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?
Annie Gaylor. Remember that name.
L
The words are “precedent” and “vernacular”.
That is all.
L
Oh no we do agree HOWEVER if the precedent is incorrectly established and incorrectly followed it is up to CONGRESS to set it right by enacting laws that clearly defines what the particular law in question is and should be.
To allow courts decide and us hem and haw about it blaming a court in something long outstanding is not directing our issue in the right direction. Congress is the one culpable here not a judge.
Lol thanks!
Semper Fi.
L
Semper Fi my friend!
Judges can overturn precedents. Judges should do this judiciously when precedents are incorrectly decided.
I agree with you in this point as well.
If only these unelected morons applied it to "illegal" aliens!
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.