After Explosion Near War Memorial Cross, Fingers Are Already Being Pointed at Atheists

***Update***: FFRF has responded after getting blamed for causing the explosion.

Around midnight late Thursday night, a small explosion went off near the Mingus Park Vietnam War Memorial cross in Coos Bay, Oregon:

Mingus Park Vietnam War Memorial cross (via FOX News)

There were no injuries. The memorial itself is still standing, but with some damage. There are no suspects yet. There’s no established motive. We pretty much know nothing about this incident other than “it happened.”

So, of course, atheists are already being blamed for it because they once challenged the constitutionality of it:

“We unfortunately are now to the point where explosive devices are being placed next to crosses,” said Hiram Sasser, director of litigation at the Liberty Institute.

“We have no objection to the veterans’ memorials,” FFRF attorney Rebecca Markert wrote to the city. “Our objection is to the message of endorsement of Christianity over other religions and non-religions.”

The FFRF is a Wisconsin-based group of freethinkers, atheists and agnostics that has a history of targeting small towns and communities on issues regarding public displays of the Christian faith.

“These people will stop at nothing to intimidate communities to tear down their veterans memorials,” Sasser told Fox News. “Now the crazies are trying to blow one up.”

Sasser called on the FFRF to stop “fanning the flames of hostility toward veterans memorials.”

“There are consequences for fomenting hatred for what were once obscure veterans memorials,” he said. “The FFRF should immediately condemn this dangerous criminal act.”

Where do you even begin with such crazy statements?

Hiram Sasser (via C-SPAN)

FFRF rightly challenged the constitutionality of putting a religious memorial on public land. It didn’t matter that the memorial was donated. Not all veterans of the Vietnam War were Christian, and there’s no reason a local government should have approved of a cross to symbolize the veterans’ sacrifice. That’s what FFRF was against. That’s the *only* thing FFRF was against.

The inherent religious significance of the Latin cross is undeniable and is not disguisable. No secular purpose, no matter how sincere, will detract from the overall message that the Latin cross stands for Christianity and the overall display promotes Christianity. The display of this patently religious symbol in a city park confers government endorsement of Christianity, a blatant violation of the Establishment Clause.

It is unlawful for Coos Bay to display a patently religious symbol such as a Christian cross on public property. We ask you to remove the cross from the park immediately or direct the display be moved to a more appropriate private location. We would also appreciate a prompt response from you, in writing, informing us of the steps the City will take to resolve this matter.

There was no hostility. There was no hatred. There was no call for violence.

I have no doubt FFRF will condemn this act, but let’s be very clear: They had nothing to do with this. I can say this because I know many of the people who work there and I know how they think about these issues. They want to persuade elected officials to not put up these religious memorials in the first place. They want to convince them it’s an unconstitutional idea. If none of that works, they’ll consider litigation as a last resort. And, of course, they have no problem with these memorials being put on church property.

They never urge supporters to resort to vigilantism or violence. They wouldn’t even joke about that.

For Sasser to even suggest that FFRF has a role in this says far more about him than it does FFRF.

I hope whoever did this is caught and punished. I don’t know what someone’s motivation would be for doing this, but I certainly have no tolerance for it. Neither do the atheist groups that challenge these types of memorials.

We’re right on principle alone. There’s just never any justification for actions like this.

Incidentally, the same war memorial was vandalized earlier this year by someone who clearly didn’t approve of the cross:

Mingus Park Vietnam War Memorial cross… vandalized (Thomas Moriarty – The World)

FFRF had nothing to do with that, either.

No suspect was ever caught nor was any motivation found, but I’ll gladly join the crowd in condemning this act of vandalism. It doesn’t help our cause to have individuals pull shit like this because they think they’re above the law. It just fuels further speculation from people like Sasser who are quick to point fingers without any due diligence.

The memorial was also vandalized again this past June by someone who was clearly in support of the cross:

Mingus Park Vietnam War Memorial cross… vandalized again (KCBY News)

I can’t find any instance of Sasser condemning that action, by the way.

(Thanks to @thatACDCguy for the link)

About Hemant Mehta

Hemant Mehta is the editor of Friendly Atheist, appears on the Atheist Voice channel on YouTube, and co-hosts the uniquely-named Friendly Atheist Podcast. You can read much more about him here.

  • ShoeUnited

    Clearly Hiram is not nor is he familiar with atheists in Oregon (or any other Oregonians for that matter). Otherwise he never would have broached that kind of statement. Not to say vandalism of religious icons don’t happen:
    But as yet, there’s no indication of any purpose behind any of these things. Let alone an easy to point finger. Oregon has more than just Christians and Atheists. It has a multitude of religions, irreligions, philosophies, teens, hippies, yuppies, young adults, elderly, and even trees!

    Oregon is not like other areas of the country. Except for the occasional rabble, most people work on a live-and-let-live/greater freedom for all/humanistic world view. “Keep Oregon Weird” is not just a local phrase said by people on the street. But even on the news and local commercials. I even saw a van yesterday advertising the “Kevorkian Kult” across the street from a church. And nobody batted an eye. That’s the kind of place this is.

    Assuming this is an act of intentional vandalism (which I’ve seen no evidence either way) even if the perpetrators are whatever X group, it’ll be unrelated to whatever anybody else in X group feels or believes.

    • CamasBlues

      Well, I wouldn’t go that far. Oregon is a big state, and not all of it is hippie friendly – some of it is very insular and conservative and downright unfriendly to ‘outsiders’. I grew up in the Coos Bay area, spent most of my life there (tho’ for family and economic reasons, moved away about a decade ago). Coos Bay is very white (I think the biggest minority group are Natives – of which I am one, Hispanic population slowly growing) – in my experience, very few non-Christian religions there. I knew of only one Jewish family there growing up. Conservatism runs strong there (altho’ fortunately for my sanity there are some liberals there). But it sure ain’t Portland or Eugene, not by a long shot. It is very different in culture and politics than those cities. Conservative politics and Protestant Christianity is very dominant there, in my lifetime experience. Also, sadly, meth addiction is common there, and the region has been struggling economically for more than 30 years, since the lumber mills largely went away.

      I don’t know who the hell wd think it was a great idea to plant an explosive device in Mingus Park.

  • William Geoghegan

    It amazes me that any community would tolerate a war memorial dedicated to a single belief e.g. Christianity

  • Jasper

    Not cool. The rule of law is on our side on these things. Resorting to domestic terrorism is not the answer, and why we can’t have nice things.

    • Jim Jones

      > Resorting to domestic terrorism is not the answer

      A rule atheists follow.

      Huge Jesus billboard: Left alone.

      Huge atheist billboard: Vandalized within days if not hours.

  • Cybershaman

    Clearly could have been, as in the case of the “cut here” vandalism, as much from someone of a different denomination, such as Judaism or Islam. Or kids. I hate to be a conspiracy theorist but it could also have been a frame job. But the point is that, based on the evidence, all are equally probable. Fox especially has perfected the art of “if we allude to it, it means that it is true”. Yet another thing that atheists have to weather and move on from. Stress our level-headedness and attention to detail. You know, our love of facts and stuff… ;)

    • wmdkitty

      How about kids paid off to pull the frame job?

      • C.L. Honeycutt

        My money’s on a couple of moron teens without developed beliefs (or even whose families are churchgoers) hearing about the controversy and, without actually understanding things, setting off M-80s in what they believe is a statement, but is really just them being dumb kids.

  • Mario Strada

    Anybody familiar with the issue would know that blowing up a Christian symbol would generate more hostility against us and it would be more counterproductive than any benefit we may derive from it . In fact, I don’t see any benefits at all in this act for our movement, nor I see any beneficial outlook to thje act itself. If the cross was pulverized we would have been blamed even more, with the cross still standing we are blamed sand still have to look at it.

    The only positive outcome regarding this monument would be its lawful removal. Something that bombs cannot achieve.

    In fact, since we are at the mudslinging, feces throwing , fake accusations level here with these “family this and that” people, I will sooner believe that one of their group put a small petard next to that monument than anyone even remotely connected to the FFRF or the atheist movement. Maybe they felt that they didn’t have enough real life arguments to make and that they would fabricate a couple.

    Would it be so far fetched to imagine someone in support of the monument’s christian message exploding a low powered bomblet knowing damn well that the first to be accused of it would be those that have painstakingly gone through the courts to make not an individual gesture, but a much larger point. They know the FFRF is fighting inside the bounds of the law and that bombing this thing would necessarily smear their reputation and give the other side ammunitions they don’t have because the law is on our side (or at least, we have a lawful argument). And they can’t stand it.

    I see our side (not the FFRF, but the more loosely organized atheist movement) much more likely to do something like in the second photograph. A gesture I am condemning with a very serious, disapproving look in my eyes and with my mouth in the shape of an inverted parentheses, signaling displeasure and indignation, while shaking my head in the “no” sign.

    But at the same time I “strongly condemn” the vandalism by sharpie of the monument, I also recognize it is friggin hilarious and much more in the irreverent style of atheism. I have no problem admitting “one of us” did that, despicable (and as funny) as it is. I’ll take the blame.

    A bomb? Especially one that does very little damage? I don’t buy it. Of course it’s possible some misguided atheist sympathizer could have done it, but it’s just as likely a bunch of garden variety vandals did it.
    Let me just put it this way, in my misspent youth I may have occasionally associated with young individuals that derived enjoyment from blowing up things. I really never approved, even in my most rebellious phases and usually I would partake of one episode of vandalism and stop associating with such people, but where I grew up there was a period where you would have been a loner if you scratched off your Filofax everyone involved in petty vandalism.

    Such vandals don’t need a reason to destroy something.

    • jferris

      “Anybody familiar with the issue would know that blowing up a Christian symbol would generate more hostility against us and it would be more counterproductive than any benefit we may derive from it .”

      Poor assumption. Regardless of their position on this religious monument, anyone attempting to use “force” to make their point does not take a rational approach to the issue, period. Killing abortion doctors in the name of religion, vandalizing H2 Hummers (EF folks) to prevent climate change, setting off bombs in a church to prevent blacks from worshiping….none of these are rational acts, none of these are aimed a providing a “benefit” to your position on a point of view. They are acts of violence. Period. Regardless of who committed the acts, they should never, even in the darkest of moments, be considered “justified”.

      • Mario Strada

        I hope it didn’t sound like I was justifying anything in my post, but I disagree with the examples you brought up.

        Killing an abortion doctor assures that that particular doctor won’t ever perform another abortion and it will scare anyone else thinking of pitching in.

        Bombing a church scares parishioners away and depending on the blast may keep the church closed for an amount of time. If this happens at election time may very well result in less people voting.

        Even vandalizing a Hummer may sway those thinking of buying one.

  • the moother

    “For all those that died for freedom”

    Nice statement continuously in your face in a country who’s government is spying on everyone.

    • LizzyJessie

      Also consider that this is a Vietnam War memorial. A war so unpopular that it took around 20 years (a generation!) for people to accept the soldiers that were drafted in the tens of thousands and sent over.

      Personally I don’t know how they were “Fighting for our Freedom.” Was the Communist Domino Effect really a threat to the freedoms of the United States?

      • Jim Jones

        > According to a study that was just released by Boston Consulting Group, the wealthiest one percent now own 39 percent of all the wealth in the world. Meanwhile, the bottom 50 percent only own 1 percent of all the wealth in the world combined.

        That’s why the war was fought – to prevent ideas that might lead to changing this.

  • DougI

    I blame the religious for vandalizing a park with their religious graffiti.

  • Kevin_Of_Bangor

    I’m going to play the conservative card and scream false flag. I know for a fact that this was done by Christians to make us atheist look bad. I’m pretty sure Obama and his goons had something to do with it as well because we all know Obama is a communist socialist who wants to destroy the country and get rid of all the Christians.

    Again, this is nothing but a false flag.

  • randomfactor

    An explosive device? I’d look for an angry Christian.

    • anniewhoo

      Let’s not blame any group until there is evidence to support it. After all, that’s exactly what Sasser is doing… pointing a finger at atheists with absolutely no evidence to back it up. We can speculate all we want, but it would be just that- speculation.

      • phantomreader42

        I’m gonna go ahead and assume Sasser was the one who did it, so he could use his own incompetent act of vandalism as an excuse to attack FFRF.

      • Cake

        Speculation? Lets look at the history of, Ever.

        How many times have atheists blown up religious icons.

        How many times have religious icons been blown up for non religious purposes.

        How many times have theists blown up religious icons.

  • m6wg4bxw

    Play their game and assert the explosion was (part of) a miracle. Prove me wrong.

    • C.L. Honeycutt

      <3. So many <3's.

    • Sailing J

      I’d say the miracle is the fact that the cross is still standing. Or it could be that the morons who planted the bomb have no idea of how explosives work.

  • runawayuniverse

    I live in the area and hear all sorts of explosions from fireworks both big and small on a pretty regular basis. I’ve been over to check this thing out and it’s not small, so any sort of explosive device would have to pack a wallop in order to do any sort of damage to it.

    My guess is someone set off a large firework in or near the park and people who support this cross being there are jumping at the chance to point fingers and blame the “bad atheists” who want it removed as the people responsible for setting it off.

    • Jim

      I grew up in the area and remember kids setting off “Piccolo Pete” bombs often. My guess is that that’s what happened. It seems to me that if it was anything more than that, the authorities would have said something by now. They’re probably embarrassed to have made such a big deal out of nothing.

  • C.L. Honeycutt

    What is that, concrete? Either the explosion was fireworks* or else someone pretending to attack it. I don’t like the meme of blaming someone on the target’s own “side”, but seriously, I could damage that cross beyond repair with a few mallet swings, with a couple of folded towels laid over it to dull the noise (the base is another matter). Someone who could built a legitimate explosive device would not fail to cause a lot of harm to it.

    Incidentally, if there was an actual explosive device, this news would be all over the damn place. Domestic IED incidents aren’t just overlooked by the media.

    *Yeah, it was certainly this.

    • Ace_of_Sevens

      THat’s a good point. If someone were trying to destroy the cross, they are incredibly incompetent.

      • Astreja

        That’s an interesting point, Ace — A lot of posturing with signs, but no actual damage. I think that the culprit(s) are trying to cause problems for the FFRF without actually destroying the cross.

  • LesterBallard

    I did it. After I helped Hitler, Stalin, Mao, and Pol Pot carry out their slaughter.

    • Bear Millotts

      Then you sat down and had a baby eating contest with them.

      Pol Pot cheated but you soundly beat Hitler and Mao. Too bad Stalin didn’t eat breakfast that day.

      Show off.

  • yohocoma

    Not all veterans of the Vietnam War were Christian, and there’s no
    reason a local government should have approved of a cross to symbolize
    the veterans’ sacrifice. That’s what FFRF was against. That’s the *only* thing FFRF was against.

    Well that’s too bad. Mindless monuments to veterans’ sacrifices (littered ALL OVER this great land), without accompany contextual criticism of the extreme warlike nature of the US, are worthy of being against.

    • Guest

      There’s a time and a place for criticism of US forgien policy. It is not at a graveside, or at a memorial where family and friends of the deceased might go to remember them. Part of the reason wars are so terrible is the senseless waste of human life; by remembering soldier who died, that cost of war will remain in the public eye. Of course it would be nice if there were monuments to the civillians slaughtered as well…

  • Richard Wade

    So far, I can’t find anything in any news reports that give a clue what this “improvised explosive device” was, or how powerful the explosion was, or exactly where the device was when it exploded. The non-Fox News sources sound neutral about these things, but the Fox reports make it sound like a massive “blast” that rivals the IEDs killing troops in Iraq.

    For all we actually know so far it could have been two cherry bombs taped together and covered with twine and glue. I did that as a kid. The explosion was impressively loud, but hardly a “blast.” One sniff from wherever the thing went off would tell an investigator if gunpowder was used, and if so, would indicate some dumbass kid (like i was) going “hee hee hee” in the bushes in the park. It could very well have nothing to do with the Constitutional controversy about that cross.

  • Ace_of_Sevens

    It’s not just that they are blaming atheists, which is plausible, but not really in evidence. They seem to be specifically blaming FFRF, which is absurd.

  • velveteenRabbit

    you know it’s kind of funny, but I don’t even really associate the cross with christianity any more… when I see them on the roads and in graveyards, etc … I just associate the cross with death.

    • Richard Wade

      That seems to be a growing perception. Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia said that the Mojave Desert Cross is okay to be kept on government property because a cross is not a symbol of Christianity, it’s a symbol of death.

      So I guess all those big buildings topped with crosses I see around my town aren’t churches after all. They must be funeral homes, morgues, and tombs. There sure are a lot of people going in and out of those places on Sunday mornings.

    • Guest

      That’s a sign of religious hegemony- when the Christian symbol has become so ubiquitous, even atheists accept it as just part of the landscape of their culture. I feel the same, btw. There are war memorials all over England with crosses on them. They do not make me think of religion first, but vague things like ‘remeberence’ or ‘sacrifice’.

  • Richard Wade

    didit dit diditdit didit dit diditdit didit dit diditdit…


    A sticky substance coating the cross which has attracted ants has proven to be a vital clue to the investigation. Preliminary tests indicate traces of Coke and Mentos!

    The FBI has issued a statement saying that the Coke and Mentos bomb was not the work of amateurs, but of very technologically sophisticated professionals. How someone might make a living making Coke and Mentos bombs no matter how sophisticated was not explained in the statement, but authorities worry that this could be the beginning of a dark era of Coke-and-Mentos terrorism!

    Funny how no one saw Joe Klein at or near his home in New Rochelle, New York on the fateful night of the deadly blast of sugar, assorted flavorings, and soda water. Hmmmmm.

    didit dit diditdit didit dit diditdit didit dit diditdit…

    • m6wg4bxw

      Someone will seek accolades for this explosive bricolage.

  • Compuholic

    Hey religious people already claim to know things for which they have no evidence. Why should they suddenly start demanding evidence now before making accusations?

  • Tom

    I find the use of the word “obscure” quite telling – apparently, these super-offended people don’t actually care much about the memorials they’re supposedly defending except as a vehicle for denouncing atheists.

  • Goape

    Maybe this memorial is just meant to honour the tens-of-thousands of soldiers who were crucified during the Vietnam war, and the explosion was just part of a patriotic pyrotechnic display to commemorate the subsequent rising of the zombie brigades. But seriously, kids, don’t blow stuff up.

  • Guest

    The ‘remove/cut’ graffiti is pretty cool. Reminds me of Banksy.

  • Timothy Steele

    I for one hope it was an atheist. Fuck their cross.

  • Guest

    Meanwhile in Syria, thousands have died. Where’s the humanist response to that? Why are people wasting time and effort on getting a cross remove from a war memorial when it does them no harm and comforts some of their fellow humans, and the money could be spent on actually improving people’s lives? This whole story is completely inconsequencial. It really doesn’t matter. It’s a load of bullshit. If everyone who donates to FFRF gave their money to Doctors without borders instead, you could pay for vital medical aid inside Syria. Real human beings would live insted of die.

    • TheBlackCat13

      Yes, if we can’t instantly solve all the world’s problems we just shouldn’t do anything at all.

      • guest

        I’m not saying we shouldn’t do anything at all, I’m saying we should focus our energy and money on stuff that actually matters.

        • C.L. Honeycutt

          Because what matters to you is the only thing that matters. Quite humble and empathetic there.

    • C.L. Honeycutt

      Because you donate exclusively to foreign nations whose citizenry need the help much more than almost any American does, right?


      • guest

        As much as I can afford to, yes.

        Don’t you?

        • C.L. Honeycutt

          Not an answer to the question I asked. Feel free to try again.

          EDIT: And in answer to your childish insinuation: This weekend I sent all my spare cash to a friend of a friend who I know is in danger of not being able to afford gas for work. The week before that, I gave my last $5 to animal rescue people after buying them snacks because I noticed they didn’t have any (because the volunteer whose turn it was to bring them didn’t show). Two weeks before that, I bought water for a newly-homeless couple who were standing beside the road and asking for help, and gave them my last $20.

          Oh, and I now owe the bank an extra $35 for overdrafting to pay for my own gas after that most recent one. And I can’t afford to go to the doctor for the ankle I sprained yesterday.

          On the plus side, I’m losing weight.

          • guest

            Yes, I donate only to charities that focus on the most desperate people in the world. Happy?

            • Oswald Carnes

              Why are you wasting time posting on a blog when there are people around you right now who need help?

    • NewDawn2006

      Why are people wasting time and effort giving money to their churches so they can have bigger buildings, new sound systems, their pastor’s new house/car when it helps no one except those in their congregation and only comforts those who are in the church and the money could be spent on actually improving people’s lives? If everyone who gave their money to a church gave their money to Doctors Without Borders instead, you could pay for vital medical aid inside Syria. Real human beings would live instead of die. But I’m sure you all are praying about it, so you’re doing all you can…

    • Bear Millotts

      I’m waiting for the Xian god to save the millions of children under 5 who’ve died this year alone, not to mention the 6.9 million in 2011, 7.6 million in 2010, 8.1 million in 2009 and more.

      Oh, wait. That non-evidenced god isn’t going to do anything? I guess i’ll give to Doctors without Borders, then. And any other cause, humanitarian or otherwise, that I choose. Don’t like that? Suck it.

  • Guest

    This is unique. Becaus atheists never, ever, and I mean never, jump to the conclusion that something done against some atheist subject is done by religious types. Nope. No fingers are ever poiunted by atheists. But how could they? It’s the burden of atheists always being right and perfect all the time!

    • tsig

      Take up the Atheist’s burden –

      In patience to abide,

      To veil the threat of terror

      And check the show of pride;

      By open speech and simple,

      An hundred times mad plain.

      To seek another’s profit,

      And work another’s gain

      • Guest

        Or we could go to the post above, deriding the Orthodox Church’s call to end an atheist rally, while conveniently ignoring why the Orthodox Church might, you know, be a tad timid about seeing atheists gather in a formerly (and explicitly) atheist nation that spent 70 years grinding the Church into the ground.

        • C.L. Honeycutt

          The Russian Orthodox Church is not timid. It is rich and powerful, and in bed with a dictator. Are you more of an ignoramus or more of a liar?

          Christ but you narcissists are boring. Come up with new lies to fuel your persecution fantasies, would you?

        • NewDawn2006

          You realize that atheism doesn’t necessitate socialism or vice versa, right? People were not killed there in the name of atheism. They were killed because their leader was crazy. Much more than I can say for the Christians. They have killed in the name of Christ for centuries.

          And why should an atheist rally be stopped? If they were being peaceful and non-violent do they not have the right to assembly? Or is that just for your Christians, too?

  • Know

    We don’t use explosives like all the nutty religious nuts do, we use the court system and make it LEGAL. Such dopes!!!! They accuse us of doing what they themselves would do if they were us. NOT the same, we are not the same as them. Good grief, are they ever going to “get it”?

  • Houndentenor

    Because it’s not a sin to make accusations without proof?

    I’m strongly against acts of vandalism and support the arrest and prosecution of whoever did this. If anyone has evidence as to who did it, they should turn that over to the police. Otherwise they are simply lying. If only Christians would read their own damn Bible.

    • guest

      “Thou shalt bear false witness against thy neighbour, as long as he’s a filthy atheist”

  • Jim Jones

    If the cross portion of this was removed you would wind up with one of the shittiest war memorials ever. It appears to me that this was placed more for the cross than for the memorial, and thus supports the position of the FFRF.

  • axelbeingcivil

    Wouldn’t it be a good idea to come out and condemn this, simply for the sake of saying that vandalism and violence are not the way to deal with this problem?

  • joe

    gee, if I were a hateful theist who had a particular burning hatred for atheists in general, I’d probably vandalize that cross myself. Then I’d immediately start accusing my detractors of committing that crime, so as to both take attention away from myself, and cause my detractors to lose favor in the “court of public opinion”.

    it’s actually a pretty classic tactic. surely y’all can see through it, right?

  • Booze And Nonsense

    Funny how you never see Joe Klein around after acts of vandalism…

  • Crud O’Matic

    This sounds fishy as hell.

    The article says that the explosive charge was set up a distance away. The ONLY logical reason for setting up an explosive charge at a DISTANCE away from that you want destroyed is BECAUSE YOU DON’T WANT TO DESTROY IT. This screams out “victim complex” to me.

    If this was an atheist, WHAT made him/her set up the charge AWAY from the target? If they were truly atheist, and they hated that cross with a fiery passion, why did they not place the charge ON THE CROSS ITSELF?

    This is something I’ve been thinking about – no suspects, yet automatic blame of atheists. It couldn’t possibly be a Muslim either, as they would have also set the charge up on the cross, instead of a distance away.

    There was nothing stopping the bomber from sneaking the bomb in anyway – SO WHY SET IT UP AT A DISTANCE, instead of ON the cross itself?

    The only logical conclusion that I can come to, without having to jump through hoops, is that the bomb was set up by someone who DIDN’T want to destroy the cross – but merely to DAMAGE the cross.

    Now, DESTROYING a cross would be BLASPHEMY to a Christian, so if a Christian wanted to frame atheists for trying to destroy the cross – they damn well couldn’t blow it to hell – that would be bad marks in the book of life. BUT they COULD set it up so the cross was only damaged, and it wouldn’t weight heavy on their conscience.

    Coupled with the FACT that there was AUTOMATIC finger pointing BEFORE ANY EVIDENCE CAME IN – FFS, there isn’t even a suspect yet! It only leads me to believe that it was a Christian who set up the bomb, in an attempt to frame atheists for it. Nothing would please them more than atheists being labeled terrorists – thus rallying the Christian community to stand even firmer on their position of injecting church into state.

    I would even go as far as looking into the organization that INSTANTLY blamed atheists for the bombing – maybe THEY are guilty of it, or at least complicit.

    Of course, this is before we have any evidence on the matter – it’s quite possible that it could be a mentally ill atheist who is inept (set the bomb up at a distance instead of on the cross).

    I highly doubt it though. This ALL seems too funny. This seems like a MASSIVE set up going on.

  • Rick

    Hemant, the fact that you know FFRF people, isn’t proof that they haven’t stoked the fires of atheists to commit vandalism like this. The atheists know that they’re wrong morally and legally, so they have to act like little children to get what they want. Maybe you should use your little blog to actually write some truth and stop writing pure rubbish.

  • Gus

    Bombing the cross would be exactly the opposite of what FFRF, or any thinking atheist would want. The whole point of filing lawsuits is less about taking down any one individual memorial, it’s about establishing precedent and preventing the widespread construction of such monuments excused by “tradition”. The goal is to prevent the tradition from being established and to have every government official around the country know that attempting to put up these monuments will result in them being taken down at greater cost in the future.

    Simply knocking down the monument is never the goal. If this was done by someone who opposes the monument, whether an atheist or a member of another religion, then they’re an idiot, as demonstrated by both their utter missing of the point and their incompetence (they used an explosive that could have been dangerous and failed when they could have succeeded with a sledgehammer, which would still be stupid for reason number one).

    Possibilities that are more likely than atheists attempting to destroy the monument:
    1.) Teenagers, young adults, and/or drunken idiots in a completely unrelated desire to make things go boom.
    2.) Teenagers, young adults, and/or drunken idiots who thought blowing up the cross would be fun.
    3.) Anti-war extremists left over from the sixties.
    4.) Muslim extremists.
    5.) Christians who want to make atheists look bad.
    6.) Liberty Institute in particular.

    • TheBlackCat13

      The FFRF is definitely not involved, but the FFRF does not represent all atheists. Although I would like to think atheists wouldn’t do this, “atheist” does not automatically mean “moral”, “smart”, or “mentally all there” any more than “Christian” does.

      So it certainly could have been an atheist not associated with FFRF or other established atheist groups who is responsible.

      Concluding that it is was unlikely an atheist that did this is the same trap that religious people fall into when claiming the moral superiority of their own group. It may have been an atheist, it may not have been. We really can’t say.

      I am an atheist, I strongly support what the FFRF is doing, I really, really, really hope it wasn’t an atheist involved. But I am trying to be evidence-based here, and I don’t think the evidence supports concluding that an atheist was unlikely to be involved.

  • starmom

    I would like to add that the skate park is half a block away from Mingus Park, and the memorial is quite near the covered picnic tables where kids like to hang out to smoke. This was very likely kids being stupid the last week of summer vacation, nothing more.

  • Sally Johnson

    Any excuse to raise money. Atheists are smart enough to know that blowing up a cross just causes a bigger cross to be erected in place of the one that was blown up. You have to sue them while they’re small.

  • Jim

    Ok, after looking at the photos, I can’t see where any damage occurred. It doesn’t look like any even remotely bomb-like happened in the area. Probably some idiot kid with some left over fireworks and a soda bottle. Makes a big POP but doesn’t do much.

  • dm_apostate

    The Constitution, court precedent and the law will remove this religious idol as it will the ones on Big Mountain, “A” Mountain and the easter cross in San Diego.

    Our government will always protect the minority from the tyranny of the majority. The importance of keeping our government neutral in matters of religion can never be ignored.

    This firecracker, public opinion and other irrelevant matters will not help the Christians turn our great Nation into a Christian Dictatorship.

  • rev_anon

    So many times in history the first person to point a finger and claim “those people did it” was almost always the real person who did do it.