress. So the city covered up the cross on all city vehicles, police cars, fire engines, stationary, etc, & etc. This really pissed off a bunch of people so they circulated a petition (which I signed) to have the cross re-instated on the city seal.
Now I am not a deeply religious person, and won't go off on a tangent with that, but the whole deal just really bends me the wrong way. First of all its been there for 42 years and no one has died from a apopectic seizure because they were Hindu, or Hari Chrisna or anything else. Like most other cities, Redlands has people of diverse ethnicities, and beliefs. Up to this point no one has had any problem with the cross on the seal.
Now in the voters info pamphlet the argument against having it re-instated says the city WILL loose the court case and it's estimated to cost a couple hundred thousand bucks. But also parroting the ACLU, they agree that it isn't right to have it there because of the "Seperation of Church and State". So all this time these idjits have been in a sweat over it, but just never said anything? Or maybe it never inpinged on their lives so it was okay? So why the hand wringing now?
NowTHAT is just so much BS. The seperation of church and state is nothing more then a clause to keep the government from instituting a FEDERAL approved church, like they did in England. There would be no religious persecution due to one' beliefs. The government would be seperate from forming or regulating and religion.
On the other hand, it may be simplistic of me but if the ACLU is FOR it, ah'm AGIN it. If you look at what the lunatics in the ACLU want you'll see that it is the dismantling of most everything that made this country great.
They want to force the Boy Scouts, a PRIVATE organization to allow gays (oops sorry, I meant queers) as scoutmasters. Sure they like boys. Oh Bobby, would you like to sleep in my tent tonight? Yack!. Let the weirdos start their own club.
When Levi Strauss quit donating money to the Boy Scouts (hey it's their money, so they can quit) I quit buying their product because of WHY they quit donating, and it was the Scouts stand on homosexuals. In fact I just made a donation to the Boy Scouts Legal Defense Fund last week to help them fight off the ACLU.
So anyway I'm pretty sure it will get passed, and I'm pretty sure the ACLU will make a big circus out of it. A large lawfirm has said they will represent the city free of charge. Of course if they loose the city will have to pay the costs of whatever the court decides.
However I'm voting FOR the proposition, and I will be willing to pay my share, and then some, of the fine the city recieves if it looses. I am just sick to death, and dang tired and wore out on this crap, and that's all it is. My life will not change one way or the other, but that isn't the issue.
..............Buckshot
In 1963 a new city deal was adopted by the city counsel. Basicly like above except the Incorp 1888 was put on the rim also. The inner circle was divided into 4 equal pie shaped pieces. The city has a website, so you can access it and see what the seal looks like. Naturally there won't be a cross on it.
Bottom left had mountains in the background, a plowed field, a shining sun and an orange tree (Redlands was bigtime citrus ). Upper left had some city type buildings with a gearwheel superimposed to represent progress and manufacturing. Upper right has an open book, a set of balance scales over that and then superimposed a flaming torch, to signify education (University of Redlands and etc).
The issue that came up a bit over a year ago was when the ACLU sailed into town and said that the cross in the bottom right section had to come off, or they would sue the city. In that section is the representation of a church with a steeple and the cross is shinning in sky above and to it's left. Now Redlands has quite a few churches. And many of them are really nice fancy old churches.
Redlands was developed as a wintertime escape for people from back east (Read wealthy people from back east). As a result there were lots of churches. On the corner of Cajon and Fern there is a church on 3 corners and the 4th is the YMCA. They call it "The Lords Corner".
I digress. So the city covered up the cross on all city vehicles, police cars, fire engines, stationary, etc, & etc. This really pissed off a bunch of people so they circulated a petition (which I signed) to have the cross re-instated on the city seal.
Now I am not a deeply religious person, and won't go off on a tangent with that, but the whole deal just really bends me the wrong way. First of all its been there for 42 years and no one has died from a apopectic seizure because they were Hindu, or Hari Chrisna or anything else. Like most other cities, Redlands has people of diverse ethnicities, and beliefs. Up to this point no one has had any problem with the cross on the seal.
Now in the voters info pamphlet the argument against having it re-instated says the city WILL loose the court case and it's estimated to cost a couple hundred thousand bucks. But also parroting the ACLU, they agree that it isn't right to have it there because of the "Seperation of Church and State". So all this time these idjits have been in a sweat over it, but just never said anything? Or maybe it never inpinged on their lives so it was okay? So why the hand wringing now?
NowTHAT is just so much BS. The seperation of church and state is nothing more then a clause to keep the government from instituting a FEDERAL approved church, like they did in England. There would be no religious persecution due to one' beliefs. The government would be seperate from forming or regulating and religion.
On the other hand, it may be simplistic of me but if the ACLU is FOR it, ah'm AGIN it. If you look at what the lunatics in the ACLU want you'll see that it is the dismantling of most everything that made this country great.
They want to force the Boy Scouts, a PRIVATE organization to allow gays (oops sorry, I meant queers) as scoutmasters. Sure they like boys. Oh Bobby, would you like to sleep in my tent tonight? Yack!. Let the weirdos start their own club.
When Levi Strauss quit donating money to the Boy Scouts (hey it's their money, so they can quit) I quit buying their product because of WHY they quit donating, and it was the Scouts stand on homosexuals. In fact I just made a donation to the Boy Scouts Legal Defense Fund last week to help them fight off the ACLU.
So anyway I'm pretty sure it will get passed, and I'm pretty sure the ACLU will make a big circus out of it. A large lawfirm has said they will represent the city free of charge. Of course if they loose the city will have to pay the costs of whatever the court decides.
However I'm voting FOR the proposition, and I will be willing to pay my share, and then some, of the fine the city recieves if it looses. I am just sick to death, and dang tired and wore out on this crap, and that's all it is. My life will not change one way or the other, but that isn't the issue.
..............Buckshot