Uh oh... the wingnuts will be out for the July San Diego Mayor election

[cascadiance]

They've got their rallying cry now with the City Council just voting to have the fate of the cross on Mt. Soledad go through yet another proposition vote in the July 26th special election for mayor.

Folks, we're going to have to get to work that much harder to get the vote out for Donna Frye now.

Interesting that Frye voted along with Murphy to reverse the earlier council decision to prevent the city from donating the cross and surrounding lands to the federal government, even though she and those opposed remain concerned about potential lawsuits to continue.

She probably knew that voting against it would expose her that much more to a mobilized religious right that wants to protect the cross. Still, with all of those churchgoers going out to vote in July, she's now got her work cut out for her.

http://www.signonsandiego.com/news/metro/20050518-9999-1n18cross.html

[slackmaster]

1. It's not just the religious right who want to protect the cross

I'm an agnostic or atheist (depending on how the terms are defined) and I want the cross to stay. I don't feel nearly as strongly about it as I do about many other things, but my preference as a lifelong San Diegan is to keep it where it is.

BTW I voted for Donna Frye in the last election, and DID fill in the bubble.

[cascadiance]

2. I think you're right...

that there are many others besides heavily religious types that want the cross still here. I myself have mixed feelings. I wouldn't mind having other religious (and non-religious) icons there at the site to help make it seem more pluralistic and not just for Christians, kind of like the Supreme Court has Moses and the 10 Commandments (which the wingnuts will constantly remind you of), along with other "lawgivers" such as Mohammed (which the wingnuts will constantly neglect to tell you), to make it more of a historical thing rather than a prescribed belief thing. On the other hand, taking this cross down makes me feel that it might be something like Brazilians feeling they have to take down the statue of Christ looking over Rio De Janeiro, which would be just wrong, with it's very historic and artful placement there.

I guess my main concern, which I also had if a runoff election had to be held in November when Arnold will have his army of folks voting for his propositions then, is that the turnout will be more heavy for the rethugs with those other votes going on too.

[rinsd]

3. This could get ugly.....

Didn't a previous prop dealing with the cross pass by a healthy margin?

Oh well, Mt Soledad means many things to many people. I bring visitors up there to see the memorial and the view (which you likely know is amazing)

[slackmaster]

4. The previous public vote was on a confusing ballot issue

One of those "yes means no, no means yes" initiatives. But people did choose the vote that would supposedly have had the best chance of keeping the cross in place.

I bring visitors up there to see the memorial and the view (which you likely know is amazing)

I've been there hundreds of times starting in 1962 when my family moved to La Jolla.

[rinsd]

6. That's right....

...among the seemingly endless props & intiatives that election I found it the most confusing.

[maveric]

5. What was done about the Mt. Helix cross? (La Mesa)

Mt. Helix does belong to the city of La mesa or the county I beleive. Its still there and church services are also held there.

[slackmaster]

7. Or how about the fact that San Diego is named after a Catholic semi-deity?

The city of Los Angeles offends me because I don't believe in angels, and I know for a fact it wasn't named after the baseball team!

:evilgrin:

[Liberty Belle]

8. The Mt. Helix cross was donated to a private group

which maintains the property now. I've been told that the Mt. Helix cross was on private land long before it became public, then became private again. Supposedly the courts differentiate that from the Mt. Soledad cross, which I believe was always on public property.

Mt. Soledad's cross is also a bona fide war memorial, however, with plaques commerating soldiers who have died, so it has a legitimate claim to being a historic site. Although I would not supporting building new religious symbols on public property, I wish there could be a way to keep this cross in place because it has such emotional significance for many veterans in our community.

I've heard that some groups are now challenging public funds used to maintain California's missions, the oldest buildings in our state which clearly have historic importance. At some point, a line needs to be drawn or we may lose many historic structures.