Posted on 06/20/2017 6:43:07 AM PDT by Kaslin
Atheists across the fruited plain are rejoicing after a federal judge declared that a cross erected in a Florida park violated the law and must come down.
“I am aware that there is a lot of support in Pensacola to keep the cross as is, and I understand and I understand and respect that point of view,” U.S. District Judge Roger Vinson wrote in his ruling. “But, the law is the law.”
The lawsuit was filed in 2016 by the notorious Freedom From Religion Foundation and the American Humanist Association on behalf of four Pensacola citizens
The judge pointed out that park has hosted tens of thousands of people for roughly 75 years without causing anyone offense – until now.
“When a city park serving all citizens – nonreligious, Jewish, Hindu, Buddhist, Muslim and Christian – contains a towering Latin cross, this sends a message of exclusion to non-Christians, and a corresponding message to Christians that they are favored citizens,” said Annie Gaylor, the organization’s perpetually offended co-founder.
The original cross was erected in 1941 in Bayview Park. It was replaced with a 34-foot, white “Latin Cross” in 1969 by the Pensacola Jaycees.
Judge Vinson noted in his ruling the “Bayview Cross” is “part of the rich history of Pensacola and Bayview Park in particular.”
He said the cross had been the focal point for Memorial Day and Veteran’s Day services – not to mention Easter Sunrise services.
“However, after about 75 years, the Bayview Cross can no longer stand as a permanent fixture on city-owned property,” the Reagan-appointed judge ruled.
He directed the city of Pensacola to remove the cross within 30 days. He also ordered the city to pay the aggrieved plaintiffs one dollar in damages. That comes out to a quarter apiece.
The American Humanist Association celebrated the judge’s ruling.
“We are pleased that the Court struck down this cross as violative of the First Amendment,” attorney Monica Miller said in a statement. “The cross was totally unavoidable to park patrons, and to have citizens foot the bill for such a religion symbol is both unfair and unconstitutional.”
Judge Vinson based his ruling on a court case involving a similar cross that suffered the same fate in Rabun County, Georgia.
“If the cross under review in Rabun County violated the First Amendment and had to be removed, the cross here must suffer the same fate,” the judge wrote.
Oddly, Judge Vinson seemed rather reluctant to rule against the cross.
“The historical record indicates that the Founding Fathers did not intend for the Establishment Clause to ban crosses and religious symbols from public property,” he wrote. “Indeed, ‘the enlightened patriots who framed our constitution’…would have most likely found this lawsuit absurd. And if I were deciding this case on a blank slate, I would agree and grant the plaintiffs no relief. But, alas, that is not what we have here.”
As I wrote in my book, “The Deplorables Guide to Making America Great Again,” people of faith are facing unrelenting attacks from a ruthless bunch of godless atheists -- hell-bent on eradicating Christianity from the public.
Should Christian citizens be relegated to some sort of second-class citizenship? Should they be directed to keep their beliefs hidden inside the church house?
Will they demand that city leaders rename Los Angeles and San Francisco? Should The Ten Commandments be chiseled off the doors of the Supreme Court? Should references to God be sandblasted from our national monuments?
Just how far do the atheists intend to go in this cultural jihad on our Judeo-Christian values?
Our city was sued for the same issue.
We have a private group maintain the ten commandments in our local park after the city deeded the small plot to them.
In the end, GOD wins and we still get to keep them right where they they are.
I firmly believe President Trump wants to correct the insanity, but he can't think of everything all the time.
He needs to read about a lawyer in Pensacola challenging this stupid law (f'rinstance)
Using that logic, a playground in a city park sends a message that people with children are favored citizens.
There sometimes need to be red lines. How about no and take to the streets to stop the enemies of Western civilization?
Appeal to a judge that understands the Constitution.
>>Should Christian citizens be relegated to some sort of second-class citizenship? Should they be directed to keep their beliefs hidden inside the church house?
Read the book of Acts.
Now compare that to a hipster megachurch that freely operates in public, but tones down the “God talk” so as to not offend the “seekers” who choose a church based on amenities.
To the left, without a doubt.
f the Christian religion may not act to worship in the public square, then the Christian ethos - caring for a fellow man - has no place in policy making - or guilt tripping Christian citizens to part with their wealth.
Another win for Annie Laurie Nutjob.
If the Christian religion may not act to worship in the public square, then the Christian ethos - caring for a fellow man - has no place in policy making - or guilt tripping Christian citizens to part with their wealth.
Yes they will.
“”violated the law and must come down. “”
I am not a constitutional scholar but the 1st Amendment forbids Congress from passing a law establishing or prohibiting a religion. Exactly WHAT LAW is being violated?
Are we EVER going to return to common sense? Someone wrote a book years ago about that but this will do:
http://infohost.nmt.edu/~armiller/commonsen.htm
Except I believe as the article says, it’s dead and gone...
“One day, they will all bow their knees to the King of Kings. So much for their offense.”
Yep.
5.56mm
Annie Laurie Nutjob?
“But, the law is the law.”
.... Except when we’re talking sanctuary cities, recreational marijuana, sodomy, and other liberal pipe dreams.
He’s saying he has no spine to do the right thing and instead is cowering to follow more current trend then the actual foundations of our country.
He’s saying he puts his job above doing the right thing,
He’s saying he’s not up to the challenge of standing firm with our forefathers, but wants to save face and not annoy people who likely would find a way to retaliate if he allowed the cross to stay put.
If as he writes the cross would be allowed by our Founding fathers than that is the only basis the judge needed to make his ruling. He could have left it at that and let the whiners take it to supreme court instead he took the easy way.
We have way too many wimpy judges ruling from ease and feelings and twisted cases over the years than from roots of our country’s foundational documents and their intent.
What liberals fear most.
Amen. A lady in Tomball, Texas has had a huge cross erected on private land to honor her late son. It’s right on the new and well traveled Grand Parkway.
I hope a private landowner does the same thing within eyesight of the Florida park. I also want the courts to rule that it’s offensive to Christians to have to hear the morning call to Muslim prayer.
www.thepinkarmadillo.com/2017/03/24/125-foot-giant-tomball-cross
I went to 35 and saw no answer.
So I will interject; Jesus conquered death, the consequence
of being ungodly.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.