Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Spunky

He authored a concurring opinion. He criticizes the concept of the offended observer and would have held that suits like this should be dismissed for lack of standing. He’s 100% correct, IMO, and it’s a shame his view didn’t prevail, but at least this decision went the right way in general.


13 posted on 06/20/2019 8:26:12 AM PDT by Stravinsky
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies ]


To: Stravinsky

That should now protect every cross on public land in America. Now add those mayors, congress critters and other political animals who opposed this to the list of pols that need to be defeated next year.


15 posted on 06/20/2019 8:39:24 AM PDT by EQAndyBuzz (Trump is President and CEO of America, Inc.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies ]

To: Stravinsky

I think I’m glad the ruling went the way it went. I am concerned however that Ginsberg has a valid point. I would prefer that a Star of David not mark my grave. The fact is however that in our day and time as in the last 200 plus years of our country the cross has meant more than Christianity, although it can certainly mean that. Was there a section in the cemetery for various religions?

I would never be in favor of removing the Cross, Star of David or Crescent but if I was a Jew and there was only a Cross I might be inclined to complain that I too need a marker.


16 posted on 06/20/2019 8:54:33 AM PDT by JAKraig (my religion is at least as good as yours)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson