WEST HILLS (CBS) — A retired San Fernando Valley woman could face thousands of dollars in zoning fines for erecting a 24-foot-high cross on her property.

Los Angeles Building and Safety inspectors visited the home of Laly Dobener on Thursday after receiving complaints from neighbors and determined she had violated zoning laws by erecting an unpermitted structure, the Daily News reported.

“She has two options,” Building and Safety spokesman Dave Lara told the newspaper. “Option A is that she takes it down and Option B is that she tries to get a permit.”

“This is a public safety issue,” he added.

The 72-year-old retired baker faces an immediate fine of $336 and has 30 days to either dismantle the cross or obtain a permit. Failure to do so could result in up to some $3,000 in fines, the Daily News reported.

Dobener told the newspaper she intends to file the paperwork to comply with city codes so she can keep the symbol of her Catholic faith.

“I don’t want to take this cross down,” she said. “To me it’s an important symbol of my faith. It’s not hurting anyone.”

Her neighbors, however, say the cross has attracted numerous passers-by to the quiet cul-de-sac and is driving down property values, the Daily News reported.

(©2011 CBS Local Media, a division of CBS Radio Inc. All Rights Reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed. Wire services contributed to this report.)

Comments (290)
  1. swhitS says:

    I am not religious but I believe in our Constitution. Her property she paid for it, pays the insurance and the tax she should be able to do what the hell she wants to it.
    Ron Paul 2012! Smaller gov, less regulation and no taxes.

    1. T says:

      dont know how i feel about Ron Paul yet – but it is her property…. bought n paid for ….If you pay your taxes, and make your mortgage payments – no one should be able to tell you what you can and cant put on it …. now getting a permit to comply with the law is just playing by the rules….she gets her permit, the city is happy – no more fine – all settled…..

      1. Mike D says:

        Sorry, bought and paid for or not – you still can’t murder people on your property either…..

      2. Seth Day says:

        Mike D that is a stupid comment, how does your mind make the jump from cross in the yard to murder. Derrr, nice try

      3. Randolph says:

        Ron Paul is the only honest politician running for President, and his appeal crosses the lines of Democrat-vs.-Republican. He is the only one who’s not bought and paid for and has a long track record of statesmanship and service to the nation. For that reason, the slime balls all hate him and Fox News even yanked their poll on “Who won the last GOP debate?” since Dr. Paul was winning hands down. Silenced, marginalized… he has a good chance of being elected president. He would be the first true president of the people since JFK. He gets it. He rocks. Just simple honesty and actually deciding for the people instead of the ultra-rich. No other candidate even comes close.

      4. Mike D says:

        @Seth Day

        “Mike D that is a stupid comment, how does your mind make the jump from cross in the yard to murder. Derrr, nice try”

        It clearly highlights how property rights do no supersede others rights to things like safety… etc. etc.

        To not grasp this simple point must make you how intelligent now?

      5. Craven Poll says:

        The D in Mikes name stand for dum mass.

      6. Magpie says:

        “no one should be able to tell you what you can and cant put on it ”

        So you would be ok if your next door neighbor erected a 24′ pentagram in their front yard?

      7. WakeUp says:

        Mike D. That IS a stupid staement. Murder is illegal. The Constitution guarantees that her free excersize of religion shall not be infringed. Seems to me that stopping her from having a cross on her own property is infringing in her free excersize of religion and therefore is a violation of her Constitutional guarantee.

      8. Chuck says:

        Mike D.

        Look up the “castle doctrine”, and them come down to Texas and test your theory….

      9. smuglydumb says:

        Mike D is right! Either we violate her constitutionally guaranteed right to free expression of her faith or we have to let people commit murder in their front yards! Baaaaa! Baaaaa!

      10. John Patricio says:

        WakeUp said: “Mike D. That IS a stupid staement. Murder is illegal. ”

        I say, putting up a cross in your yard without the permits needed is also illegal.

      11. R.T. Castleberry says:

        Shame she didn’t get the permit first. Planning for the construction and planting of the cross must have taken a lot of time, time enough for her to get the permit. As to Ron Paul, he’s taking McCain’s place this election cycle for Cranky Crazy Uncle. If you like the idea of returning to the 18th century, vote Ron Paul.

      12. Ron` says:

        I think that this is about zoning laws. What zoning laws are acceptable and what are not? Can one person put up a crummy shack in a nice residential neighborhood? And what does a crummy shack mean and what does nice me? It becomes complicated. And if this is an area zoned residential can a person start a business in a residential zone? I doubt if most people would disagree with some zoning laws if they are the laws that they affirm. However, when we have zoning laws that we don’t agree with or community compacts that are agreed to when we buy a property that say no flags or crosses or such as that on our property – should we dishonor our contract or compact when we put up in our lawns something that violates such an agreement?
        I am a Christian and I have had crosses on my front door. I don’t think that this is as much about Christian faith as it is about, “I’m gong to do what I want to do regardless of what anyone else thinks” I think that this issue is more about love and respect for one’s neighbor then it is about power – or at least should be in my opinion.

      13. Aaron Self says:

        @ Mike D and Seth Day I’m sorry but you might be an idiot Seth, the constitution does not guarantee safety it guarantee freedom.

      14. Tim Lucas says:

        I suppose flag poles and the American flag is next followed by any prayer by anyone. My how you liberals take it upon yourself to protect us from all those symbols you have a problem with in the name of safety. All those claims about property when you lack a study just so you can make your s stick to the wall. I think half the people should leave and the remaining can pay twice the taxes such as Detroit and New York. Ca. is overbearing and full of extremist. Vote with your feet.

      15. Oberon123 says:

        So, putting a whor*house on your property should be okay since you bought and paid for it?

    2. Moses says:

      This proves that Government sucks! There is no freedom in America, just TAXES for these government weenies! The Muslims, the illegals, the atheists are tearing America apart and throw in some of the “riot” people that feel like they deserve retribution for slavery that WE the people had NOTHING to do with; it really doesn’t make any sense!! All of these people afore mentioned should be deported if they can’t conform to America!!!

      1. Jrock says:

        Do you mean conform to your religion?

      2. Mike D says:

        This proves that Government sucks! There is no freedom in America…….. All of these people afore mentioned should be deported if they can’t conform to America!!!

        ‘conform to America’ ??!!

        How typical – a rant that complains of ones own freedom while demanding to remove someone elses freedoms.

      3. Oberon123 says:

        America is about respect for all people’s beliefs. It seems to me that you are the one who should be deported.

      4. abdulman says:

        muslims have been tearing the U.S. apart?!!! really?????!! theyre less than 2 percent of the population but there so strong that they can tear the U.S. apart?!? nah, me thinks you have hate in your self.

      5. Michael says:

        Where will you deport atheists to? Athganistan?

    3. Richard Henkle says:

      the thing is 24 ft high. She may own the land but she doesn’t own the sky. Why do you need a 24ft high anything on your property, in the valley? Remember that your rights stop when they infringe on others’ rights. I’m all for Ron Paul as well, but this has nothing to do with govt, this has to do with her neighbors that have to look at a 24ft structure all the time now. Freedom involves having responsibility and common decency towards your fellow man as well.

      1. Max says:

        What can be 24 feet high? A two story house, trees,, a satellite dish hooked to a house, utility lines and etc. Do you think that all things that are 24 feet tall be removed? Or do you just want that mean old cross removed because you are offended? Do you really think that a cross is more of a danger than a tree? If so you must be a fool.

      2. Sammie Jo says:

        you are absolutely correct! Does she really need a monument that high to remind her she’s a Catholic? What if her neighbor was a practicing witch, and errected a 24 ft pentagram?
        24 ft high is ridiculous, what if there’s an earthquake and it falls and kills someone?
        I wonder if she has all these religious trappings inside her home or is this just a big show?

      3. T says:

        @ richard – cant argue with that logic – you do have to use some common sense no matter what you do, and consideration – I think if im not mistaken that symbol is meant as a symbol of peace to her … Im sure being elderly she is probably quite upset about all the comotion….I know my mom would be – and she’s about the same age…..

      4. John says:

        What she should do is officially turn her house into a church. Have a few people over once a week and read the Bible. This way she can skirt the local busy-bodies, zoning board and government. Then take down the 24 foot cross and erect a 48 foot cross.

        I live in the Salt Lake valley and I can’t drive a half a mile without seeing the steeple of a Mormon ward house or temple…….doesn’t bother me and I’m not LDS.

      5. Oberon123 says:

        Well, it would bother me, but I’m not supid enough to move there. People who buy houses need to check out zoning restrictions, HOA restrictions, and any other restrictions before they buy. If they don’t like what they find, buy someplace else. I don’t want to buy in an area expecting that there are restrictions on some clown building a cross in his/her front yard and then have to look at the darned thing. What happend to MY rights, which I check out before buying?

      6. cline says:

        Actually she does own the rights to the sky over her private property. Only Nasa and the FAA are given a waiver to operate in said area.

      7. Scotty says:

        Technically she does own the sky above her house- Real Estate 101 in California…

      8. Squid says:

        Her rights are being infringed upon by her neighbors by insisting she take the cross down.

    4. espy says:

      I like Ron Paul to a certain degree, but I feel he is too naive to be president as well as his comments about 9/11 make me hope he is not chosen as the Republican nomination.

      1. Hoogly Boogly says:

        What do you mean his comments about 9/11 are naive? Go to his website, read his books, then read the words written and spoken by those who hijacked the planes as well as OBL’s declaration of war against America. Ron Paul didn’t make anything up and he never said America deserved what it got he’s merely trying to explain blow back to people who refuse to leave their comfort zones. He isn’t naive, he’s just telling you a truth you don’t want to hear.

      2. R.T. Castleberry says:

        If by “naive” you mean mad as a hatter, I agree. He wants to do away with virtually every government program since oh, the War of 1812.

      3. Hoogly Boogly says:

        RT Castleberry:

        Not every government program, just the ones that are un-Constitutional. You know what the Constitution is don’t you?

      4. moral_threat says:

        @R.T. You really need to do some research on Ron Paul and not listen to everything you read on Fox, MSNBC, etc…

        Ron Paul has 30 years more experience than Obama and understands the economy while also protecting the Constitution and personal liberty.

        If he is not elected, the US will continue it’s descent to third World status and more and more of your rights will be taken away, not to mention your “things” because you have more that Joe Blow.

        Ron Paul is the only politician that has stood by his beliefs for his entire life and is the only one who is not bought & paid for.

        It’s time to fix our country and get some real Change.

        Ron Paul 2012!

    5. JB says:

      She’s probably paying property taxes equivalent to a $2 an hour fulltime job, she sure should be able to do what she wants.

    6. Charlie Di Bartolo says:

      A Moslem Democrat President, Hussein Obama, allows a terrorist Mosque to be built on site of Twin Towers is proof enough that he supports Moslems and all terrorist are Moslems, that is a proven fact. Charlie

      1. Steven Cornea says:

        no he supports peoples right to do whatever they want, thats what makes this country great.

        if you believe this, then you shouldn’t vote.

        simple as that.

      2. f46calif says:

        Charlie is correct!

      3. Oberon123 says:

        You’re about as sick, and uninformed, and misguided, as they come.

      4. apu says:

        the mosque wasnt even on ground zero it was 2 blocks away and there already is a mosque close by, nice try charles.

    7. ajax44 says:

      You have a point. She had paid her dues for her property and she can do whatever she wants with it. However, no one i s asking her to renounce her faith, they are simply asking her to comply with the laws of the community to make sure that everybody’s happy. http://www.Survive-Pack.com

    8. John Fisher says:

      If this were a flagpole, I’m certain no one would have said anything. People need to buck up, shut up and move on.

      1. CRT on the Beach says:

        Until you put a US flag on it…

      2. LarryG says:

        There is no shortage of busybodies. There will always be someone around to make a stink about something just to satisfy some malignant desire to torment somebody.

    9. Al Schork says:

      @ Mike D Too bad it isnt a phallic symbol, it would go from a health hazard to a lollipop for you and your ilk !!!

    10. RSA9999 says:

      I have never understood why the front yard of any house cannot be enclosed. I have bought and paid for it and cannot use it like I use my back yard. What a thought – actually having the use of my front yard instead of it being treated like communal property. Go Ron Paul, you have my vote too!!!

    11. Todd Lashley says:

      Can I have the address and a name to make a check out to. Only the Godless would oppose a womans free speach rights to erect a cross. Safety issue my ass. This is about the wicked and Godless, rising to end times prophecy.

      1. Oberon123 says:

        “Godless?” How about not wanting to look at an eyesore? What makes you think you have the right to shove your religion down my throat?

      2. CleanFun says:

        @Oberon123 – Eyesore? Take a look around you. Look at the cities. Look at the people in them. Look in the mirror.

    12. FlDoc says:

      Including not taking care of theproperty, leaving junk in her yard and how about three or four unused cars up on blocks?

      1. Terry Furlough says:

        It’s ok in “Tha Hood” or “LaBarrio”.. though..

    13. Spanky says:

      “Ron Paul 2012!”

      At age 77, Paul would be the same age starting in office that Reagan was upon leaving it.

      Paul is just too old to be elected.

      1. moral_threat says:

        Ron Paul is the only one who can change this country. We have never in history been more divided than we are now and it will only get worse if we keep electing the same bozos over and over.

        Obviously, someone younger was only able to hasten the decline of our once great nation.

        The media needs to wake up and pay more attention to him.

        So far, this has not been the change anyone was hoping for:

    14. Hadley V. Baxendale says:

      Yeah, zoning laws suck.

    15. freecheese says:

      swgutS: You’re soooooooo right. I would like to say that this could happen only in goofy Kollifornia, but not so anymore.

    16. Zod Cranards says:

      Mike d is an idiot.

    17. Zod Cranards says:

      Christ haters can’t be argued with because it is bointless to argue with fools

    18. DaveyB says:

      I certainly agree Ron Paul is the only politician in a long while that understands property rights and how protecting them protects freedom. The reason this woman (and all of us) have to get permits and pay property taxes is because we do not own it. Yes you may own the buldings but the State owns the land. If you are paying these it is because you are in a volntary contract with the State. You do not posess allodial title. As long as you dont own property free and clear you are not free. Contract rights are an important function in the American Republic, but many people have been misled and coerced into voluntarily entering into contracts with their government, surrendering their liberty with the signature.

    19. art ross says:

      In this country we don’t own property we only have the to pay taxes on it.

    20. HOMER J says:

      It looks UGLY take it down beatch

  2. H8Rs says:

    That’s because non-Christians are in power and their agenda is to destroy Christianity.

    1. Enoch_Root says:

      F the Fed govt. I would urge them to proceed with extreme caution. 25% unemployment means a lot of patriots have a lot of time on their hands.

  3. cluelessinky says:

    I find it amusing that the neighbors are blaming Ms. Dobener for lower property values. I suggest that the values are lower becasue of local , state and federal government interventions.

  4. Mike D says:

    “she had violated zoning laws by erecting an unpermitted structure”

    Oh – so it DID NOT have anything to do with it being a ‘cross’ then – shame on you CBS… this ‘spin’ headline is duely noted.

    1. Mara says:

      But they get so much more traffic if they imply discrimination against the poor beleagured majority….and boy are people biting at the bait!! It can’t *possibly* be a zoning issue, it MUST be a religious infringement problem because it’s a CROSS fer god’s sake!

    2. Mannie says:

      Yes and no. I suspect some cranky neighbor complained purely because it was a Christian cross.

      But a 24 foot high cross is a significant structure. I wouldn’t want it to fall over on me during a windstorm, or the patibulum (the cross bar) to fall on my head. So the City does have a valid concern. It ought to be looked at by a building inspector.

      1. Mike D says:

        “It ought to be looked at by a building inspector.”

        A call for yet more government? whos gonna pay for the expertise to decide how safe it is… easier to say – take it down and avoid any and all possible liability.

      2. John Fisher says:

        The only difference between where she is now and where she can supposedly be if her permit is approved is that she will have to pay money for the application, pay for the permit, and still keep it where it is and how it is. Public safety isn’t a concern here, it seems. Only money and religion.

  5. Roger says:

    I’m a Christian evangelical pastor who is quite ocnservative, so I am by no means biased against the cross or what this woman is trying to do.

    However, she is clearly violating the law. Is it her property? Yes, but that does not mean that ‘anything goes’. Were she to have raw sewage on her lawn, or a meth lab in her basement, we could all agree that the use she has chosen for her property is negatively affecting her neighbors. It sounds like the same applies here, if a 24 foot cross in someone’s lawn is driving down home values (entirely possible), then her neighbors are very reasonable in asking her to take down said cross.

    Furthermore, as a Christian, I would think her relationship with her neighbors should be more important to her than erecting a giant cross to repel them.

    1. AJ says:

      The neighbors should feel the same way about her. Leave the cross alone..

    2. TroyG says:

      Have you never heard “Render unto Caesar what is Caesar’s and unto God what is God’s?”

      I doubt that the Rev is a moron, but you on the other hand…

    3. Jrock says:

      Wow finally a Christian that believes in Christian values.

      1. Mara says:

        hear, hear!! A lot of these ‘christians’ on the forum seem to forget Matthew 6:5….

    4. king1 says:

      Where is your church so I can warn people about you

    5. Meredith H. says:

      To Roger the pastor: Christian-check;conservative-check; evangelical-check;anti-Catholic-check and double check. That’s why you don’t support her or her cross.

      1. Mike D says:

        “anti-Catholic-check and double check. That’s why you don’t support her or her cross.”

        You really do put the ‘ass’ in assumptions don’t ya.

    6. RNGH says:

      I recon you would have been against ole Noah’s boat too…. But that was different because he was doin’ what God told him. But we know for sure God didn’t tell anyone in California to build a cross in their front yard because they love and honor His Son. Don’t we Rev.? The guy down the street from me has one in his yard, but I think God told him to.

    7. michele says:

      If she were a conservative evangelical Roger would be out there Bible in hand showing support. Being that she is of the Catholic faith, he compares her cross to raw sewage and a meth lab. Hey Rog it looks like your Christianity is based on your dislike of Catholics. Your raw sewage comment is a 24 ft tall symbol of it

      1. Magpie says:

        I suspect people don’t dislike you because you’re Catholic. I suspect they don’t like you because you are an unpleasant person with a huge chip on your shoulder.

    8. Matt says:

      Wow, one of the few intelligent comments on here, and you get flamed by every nutball on the web. I guess that’s what happens when Drudge posts a link to a story: all the loons come to call.

      You’re absolutely correct, Roger. Just because it’s your property does not mean you are free to do anything you want on it. You cited several good examples. I would add that you cannot create a public nuisance on your property either by — for example — blasting loud music at all hours, running a kennel in your backyard, or hosting a nudists’ convention on the front lawn.

      Roger’s point has nothing to do with Protestant vs. Catholic; it has to do with common sense. A number of years ago, a woman in a local neighborhood (Huntington Harbor, CA) was finally arrested and fined after years of keeping her front lawn completely littered with rubbish bags and all sorts of junk, this in an area where homes go for well over $1M apiece. What you do to your front lawn does have an impact to people around you, especially when you live in cramped quarters like we do. Forget about the cross for a second, and say instead it was a huge flag pole with a 20 ft. wide American flag flying on it. It’s completely out of proportion to the neighborhood and, yes, it could pose a danger to the community. You can still love this country without needing to slap everyone in the face with a gigantic flag, and you can still love your God without advertising it with a gigantic, gaudy cross.

      1. ImChaz says:

        Has the location of said cross been established? Is it sufficiently removed from property lines and sidewalks to prevent injury to anyone but the owner? Without this knowledge, it is impossible to ascertain “danger to the community”. For those that assume the Catholic vs Christian angle, remember that being a Catholic doesn’t mean you are not Christian any more than being a Baptist means you are.

    9. Mike D says:

      “Furthermore, as a Christian, I would think her relationship with her neighbors should be more important to her than erecting a giant cross to repel them.”

      As an atheist, I desperately need to thank you for being the one to say this.

      1. CLAUDE says:


      2. Enoch_Root says:

        a Cross “repels” only the Godless. perhaps they ought to consider how it is possible that they are repelled by a Cross.

    10. Silly Millie says:

      Finally, a voice of reason!

    11. Trisha Doherty says:

      You pegged why I am no longer a christian. I do not give a damn about my neighbors and do not even want to klnow their names, however, I do not butt into their business and I will terrorize their existance if they butt into Mine!

    12. CleanFun says:

      But what kind of individual is repelled by a symbol of love, sacrifice, and forgiveness? We could speculate and say a muslim or an atheist, both of whose agenda for her to take her cross down is just as personal as her agenda to put it up.

      One thing is certain, it doesn’t really have to do with property value. That makes the antagonist a liar. They’re also likely a hater of Christ and the moral values that he tried to teach.

      I say get the permits and repel them right out of your neighborhood.

  6. Daniel Goodman says:

    Another effort by government to sqelch two Constitutionally-protected rights, in this case speech and religion using an implausible rationale. Is the cross going to fall on someone or will a low flying aircraft strike it? Baloney!

  7. Jesus Christ says:

    You have to have a permit, why does she think she is special to get around the law? Some of you idiots think its ok to build a structure without a permit and avoid having it inspected to make sure it doesnt fall over and cause damage to another person’s property or even worse, their body? Are you people really that stupid?

    1. TroyG says:

      These people aren’t stupid J.C., you are only a sheep who thinks Government inspectors actually make anything safe. I’ll bet you love the labels on your food too, and your safe car, and your right to pay onerous taxes.
      Yep, you are just a little sheep.

    2. king1 says:

      Geewiz jesus I didnt expect you to call people stupid. that is not very christian.

      1. Tired of TROLLS says:

        You and he are no Christians so why worry idiot?

    3. Land Surveyor says:

      Well Dill Weed,
      I wonder if the person at 7200 Hyannis Drive got a permit for their 20+ foot flag pole (just to make it safe)? How about all those “illegal” basketball hoops? Need a permit to make them safe too. Might check on the lawns on the block. Looks like some of them have far to many dandelions to be permissible. I think I will just have a glance at the zoning laws; they are available on line. Want to bet that we can’t find just what “rule” she has broken?

  8. Mark Matis says:

    May the God damned pigs rot in hell for what they have done to this country!

  9. Mohamed Salem says:

    A muslim is already labeled as a terrorist isn’t that enough already? why are you even refering to a muslim here?
    The question is, does how big the cross is show how much you beleive? comeon already!!!

    1. TheStevens says:

      What a moronic comment. Who labels all Muslims in this country as terrorists? Nobody. But there is no doubt that a blatant left wing effort is underway to slam Christians. Meanwhile, they bend over backwards to allow any and eery form of Muslim worship.

      I wonder, Mr. Mohamed Salem, how many of your Muslim friends think Jews should be removed from Israel.

    2. Tired of Islamic Victomhood says:

      Stop playing the victim. Muslims have been babied and protected from any and all insults by both the government and the media. Grow a pair, act like a man and mind your own business.

    3. BILL MCNEAL says:


    4. M Townsend says:

      No it is not enough. We have been repeatedly killed and attacked by Muslims. The last thing we need is your sophmoric comments on the subject

    5. Jake says:

      All Muslims follow the teaching of a pedophile. Prophet Muhammad was a pedophile.

    6. sanjo kafir says:

      If I were a Muslim in America today, I would not be shooting off my mouth, or anything else for that matter.

    7. Tallron47 says:

      Does the size of the bomb or the gallonage of blood show the depth of your faith? The muslims who denounce violent jihad are not so labeled, but they are rare since the killing of the fakir is a holy sacrament of your faith.

    8. Scott Martin says:

      Tribal comments like that are from terrorists…I am a Christian married to a Muslim woman and she is no tribal person, neither is her family…

      Stop being tribal and your pain will end…

    9. Alaine Debreaux says:

      Not how big the cross is or who’s labeled a terrorist…….the point is that Christians are being beaten down, little by little, while Muslims and Hispanics are given the red carpet covered with free food, health care, education, don’t have to remove their veils for license pictures, are allowed swim in public pools with all their robes that they wear on the street, and the right to do whatever else they wish. Christians are told to shut up or they will OFFEND these leeches……don’t forget, these foreigners get all the free stuff right out of your tax money! Why are you so blind?

      1. Steve says:

        LOL christians are being beaten down? I’m gonna assume your joking cause only a complete moron would make a comment like that.

        open up your door and step outside in the world with the rest of us.

        please don’t vote…..ever.

      2. CleanFun says:

        But you voted for Obama. There has never been a less educated voter base than the one you are affiliated with.

  10. RVT1000 says:

    The problem is not the symbol it is the size of the symbol. Let her paint all the crosses she wants to on the walls inside her house if she wants to. Nobody needs a cross as big as a two story house in their yard and her neighbors should not have to look at it.

    1. Kevin says:

      So what do YOU think we should have in our front yard so we can go right out and get it?

    2. CleanFun says:

      Under that exact same logic, we shouldn’t have to look at the way you chose to landscape your yard. Or the color you chose to paint your house. Maybe it’s offensive 1 or 2 people. Of course, we could always choose to simply not look at it.

  11. mark edward marchiafava says:

    LOL, another example of stupid Amerikans thinking everyone must work to increase THEIR property values. Get a life, already.

    1. Mark says:

      LOL, another stupid basement dweller living off of Mommy trying to sound intelligent.

      1. CleanFun says:

        He makes a point Mark. That’s something you clearly failed to accomplish.

  12. peterfitzen says:

    “driving down property values” Take a look around there are no property values anywhere. And by what cars, its a street that’s what it is for! Sometimes I think people should kill themselves and save the world from their dumbness…

    1. Oberon123 says:

      Why don’t you start that trend and kill your own stupid self for starters?

  13. Countrygirl1362 says:

    Does this apply to all displays? Chirstmas light, pumpkins at halloween and so on. Time for people to start flooding the Building and Safety inspectors in the area with phone calls on all displays on private property. Some of those decorations cause people to drive around to look at them, same thing as what is happening with this lady.

    1. Jrock says:

      Get real. If a muslim put up a 24ft anything in their front yard you would be the first one here crying.

      1. Terry Furlough says:

        And you’d be the first to defend it,

      2. Enoch_Root says:

        well, until she can place that Cross at Ground Zero your comparison is hollow.

    2. Asides says:

      If it were permanent year round then yes it would. Think how annoying that would be if every night your neighbors put up lights that shone into your house. This though is simply an all day blight. Look forget it’s symbolism for a moment and imagine if there were a honking big radio mast or pylon in your neighbors backyard, and you were living in one of these small suburban areas. It’s not going to be good.

      Also – enough from the other guy with his obsession with Muslims, seriously, get over yourself.

      1. Terry Furlough says:

        “This though is simply an all day blight. ” The only time the cross is considered a blight, is when it offends atheists and moon-god followers like you.

  14. Blood Runs Irish 1916 says:

    More convinced than ever a full blown revolution is coming.

  15. Off With Their Heads says:

    The funniest thing I heard about was something similar, but it was a giant sign on some guy’s front yard. The city, as usual, power-tripped and threatened ridiculous fines. Guy moves sign to bed of pickup truck parked in driveway and they can’t touch him.

    1. Alex says:

      Sounds like a smart guy!

  16. Sau Sage Fingerz says:

    LOL! I hope she gets fined until she’s broke and gets put out on the street. Rules are rules, you don’t get to disregard those you don’t like simply because you are an old crotchety religious coot.

    1. Mitch says:

      I hope that you suffer an impacted hemorrhoid.

  17. king1 says:

    No reverand the law is unjust they are denying her right to practice her religion something in her is telling her that she needs to do this. I pray for you because of the harm you do by coming her and posting this giving ammunition to those don’t believe or even hate our lord. This is your opinion but you need to understand that by being a reverand a man of the cloth you are called to higher standard not just through your opinion out which makes me wonder are you really a reverand or just saying that.

    1. Reverend Rev says:

      She doesn’t “need” a cross that’s taller than her house – and which can fall over and hurt somebody.

      1. Ronald says:

        People don’t need cars that can kill people either. Get off your fat ass and ride a bicycle.

    2. Rod Anders says:

      @king1 – My religion demands that I have sex with underage girls. Now what?

      1. Neil says:

        Then your religion would be for rape which is against the law and the lady’s cross is just a zoning issue not even a crime. See one is evil, sick and against the law and the other, well it isn’t any of those.

      2. The Sage Waitress says:

        Tell it to the judge, Rod.

      3. cm says:

        that would make you a typical liberal. radical leftists have suceeded in lowering the age of consent, and placing porn into the hands of schoolchildren in several states already.

      4. queen B says:

        Every time a liberal dies, a flower blooms.

  18. Gordon Wagner says:

    Does she have a Facebook page? I’d happily contribute some money to her.

  19. Ben Doverhereitcomes says:

    It was obviously a safety concern for her freedom.

  20. Rosemary Peppercorn says:

    I think you should all erect 24-foot crosses in your own front yards in protest.

  21. Regulated To Death says:

    I’m really stunned to see people comparing the placement of a large cross on someone’s own property with murder, raw sewage, and a meth lab on someone’s own property. Some of these comparisons were even listed by a so-called Christian pastor.

    Show some compassion and just let this elderly woman be, for Heaven’s sake. The woman is right: the cross isn’t hurting anyone. The problem lies inside the hearts and minds of some who view it.

    A public safety issue? Good grief, living proof what happens when a person of small character obtains a little power.

    1. Alex says:

      If a structure does not comply with the city building code, it must be brought up to standard for safety reasons or be dismantled. I don’t like government interference in anything, but the city does have a point in that such a structure may in fact constitute a hazard to others should it fall on another. I don’t like pickly HOAs either, but one of their purposes is to maintain property to insure that the values of its member’s home are reasonably secure. You can’t park cars on the lawn of most developments, change oil in the street or operate a car repair business out of your garage. This lady should have some consideration for her neighbors. She would be better advised to keep her religion to herself and not inflict it on other people. That is simply courtesy.

      1. Regulated To Death says:

        First, Alex, there is no HOA in this case, but nice try. A CITY inspector has decided it’s a “public safety issue.” Yet he omits to cite HOW it’s a public safety issue. In light of the media attention I find the omission suspicious. Clearly this elderly woman didn’t erect the cross herself, but someone had to have done it for her. It’s quite possible the cross was erected by someone very familiar with safetly laws and did so well withing safety standards. It is the CROSS that seems to be the issue, NOT safety.

        In that vein you’ve also made it clear from your other comments that it’s the CROSS that you have an issue with, as well. I’d like to point out that every time one of you atheistic cult members forces someone to put away their cross it is YOUR religion that is inflicted on others. That woman’s cross is on HER property, not yours. You and your ilk need to stop forcing people to display YOUR atheism.

    2. Terry Furlough says:

      Shut down all housing projects.. due to the number of murders, drugs and crime that take place there.. they are a safety hazard..

  22. John McGraw says:

    I an sick of these power hungry home owner groups taking away people’s freedom.

    1. Mara says:

      and I’m sick of so-called christians getting their panties all in a wad when they’re asked to follow the same zoning rules as anyone else.

      1. Alex says:

        I could not agree more! Bravo!

    2. Alex says:

      They agreed to the HOA CC & Rs before they purchased the property. If you don’t want to comply with the rules then don’t buy there! Simple. Most rules are enacted for safety and to preserve property values. Apparently this lady does not care about these important issues as is evidenced by her lack of a permit.

    3. Oberon123 says:

      Then don’t buy property in a place that has a homeowners’ group. And don’t buy property in any place that has zoning restrictions. I’m sure you can find a nice place on the moon where you can have your crack lab and 50-foot cross and cars up on blocks and nobody will bother you.

  23. Thomas Manning says:

    How large must a cross be for it to be called a structure? If the code does not specify then any yard sign must also be considered a structure and those property owners fined!

    1. Mike D says:

      Well – its not just how ‘large’ – there is ‘weight’ – its the ‘weight’ that kills people when things fall over.

      But yeah – we can look at weight, height and its base area to tell if something can withstand XXX pounds of force (wind etc) to see if it can be knocked over.

      But its up to the home owner to prove its structurally sound and safe – not the city/gov’t. the gov’t is there to make sure you DO prove it is safe.

      1. Terry Furlough says:

        Stay put of the woman’s yard.. it’s not public property, you good for nothing busy body twerps…. go pick up trash or paint a mural.. in other words MYOFB!!

  24. Tanner says:

    I’m erecting a statue of a naked John Holmes wrestling Jesus Christ… It’ll be up to code and if it offends you sorry. Free country right? Idiots. Keep your muslim, christian, catholic, straight, gay, atheist, agnostic belief’s to yourself. Can nobody assimilate to what would be considered the norm anymore? Would you like a cross in your yard? Then build a 5 foot one and plant it in your backyard. You can worship it to your little hearts content. I worship boobies but you don’t see a 24 foot set of naked mounds in my front yard. Only my wife’s 36 D’s in the bedroom…

    1. ronpaulforpresident2012 says:

      Please please put 24ft mounds in your front yard. And, then post the pictures for all to see. After that, run for President. Boobies boobies boobies hehehhehehehehehehehahahahahahah

    2. Sammie Jo says:

      while you are speaking with sarcastic humor, you are entirely right, the cross is only okay with those who worship it, but put up something they don’t worship and the furor will begin anew.

    3. Mara says:

      preach on, brother!!

    4. Mike D says:

      “Can nobody assimilate to what would be considered the norm anymore?”

      no, but that’s a good thing.

      Look, We are criticizing religion and still alive to talk about it – I call that progress.
      I think, conforming to the norm prevents such progress.

  25. Thomas Manning says:

    Chucky if you asked the customers you’d learn that McDonalds is a haven for democrats.

  26. Never Walk Alone says:

    A 24 foot statue of two perverted men have anal sex would be applauded and called diversity and promote calls for sensitivity and accommodation. The traitor, Eric Holder, would then prosecute anybody so much as talking about it in a derogatory manner.

    1. Mike D says:

      “A 24 foot statue of two perverted men have anal sex would be applauded and called diversity and promote calls for sensitivity and accommodation.”

      No I am pretty sure you could get away with calling that ‘porn’ still….

      “The traitor, Eric Holder, would then prosecute anybody so much as talking about it in a derogatory manner.”
      …. and stay out of jail for calling it what it would be – ‘porn’.

      But kudos on how far off topic you derailed us… yea!

  27. Gary says:

    Another example of why elections matter even local elections. We the people voted them in we can vote them out.

  28. Lee Yarbrough says:

    I would be interested in knowing how this is “lowering their property values.” Sounds like B.S. to me on that one.

    It is her property so what is the problem. If it is not installed safe and it in danger of hurting someone then fine, fix it otherwise leave her alone. He did nothing to anyone.

  29. keith says:

    It’s her property so let her keep it…..those neighbors need to pull their heads out of their behinds. I bet its not attracting very many people to it, and something like that won’t drive down property values….geeez

  30. Retired Builder says:

    Let’s all come to our senses. A 24′ cross is as high as a 2 story house, roof included. At 24′, it’s not a show of faith, it’s a billboard.The fact that it’s a cross is incidental. Does anyone really want a 24′ billboard of anything in any residential neighborhood? Proclaiming your faith is one thing, but using a 24′ cross is just
    a little bit too loud, don’t ya think? Too loud for me anyway. Retired builder

    1. Ivan Yurkenov says:

      It’s her property to do with as she likes; ’nuff said.


      1. Mike D says:

        even say – rape your daughter on her property?

        was it really ’nuff said’ after all? really?

    2. GsGirl says:

      I wonder what you’d think of my husband’s ham radio antenna out in the backyard then?

  31. Bulldog says:

    Just more proof that California should slide into the ocean and be renamed the Isle of Idiocy.

  32. Irishman says:

    I wonder if the city would have cited her for having a 24 foot tree in her front yard. If it wasn’t true, this would be a joke. It is clearly an attempt by the city to extort some sort of fee out of the resident. First, if anything, it’s a sign not a structure. Second, with the number of city owned trees that have fallen down over the last couple of months (one of which recently killed a person in Orange County), perhaps the city ought to pay attention to its own property first. Third, I’d be curious to know if there are any multi-story buildings or residences in the area because, at 24 feet, the cross only appears to be approximately as tall as a two story building. Finally, since its not on a thru street, I find the neighbors’ congestion and property value arguments to be specious at best. It sounds more like the people who live around the Hollywood sign also own property in West Hills. Get over it; the world is not a homeowner’s association.

  33. Asides says:

    Uh, Catholics are Christians too you dolt. Seriously, though what’s the deal with those who are anti-christianity or indeed any religion always being so poorly educated or even mentally challenged? For people who claim rationality and logic for their arguments they seem curiously vehement, possibly even fanatical to a degree that in normal polite society would be extremely alarming.

  34. Engineer says:

    So who’s helping her pay for the damages when it falls because the foundation wasnt reinforced properly? If she registers it with the city, then her insurance will cover it. Did she do the proper structural analysis? earthquakes tend to happen often in California and if a cross were to fall it would be a shame, but if anything were to fall it would be a shame. No one wants to see anyone or anything fail and get hurt. For her own sake I hope she has the blue prints, material properties, wind and seismic analysis, etc.

    1. No Surrender Belfast says:

      LOL. Structural analysis for a post in the ground. You must be one of those California nuts that think we need a law and inspectors for every conceivable thing. You ARE the problem that makes this country uncompetitive and difficult to start a business. Now I must go outside and put some earthquake straps and airbags on my kids’ play set.

  35. Matthew says:

    Are Muslims that tacky?

    1. Travis says:


      I was going to pose the question the opposite way the original poster in this thread did… what if it was a satanic symbol, or an inverted cross? Would that same person be defending the right to put it up?

      1. Oberon123 says:

        Of course they wouldn’t. They only believe in the rights of fundy xians. They will tell you that this is an xian nation, so nobody else counts.

  36. Bobo says:

    It’s just a permit thing. A church can buy any residential property and erect a church with a 30 foot cross as long as they get the permits.

  37. Shari says:

    Lady, take the city to court – all the way to the SCOTUS if you must. Contact alliancedefensefund.com and ask them to take the case on. It’s time this country had a lesson on the meaning of the Constitution – Article #1. Go for it!! It’s time all the Liberals start being truly liberal and stop attacking American’s rights.

    1. GsGirl says:

      We took our city to court for not letting us keep a 5-foot chain link fence up to keep our disabled son safe and to be able to use our yard without him being injured or running into the street…they fought us all the way – the height limiit was 3-feet…we did everything they asked us to, and they still gave us grief and tried to deter us…we took it to court and we won…this even ended up on the news (years ago)…all we asked was that we could modify our property to protect our disabled son under the FHA and ADA rules…apparently a jury agreed with us, because the city lost, and they paid our attorney’s fees…we didn’t get any money out of it, because that wasn’t the point…the point was that we should be able to modify our property to keep our son safe, and the city was just being jerks about it…this lady can keep her cross in her yard if she pays the city for a permit, right?…then it’s not about safety or structure for the city…it’s about money.

    2. Sammie Jo says:

      what about the rights of the people who live near her and have to look at it everyday. Her neighbors have rights too, 24ft is obnoxious.

  38. stoptouchingthatmabel says:

    Put up a smaller size cross and attach thousands of crosses to your home from the roof to every place you can. Mow the lawn into the shape of a cross and some topiary as crosses would be a nice touch. In other words you can beat them at their own game.

  39. CA 2 GA says:

    I have lived up the street from this lady for 16 years, though my house is far enough up the other end of the block from her that I cannot see the cross from my house. And while I do not know her, I can tell you her cross is a real eye catcher! I noticed it the first time I stopped at the stop sign at the entrance to her cul-de-saq, just 4 hours after it went up. You just cannot miss it. It has a crown of thorns, blood red paint where Christ would have been affixed to the cross (if the cross isn’t offensive, the blood red paint is over the top and offensive), and a sign letting Jesus know that she trusts him, right on top! While she has every right to practice her religion, she does not have the right to thrust it upon her neighbors, some of whom are not of the Christian or Catholic faith. They find it offensive to have it forced on them, and perhaps even becoming part of their permanent view. As a nearby home owner who is planning on selling next month, I hope prospective buyers of my home are not influenced by her cross, as they are bound to see it at the bottom of the street when they leave. Even though it is out of sight from my property, I have to see it every time I leave my house and drive down the street, just like everybody else around here. I certainly am glad I’m not her neighbor. Who would want to buy a house on her cul-de-saq, let alone next door to her? Of course it is effecting home values! It is bringing down prices in an already down turned market, it is offensive to her neighbors, and it may be a safety hazard since it was installed by who knows who, with no permits! Her right to freedom of religion does not give her the right to impinge on the freedoms of others, or to violate city codes. If she wants to be a good Catholic, she can remove it, cut it down to size, and install it within her own home. Freedom of religion covered. Freedom for the rest of us to not have her religion forced on us, covered. I’m glad I’m getting out of this crazy state!

    1. Soobe says:

      Offensive paint, LOL. Go live in Kalifornia ya crybaby.

      1. Sammie Jo says:

        he IS in california, pay attention.

    2. John in Jackson says:

      CA 2 GA

      I can show you an Amendment that says that we all have a right to express our selves, will you please show me ANY law that says you, or anyone else, have the right to not be offended? {They don’t exist}

      However,if the lady violated an ordinance or law, she needs to comply with it until the law is proven illegal, changed, or she decides to fully comply. It may be as simple a solution as some guy wires or making the cross a shorter height. The real problem everyone has is with the contractor that put the thing up! There are many other ways for her to show her faith, Personally, I would have a cross either painted on, or weaved into my shingles on my roof. Also would make sure that I had a few crosses painted with glow-in-the-dark paint.

      1. CA 2 GA says:

        If she wanted to excersize her freedom of religion, she would put the cross where she could see it and apprecitate it…..inside her own home! Instead, it’s outside, 25 feet tall with all the bells and whistles, where she doesn’t have to see it at all! Except for the minute or two she spends coming and going from her house. And you call this FREEDOM? For whom is this freedom? This is a blatant infrigement on the rights of everybody who lives in this neighborhood! So “Soobe” and “John in Jackson”, why don’t you put your money where your mouths are and buy my house? It’s goes up for sale next month, like I said. Then you can be her neighbor and walk the walk, not just talk the talk! Yeah, yeah, and blah, blah. I thought so.

      2. CA 2 GA says:

        In fact, please buy my house! Then you can put up and even taller cross! I have some liberal, commie, progressive neighbors that I would love to stick with next door neighbors like you. Wouldn’t you like that too? So, come on, let’s make a deal!

    3. sammie Jo says:

      It sounds like the woman is nuts, good luck trying to sell your house, I wouldn’t want to buy on that block.

  40. 1raindog says:

    “Her neighbors, however, say the cross has attracted numerous passers-by to the quiet cul-de-sac…”


    It’s the neighbors’ complaining and getting the cross into the news that is attracting people to the house!

  41. Jon Watts says:

    I’m not a Christian, though I support may of those beliefs. It is outrageous that anyone is interfering with this woman’s right to practice her religion. What ever happened to the First Amendment? (….shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof…)

    Progressives and socialists, that’s what. Since Robespierre, their state must be the only God. I lived in West Hills (then Canoga Park) when I was a kid. Glad I’m in Alaska now – there’s still some freedom up here…

  42. Reverend Rev says:

    This isn’t about religion – it’s about complying with ZONING CODES.

    1. Rod Anders says:

      @ Reverend Rev – don’t you know that zoning codes are made up to suit the occasion?

      1. GsGirl says:

        Rod, I agree with you…you should see all the fences that are out of compliance in my city…yet they picked on us when we had a legitimate reason to make our fence higher…the zoning code enforcement officers (at least here) are dumber than rocks!

    2. jake says:

      1. What, under city code, constitutes a “structure”?
      2. Are there neighborhood covenanats that prevent her from placing a cross of significant size in her yard?
      3. Are there any other houses in similar zoning situation that have not been requested to remove the cross?
      4. Does the law apply to seasonal displays?
      5. If in fact she does need a permit, what is the code that they would apply to this? Sign code? Building code?
      6. Do you need a permit to erect a swing set in your yard as well?

  43. BarryO says:

    Public Safety Issue? This is an outright attack on Christianity..

    Option 3: Hey LA…Fu** you and and the Devil you rode in with!

  44. Adam Smith says:

    Another lightening rod to excite the ire of the anti-Christian bigots.

  45. Rod Anders says:

    She needs to take it down and put up a Muslim flag instead. No fine. No problem.

  46. jake says:

    There are some questions that are not answered in the story… not even brushed upon…
    1. What, under city code, constitutes a “structure”?
    2. Are there neighborhood covenanats that prevent her from placing a cross of significant size in her yard?
    3. Are there any other houses in similar zoning situation that have not been requested to remove the cross?
    4. Does the law apply to seasonal displays?
    5. If in fact she does need a permit, what is the code that they would apply to this? Sign code? Building code?
    6. Do you need a permit to erect a swing set in your yard as well?

    Even as a Christian, I would be annoyed if it showed up and was an eyesore in my neighborhood. Not alot of context in the way of photos to see the ret of the nieghborhood.

  47. conservativeguy says:

    I proud to be an American where at least I know I’m free …. That sure would be a novel idea – freedom. Who gives a flying flip in hell what a bunch of cursing, swearing, God hating freakazoid liberal neighbours say. In a free country, the cross would stay. In a Christ hating country, a bunch of divorced, fornicating, self-absorbed, hollywood watching, and Christ rejecting jerks get to tell decent Christians what to do.

  48. Neil says:

    Then your religion would be for rape which is against the law and the lady’s cross is just a zoning issue not even a crime. See one is evil, sick and against the law and the other, well it isn’t any of those.

  49. Brian Edwards says:

    the problem is that the 24 foot cross could fall over…..it coulld easily happen during a huricane, tornado, or earthquate…….it would fall on a neighbor’s house or on a neighbor…..this definitely poses a danger to her neighbors..

  50. raffaro says:

    And California wonders why its in a fiancial lail spin. thers no saving most of the slime there. good luck to those real Americans worth saving. hang in there.

  51. Alex says:

    Obviously the city is only interested in money. Give them a few bucks and then they’ll go away. Greedy, pencil-necked bureaucrats. Personally, I think this woman is doing a disservice to her neighbors by not considering their sentements by erecting such a huge symbol, capable of being seen for considerable distance. It shows a tremendous lack of respect for others. If a person wants to “believe” in something, I am for them doing so, but please keep your “beliefs” to yourself. No one cares what another person “believes”! What I have never understood is why people embrace the cross as a symbol of Christianity. Being crucified is synomous with death. Why would anyone professing a belief in a Savior want to display a symbol of death? While I give no credance to The Bible at all, since it was written by imprefect men, it says that people should not pray or hold sacred symbols, images or statues. With all due respect, religion should be kept a private matter and not thrown in the faces of others that do not share their views.

    1. Scott says:

      The problem with your comment on the cross is that you do not understand why the cross is important to christians. Its not what it was used for by Romans, We know the answer to that. Its what happened on that cross ! You say you dont give credence to the Bible. read 1 chapter and think on that again. Isaiah 53 written 700 years before the birth of Christ. Then tell me it was written by men. Not trying to be hostile, just wanted to give you a different point of view. it would only take 5 min. Peace

  52. Daniel Montgomery says:

    I would color paint the cross and then put another mini-ornament that says, “MY LAWYER IS A HISPANIC CATHOLIC.”

    No judge or lawyer fears anything more than a Latino Catholic.

  53. ebo says:

    If the issue is NOT about her religion and only about the pieces of wood it still should be her choice! Her private property. The end. IF it is an issue of her faith, then there had better STOP being an issue! We’re talking about her constitutional freedom and all opposed had better back off!!

  54. Early Ardmore says:

    So you won’t mind my 32ft Leprechaun with glowing green Shamrock?


  55. Scott says:

    I thought it was funny when they said it was a saftey hazard. lol! They are using technicalities to TRY to make money and at the same time , Persecute Christians ! They just fined a couple $350 for having a bible study! same excuse Zoning laws. give me a freakin break! The state of california never ceases to AMAZE me! they will lose if this goes to any high court. Its againsed the constitution

    1. GsGirl says:

      Christians are losing their freedoms more and more each day…

  56. todd says:

    “Render unto caesar what is caesar’s”

    Right now, caesar demands a building permit. simple really

    1. Unclesmrgol Dragon says:

      If they had just said it was unsafe and she had to tear it down, I’d say they have a correct legal position — but the moment they demand money in order for her to be allowed her religious observance — in that moment they have run afoul of the 1st Amendment.

  57. Nathaniel says:

    Most of the people defending this woman are arguing that she has a fundamental right to do so, regardless of zoning laws. It might be easier to first ask, however, if what she’s doing really in line with Christian values and teachings. In other words, would Jesus approve of what she’s doing? Would Jesus advise someone to ignore the feelings and financial well-being of her neighbors just so she feels better about how she worships him?

    Christians are obliged to set a good example to others with the ultimate goal of helping non-believers to “see the light” and convert to Christianity and to help the converted to become better Christians. Does anyone here actually think she’s doing that? It seems to me that what she’s doing is incredibly inconsiderate and not in line with Jesus’ teachings at all. More than anything, her actions are helping non-believers to show Christianity in a negative light. Just because someone has the right to do something (assuming she does) doesn’t mean that it’s the right thing to do.

  58. Big Bear says:

    I long for the day when a fine collector is found broken. That will stop their zeal.

    It’s coming. In the meantime, ignore their fees and fines. They are the enemy and will be recognized as such.

  59. DL Snyder says:

    The neighbors are complaining that people are driving by to look at the cross. This activity of cars driving around their neighborhood is driving property values down? Honestly, this would not be an issue if the neighbors didn’t make it one. If the neighbors had not publicized this issue, nobody would even know the cross was there … except the neighbors. Lesson learned … let sleeping dogs lie.

  60. magnoliabel says:

    There is no law against this woman doing what she wants to with this cross. The only thing she broke is the ego of the Communist person who came out to force her to take it down.

    Let face it folks our government is Communist and the tyrannical government will get worse.

  61. magnoliabel says:

    The government is tyrannical and oppressive and covets what one has. It will get worse before it gets better.

  62. Dave says:

    LMAO…..Driving down property values? LOL…..oooh…..that’s what’s doing it.

    And all this time I thought it was Fu@k3d up FED policy, whereby years of cheap digital money encouraged reckless “investing” by house flippers and developers creating a huge bubble in the housing market leading to an enormous over abundance of housing and a shortage of buyers.

    Silly me.

  63. Crystal says:

    I agree with Travis. Here in San Diego, we have the Mt. Soledad cross and for many years people have been fighting to have it taken down. I support its beauty not only as a symbol of my faith, but freedom of speech.

    Travis, interesting argument on the inverted cross. I would agree with it. Also, if this cross was small, I wonder if the same problem would be at hand.

    I had a Mother Mary medallion that I used to mark a grave site for an animal on my property a long time ago in a large garden I once had. Would you believe it was stolen from my yard by kids? I even went to their home in hopes to get it back. I haven’t a clue to how they found it as my yard was huge and it laid on the grass.

  64. Ron Paulite says:

    Gotta love all the posters whining about her “rights”. You know they would be the first ones having a hissy fit if this eyesore was erected next to their house! Ron Paul – infringing on everybody else’s rights is our right!

  65. bobbyhoying says:

    Why don’t all you Ron Paul guys also support Herman Cain? He’s a very smart guy with lots of experience running businesses. He has very practical, common sense solutions for the economy. I think he doesn’t get any press coverage because he doesn’t fit the Jesse Jackson, Charlie Reingold helpless, oppressed, black stereotype, he doesn’t have to stumble over the big words on a teleprompter, and he knows how many states we have.

  66. Hank Warren says:

    This is all about limiting Free Speech. After all, censorship is everywhere. The gov’t (and their big business cronies) censor free speech, shut down dissent and ban the book “America Deceived II”. Free speech for all.
    Last link (before Google Books bans it also]:

  67. kcsparky says:

    California is a disease that needs to be cured. Wall off the Oregon, Nevada & Arizona borders and give it all to Mexico. Let’s see what happens when these whiners are subjected to south of the border law and Calderon

  68. Cincinnatus says:

    I say she ask the Zoning Board to oopen in prayer. They won’t because they will claim seperation of church and state. Then she leaves – having made her point.

  69. conner says:

    Its her property, and I seriously doubt if anyone looks up how “structure” is defined, this cross would count.

    I agree its unsightly, but in the end its her property to do with as she pleases. If it was a structure erected to celebrate sodomy, it wouldnt have gotten a single complaint, me thinks……

  70. Donny says:

    The USA will now undergo a battle of freedom and liberty versus slavery in the next 20 odd years. We have two ways to fight enslavement – elect Ron Paul or start taking pot shots at our leaders. I prefer the first but will opt for the second if needed. We have modern day slavery and most now see it. Federal control is everywhere, EPA, Taxation, Healthcare, Retirement, Code Mandates, Tracking Devices, Cameras, Gun ownership regulations, WIre Taping, Freedom of speech under a cloak of Political Correctness, Education, Oppression of your religion, and don’t forget the molesting of citizens and children at our airports and sporting events. The fire of freedom and liberty needs to be renewed from time to time, let’s hope we can do this peacefully but acknowledge the renewal needs to be done at any cost.

  71. DRock says:

    No way No how is this acceptable in a suburban community. If the retiree lived out in the middle of nowhere w/ acreage to buffer her from her neighbors, no problem. I appreciate this woman’s rights as a homeowner, but she needs to be considerate of the rights and property value of her neighbors. If I worshipped dog poop, and erect a 24 foot sculpture of it on my front lawn would that be OK. Take down the cross and go to Mass.

  72. blackavenger says:

    IT is a anti christian issue disguised as a zoning violation. Amazing , issnt it that the demons known as atheists, etc et al, swear there is no GOD of Jesus, yet they are deathly afriaid of the cross, the bible and the afterlife they will face. So be it fools. You will lose the battle. God made you, God will take you out, fools.

  73. Echo4Texas says:

    Can we get an clue on proportion here? A 24′ cross in the front yard of a neighborhood. If it takes such a huge symbol to show your faith then your faith must be limited. A six foot cross would probably have been overlooked by neighbors and the city. I like motorcycles and naked women, if I put up a 24′ yard art of a naked woman on a motorcycle I would expect a little negative feedback. Why should such a huge structure extolling your passion for virgin mothers and a dead guy rising be less prone to negative feedback.It isnt so much about rights as it is about respect for your neighbors and this broad obviously needs to reread the part about ‘do unto others as you would have them do unto you.’ Then reread about worshipping symbols instead of god himself. Hypocrites always scream the loudest it seems.

  74. TexasForever says:

    As far as I can see Californians could use a little God?
    What are they ashamed of? Their lifestyle?
    Of course, if this was a mosque, pentagram or scientology there would be no problem but since it is Christian symbol the hyprocrites are in a rage!

  75. Tom Davidson says:

    This is NOT a public safety issue. If safety was involved, the building inspectors would have determined that the structure was unsafe, and *ordered* it condemned. A “permit” won’t change the safety. This is all about the government wanting more money and believing they can regulate the free exercise of religion with impugnity.

  76. Lawrence E says:

    Only the state “owns” property. Local government has the say on what you can do on the property you inhabit and can take this property from you anytime they want. “Freedom” is a misnomer. There are only greater or lesser degrees of governmental control. There is no total freedom of speech or even freedom to hate. Freedom- forget about it.

  77. Philip Warburton says:

    I wonder if all the Republicans here would still be singing the same tune about property rights if their neighbor put up a 24-foot tall sculpture of a gay couple making out on the front lawn.

  78. Patrick says:

    If it was a Rainbow Flag put on a long flagpole the Liberals and ACLU and Hollyweird would protect it just like they supported that black cop killer that got executed the other day in Georgia. Liberalism is a Mental Disorder.

  79. Van Wehrle says:

    I’m an agnostic conservative and understand what the deal is in this situation. Neighbors dont like the cross because it’s abnoxious in their view (even to Christians), and the only way to get the thing down (for appearances sake to the community) is to fine the person. Asking them nicely obviously isnt an option.

    I like religious symbols, but I do not want any large obnoxious thing in a neighbor’s front yard that will hurt the value of my home (or hinder the sale of). It’s like saying you can paint your house bright purple with black polka dots or park junk cars in your yard. Sorry but the person is negatively affecting other people’s home values.

    This person could just as easily get a stained glass insert for their front door in the shape of a cross or similarly pleasant decoration.

    1. WakeUp says:

      The right to paint your house purple isn’t guaranteed by the constitution, her religious rights are. There are many thiings people do in this country that I find obnoxious, but the Constitution guarantees their right to do it. This is no different.

      1. Van Wehrle says:

        I would agree normally but I gather this cross is HUGE. Some times going overboard makes an impact on the people who live next door, they have property interests I would imagine.

  80. WakeUp says:

    Why is it that liberals think they can pick and choose which Constitutional rights are ok and which can be ignored? The Constitution clearly states that her free excersize of religion may not be infringed. Not allowing her to express her religion on her own property is certainly an infringment on her free excersize of religion.

  81. djmore says:

    How about she takes that one 24 foot cross down, and puts up 24 one foot crosses up.

  82. Jack Kinch(1uncle) says:

    Your home is not yours anymore. You rent it from the government for whatever property(?) taxes you pay. The USA is now the USSA.. You do whatever ‘big brother’ says. It was a great country before it was bought with welfare and amnesty

  83. Jack Kinch(1uncle) says:

    I would much rather move next door to a family with a cross than many, many others.

  84. Franz Fafner says:

    The days are long gone when you could do just anything you want with your land. We’ve had building codes, zoning laws, and restrictive covenants for over a century – use restrictions, size restrictions, set-back lines, and so forth. I think a 24-foot cross is a wonderful thing, but not necessarily on the front lawn of a residential neighborhood. I’m sure she’d have fewer problems if she built a little shrine in the back yard. Or should we get rid of all zoning restrictions, so that your nice house has a toxic waste dump on one side, a porn shop on the other, and giant statues of Mohammed and Marx and Marilyn Monroe all up and down the block? Get real, folks.

  85. LobaAzul says:

    Zoning laws, HOAs – just ways for people who can’t mind their own damn business to use against their neighbors.

    “This is a public safety issue,” A public safety issue??? What baloney.

    This is what we get, and worse, when we buy into the idea that there should be recourse for being offended.

  86. Rocky says:

    Isn’t this how the weimar Republic got the ball rolling ?
    Doesn’t religious discrimination and persecution toward the Catolic faith exist in every left wing dictatorship and Islamic country in the World ?
    It’s looking like the Constitution apply’s only when itt suits the Socialist/Communist Liberals !

  87. Phil says:

    She has rights granted by her Creator and codified in law by the First Amendment. Clearly there are neighbors that take themselves and their status as “homeowner” way too seriously. By the way, Christians, in case you don’t think there are some people looking to force you back into “worshipping in catacombs” so to speak, check out some of the comments on this thread.

  88. Rick O'Shea says:

    Comments like “she doesn’t need that” are really stupid. In a free society it isn’t what she needs, it’s what she wants. HOAs and ahole neighbors and ahole city bulllies. Put up a clothesline in the front yard and hang panties and bras on it all the time. There is a federal “right to dry” law. Have your lawyer look into it.

  89. TRE says:

    I’m pretty sure a 24-foot anything is against code. This is not a case of discrimination; but rather maintaining community standards as defined in the city code books.

    If said retiree erected a 24-foot cross on a property outside of the city, he surely wouldn’t have transgressed the city’s laws.

  90. Andrew says:

    Instead of building a large cross it would have been far easier to plaster her house with numerous crosses. Nothing new constructed and therefore no problem–unless of course the observers of the national sozialist american workers party were to find a problem with it–that might require a final solution to the Laly problem. Hail Victory!

  91. danielle says:

    The reason this is even happening is because her busy body neighborhs don’t like people driving down their street. WAH WAH. Driving down value? What? It’s not a Nazi swastika. If it was an islamic symbol I guarantee no one would say boo for fear of being called racist.

  92. johnny h says:

    God dammit mike d! you’re a troll. stop giving atheists a bad name

  93. joe says:

    Hay morons the PROPERTY PRICESES ARE GOING DOWN cross or no cross.

  94. ONTIME1 says:

    It’s driving down the property values……..??

    Sounds a lot like neighbors, city and questionable law is in a tissy and could probably handle the situation a lot better.

  95. Alex Moon says:

    Got to agree with the city and neighborhood on this one. Maybe on her farm, but not in her yard with neighboring houses on a city street. Main concern to me might be traffic gawkers, property values, detracts from neighborhood orderliness. I’d say she couldn’t paint her house bright fuscia or chartreuse for the same reasons.

  96. billcrawford says:

    On the bright side the cross is not burning I guess then it would be against the law but non burning is OK with a permit, just what I would want next to my house to help increase the value. I guess the back yard did not work for here or say maybe a smaller cross inside her house as it is definitely for PUBLIC display in front & 24 foot tall, how about some speakers for her Muslin neighbor so he can have a call to prayer for himself 5 times a day, they would make good neighbors as well I’d bet.

    And I thought common sense was at a premium.

  97. The Mad Man says:

    How again is this affecting public safety. I didn’t seem to read enough of a real justification on that one. More to this story than just a cross being erected.

  98. sean says:

    Usurper in office and city worries about this?My Lord

  99. oldschoolmusic says:

    So let me get this right. If she gets a permit its no longer a safety issue?

    1. Unclesmrgol Dragon says:

      Yup. We now have to pay the state to practice our religion. Kind of sad.

      1. George W. Axl Rosebush says:

        Until the bullets start flying, which will be soon enuf!

  100. elkhorn says:

    She could just burn it, get rid of it that way.

  101. Tryon says:

    Yo’ Travis: But what if it were a 24 foot high thing that looked like a book with the word “Quoran” written on it. What kind of vigorous code enforcement (in the name of public safety BS) would we see? Ah . . . probably not too much I’d guess.

  102. Ronald says:

    The comment from Building and Safety spokesman Dave Lara about what the woman does with her private property says it all about government: “This is a public safety issue.”

  103. Michael Kittrell says:

    A public safety issue… a 24 foot cross… in your own yard… is a “structure”… a public safety issue.

    Can the government hold my hand when I go to the bathroom too?

  104. lous says:

    meh, its gods will

  105. B says:

    If you want personal freedom to erect a religious symbol on your own property move away from the intolerant liberal cesspool in which you live.

  106. Freemindsmarket says:

    I find a yard filled with religious statuary or statuary of any kind tacky (“offensive”), but I never confuse what I feel with the rights of the person displaying the statuary to display it.

    If the argument “it depresses property values” wins without question as a valid principle, then we have all lost our liberty. Note “It depresses property values” is always a subjective argument.

    Yes, if the town requires a permit, then she should get a permit. But somehow, I expect no permit will issue for any reason here.

    New Hampshire got it right, “Live Free or Die”.

  107. stephenph says:

    The difference between murder (rape, meth lab, Cell phone tower) is that those things actually pose a danger to someone. As far as I know, no atheist has died from looking at a cross (or Christian from looking at pentagram) This cross MIGHT pose a danger. (if it is closer then 24 feet to the property line) if that is the case then she should have to take it down/make it smaller. Is she doing it to draw attention? Probably, but there is no law that says you can’t be annoying (I also doubt she is playing music, shining lights at houses, or doing other things to draw attention to it that might violate nusince laws.

    If the city denies her a permit, but she meets the letter of the law (AND if there are no other blatant zoning violations that they are NOT going after) then it is either about money or about being anti religion. It would be interesting to see if any of the houses on the street have a shed too close to the property line (Usually 3 feet or so), Have the permits to put up the security lights, or drain the pool into the street some dark night when no one is looking….

  108. Marcus Harvey says:


  109. John Potts says:

    I live on a boat. Perhaps next year I will move ashore. One thing for sure is I will not live within the city limits of any town. In Port Townsend, Washington one must have a permit to put up a swing set for your grandchildren. Who the hell wants every aspect of their lives controlled by folks sucking on the money tit? Yes…I have figured it out. Liberals.

  110. Craig Ritsema says:

    Decreases property values?, an expression of personnel Freedom decreases property values?. How can someone’s declaration of their Christian Faith decrease property values?, so does that mean if she puts up a Nativity Scene in November but doesn’t take it down until Feb or Mar and does that every year, will the property values decrease? That’s just like the liberals when they guns kill people, well, of course they do, IF THE PERSON HOLDING THE GUN PULLS THE TRIGGER, actually it’s still not the gun that kills, it’s the bullet, so “If guns kill people, does that mean pencils misspell words”. It makes about as much sense.

  111. Vina Sestonari says:

    I do not understand the Christian’s fetish with the cross. I’m just glad Jesus was not executed in the 60’s or else they would be wearing little electric chairs and setting up replica death chambers on their front lawn.

  112. JustFollowing says:

    it’s a 24 foot cross. it’s like a massive flag pole in the front lawn of a home in a residential area. it’s like it’s 3 feet or even 8 feet. it’s 24 feet. safety? I don’t know. building/land use code – sure. she should get a permit or take it down. what if she had a Jewish neighbor who put up a 24-foot menorah, or a moselm neighbor who put upa 24-foot minaret. should they get permits? yes. you get a permit, because it’s the nice thing to do. it shows that you respect your neighbors, especially when it’s 24 feet high, and not just a lawn ornament of say 1-3 feet high…

  113. again 12345 says:

    Plant a tree in that place and board a cross on it, trees are not a code violation, in fact they combat global warming.

  114. Robin Case Mikkola says:

    I have to say that if it is attracting people to come see it in this quite cul-de-sac it has nothing to do with the land ower but everything to do with those that have drawn attention to it…. by complaining and going to the city zoning commity… you know at one time America was free, but government took control because people don’t know how to get along and well if you own the property then you should be aloud to do as you please as a owner of the property and a tax payer of that said property…But alas America is know longer free, due to our government regulations that tear it’s citizens down and take exzorbit amounts in taxes every year while the memembes of our government do not abide by the same standards…. If this oridinary citizen has to take down something from her property then it is the fault of the poeple who don’t know how to leave well enough along and stop letting government control our lives….

  115. aubreyfarmer says:

    What more evidence do you need that we are evolving into a fascist dictatorship?

  116. Blackcurry says:

    Many people have religious statues or grottos on their property and there is no problem. Why did this woman feel the need to build such an ostentatious display on her property? A normal sized cross would have done just as well to pay tribute to her faith and would probably not have irritated her neighbors.

  117. CrossesAndFlagsOKinTX says:

    So if she buys a permit, it is suddenly safe? Sheesh, Liberals. Maybe they can fine her $666.

  118. Hugh says:

    Put a small bird house on the top. God won’t mind.

  119. sandy says:

    I am reading a good book called ” When The Crosses Are Gone ” by Michael Youssef, Ph,D. This is really an EYE OPENER! As Dr. Youssef wrote, “When the crosses are gone, the world has truly gone mad. But we don’t have to accept the madness.” You will be astonished at what you learn!

  120. Michael says:

    Can she park half a dozen cars and trucks in her front yard? Can she build a minaret? How about displaying her large flashing neon sign? Can she fence it in and put cows in her front yard? How about a 100 foot tall cross?

  121. CleanFun says:

    I bet it’s going to look awesome covered in lights at Christmas time.

    As for property value, I wouldn’t be surprised if her home sold for more than her complaining neighbors.

  122. Bob says:

    “Public safety issue”? It’s on her own “private” property.

  123. chris says:

    How much of a say do you have about your neighbors front yard? Can they install a 24′ tall advertising billboard? Can they install a 24′ flag pole with the american flag? Can they install the same flag pole with the confederate “stars and bars”. When do you have a say, especially when it effects the property value of your house because you live nearby?

  124. Boak Ferris says:

    RE: News Omission 9/29/11, 7:15 AM.

    1070 reported on the CFA call to strike, and mentioned it was due to undelivered–though promised–faculty pay raises. 1070 also reported the other “side,” that the Chancellor’s office explained how the distressed state budget prevents granting the promised pay raises.

    1070 missed the main point.

    The Chancellor funded huge pay raises for all executives/trustees in the Chancellor’s office TWICE over the last two years, and also raised the salaries of the campus presidents. By incomplete reporting 1070 becomes complicit in misrepresentations of full disclosure of each position. The CSU System is a public state organization.

  125. Speedy Bubbles says:

    Hi, how are you? I hope you do well. I wanted to say that I like this posting.

  126. weight loss says:

    Hi there, simply become aware of your weblog through Google, and found that it is really informative. I am going to watch out for brussels. I’ll be grateful in the event you continue this in future. A lot of other people will probably be benefited out of your writing. Cheers!

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment:

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

Watch & Listen LIVE