Re "Crossing the line," editorial, July 15
Congratulations to The Times for having the courage to support the correct and legal thing to do.
Were the cross a big concrete monument that said "Christians Rule," perhaps more people would see the folly of displaying religious symbols on land that belongs to all. Moving the cross a mile or two from its present location would do nothing to lessen its holiness.
The Mt. Soledad cross has brought out the best and worst in San Diegans. After witnessing nearly two decades of money and energy devoted to keeping the cross where it is, one can't help but wonder about the real agenda of the objectors -- or how much better our city would be had that same amount of enthusiasm and resources been put toward helping the least fortunate among us.
I've read much of the debate about the use of a cross to designate this veterans memorial, including viewpoints expressed by Christians and non-Christians alike.
I understand the viewpoint of non-Christians on this subject -- that the cross represents preference for a specific religion -- but I don't think this is a religious issue. It's an issue of paying respect to those who fought with bravery and determination to safeguard our freedoms.
The cross and the adjacent American flag are visible reminders of their sacrifice to the thousands who drive through the area each day.
It's a sad commentary on our society if your view that the cross should be removed is upheld. What's next, the flag?
"Graceful simplicity" is a fitting description. The top of Mt. Soledad is not a courthouse or other public building in which the local government erected a monument to a specific religion; this is open land that the sun hits when it rises -- a little spot that can lift some hearts. I am not a Christian, yet this Christian symbol is no more a threat to my personal beliefs than gay marriage is a threat to heterosexual marriage.
There are plenty of things that actually harm others -- let's pick our battles.