Christian cross has no place on L.A. County seal, judge rules


Maybe the difference in the dilemma you pose is that slavery is something that we should be ashamed of.
The Christian heritage of California is not something that a normal person should be ashamed of. (Yes, I’m implying that the bullies at ACLU are not normal.)


As this was a Federal court, how long before the names of **San Antonio, **TX; **Corpus Christi, **TX; **San Jacinto, **TX, and the cross on Austin’s civic shield come under fire?



Howz about Sacramento, San Diego, San Francisco, santa Barbara, San Bernadino…the cross isn’t a symbol of what to believe, its where the community comes from.


The full name of Los Angeles originally was “Nuestra Señora Reina de Los Angeles.” The capital of California is named Sacramento. Why not just stop being hypocrites and get rid of it all? I’m all for mutual tolerance but it seems that separation has made people oversensitive to each other and this is supported by today’s schools. Perhaps this is the logical end result of total secularism but I think it’s mad.

“Our system of government makes no sense unless tied to a deeply held belief in God—and I don’t care what it is.” Dwight D. Eisenhower

What moral foundation do absolute secularists propose to found the country on - statism?


Gee whiz, anybody remember what we called the country that renamed “Saint Petersburg” finally to “Leningrad”?

Hint, it rhymes with “evil empire.”


Los Angeles was founded by Catholic missionaries though. The cross had historical significance. It was not favoring Christianity.


Well, if they think the cross has no place in their county, they better encourage everyone in the area to boycott Christmas in 2016, after all why would they want to be seen celebrating the birth of Jesus?


Unfortunately, most people seem to consider Christmas a secular holiday meant only for eating rich food and giving and getting gifts. Sad but true.


They are just trying to appeal to their population, whatever is ‘popular belief’ at any given time, that is what the county govt will be seen promoting.

They are seeking to be in league with whatever the popular public sentiment at the time is, its doesnt matter what it is either, as long as its popular at the time, they WILL support it.

I believe there is a word for this…lol


Agreed. If representation of Christianity is the issue, get rid of the mission.


Like certain traffic signs.

The germane restriction on government is that Congress cannot establish (a state church). In no way does having a cross, emblematic of the role of Christianity in the development of the area, establish a state Church.
One waits for the day when this anti-Christian, anti-constitutional movement takes on the Christian names of thousands of cities across the country.



Then, we could be just like the old Soviet Union: St. Petersburg to Leningrad…etc. They were very good at renaming cities. I wonder how much it cost them to change the names…and then change them back later?


San Francisco and Los Angles wanted to but they found out Sodom and Gomorrah were already taken:)


They didn’t explore, develop or civilize California. Catholics did.

This country might be better off if it were a theocracy, but it’s not. It was founded on separation of church - any church - and state. The ruling was correct.

No, this country was not founded on separation of church and state. In fact at the time the Constitution was ratified, several states has official state churches.

Bingo! :thumbsup:


Oddly, God destroyed 2 of these cities, but modern San Fran and LA are allowed to prosper…??

Maybe its the time frame though, anyone care to guess how much time Sodom and Gomorrah had before they were destroyed…I mean, when you look at LA and SF, they are relatively ‘young’.


If California wants to rid itself of all Christian connotations, there are a lot of cities whose names will have to be changed. The state is practically a litany of saints from San Luis Obispo clear up to San Francisco. And let’s not forget San Diego and Sacramento! The ACLU will be very busy.


But separation of church and state is a violation of Catholic teaching. Separation of church and state was condemned by Blessed Pope Pius IX in the Syllabus of Errors.

How can you defend this federal judge, who is essentially singling out the Christian faith for mistreatment? :confused:

Thus, the ruling cannot be correct.


I don’t see how Catholic teaching on separation of church and state has any relevance whatsoever to how a judge should rule. Because whether the church agrees with it or not, we have a secular government, with separation of church and state.


DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit