Atheist center’s fence is blasphemy in town

TRIBUNE-DEMOCRAT ^ | August 31, 2003 | SUSAN EVANS

[Polycarp]

[WellsFargo94]

Okay, who's going to be the first to post flickering flames on this thread?!

[Polycarp]

These atheists are only happy when they're persecuting someone or feeling persecuted.

[Porterville]

Freedom of speech, but she's is pretty obnoxious.

[LanPB01]

LOL! Yeah, as opposed to the 10,000 ranting and raving posts that have been on FreeRepublic in the last few weeks due to Judge Moore, and the IMMINENT BANNING OF ALL THINGS CHRISTIAN! Right.

[Polycarp]

Far be it from us to poke fun at our friendly neighborhood atheist kooks and cranks ;-)

[jlogajan]

But borough officials counter that vandalism, while unfortunate, doesn’t give Polansky the right to build an illegal fence, especially one that protrudes on what they say is municipal property, and that the atheist center screams for attention.

It is settled case law here on FR that religious displays have a perfect right, per Judge Moore, to exist on public property, right?

[tallhappy]

These atheists are only happy when they're persecuting someone or feeling persecuted.

Well said. Liberals always want to operate outside the law with special priviliges and they can feel oppressed and therefore superior if they don't get the special treatment.

What should happen is that she should just get sued for all she's worth when someone crashes in to the post she put in the street.

[jlogajan]

Vandals have broken her windows, thrown eggs and human waste at the front of the building, and jammed her front door... Someone shot out the windows and the door

Sounds like the work of God's soldiers.

[LanPB01]

I think it's settled that not only do Christians have the right to establish religious monuments on public property, nay, they have the DUTY to do it!

[Polycarp]

For you atheists, is a chain link fence on borough property erected by a private citizen now considered a "religious display"?

Of course, given the record of atheistic governments over the last century, chain link fencing and barbed wire may be the perfect symbol of the religion of atheism. I'm just not sure this particular atheist kook has any constitutional right to erect her particular chain link fence outside her own private property. Maybe you disagree.

[jlogajan]

What should happen is that she should just get sued for all she's worth when someone crashes in to the post she put in the street.

Read it and weep: "Even some borough officials are now wavering on whether the fence is on borough right-of-way."

Looks like the roadway encroaches on private property.

[Cultural Jihad]

LOL! Someone is a few fries short of a Happy Meal.

[jlogajan]

is a chain link fence on borough property erected by a private citizen now considered a "religious display"?

Well, you can't pick other religion's icons, but nonetheless, in the story, it looks like the roadway is encroaching private property.

The interesting thing about this story is not the property line dispute (which borough officials are backing away from) but the vandalism by God's enforcers.

[dighton]

Post-Gazette photo

Wide-angle lens, unusual perspective aided by strong sunlight.

;-)

[jlogajan]

LOL! Someone is a few fries short of a Happy Meal.

That's no way to talk about God's goons.

[Mind-numbed Robot]

The left, and nearly all atheist are lefties and vice versa, remind me of rebellious kids. They can't get attention being themselves so they are purposely bad, or counter to the accepted norm, just to get attention of some kind. Then to give their silly rebellion some sort of legitimacy, the vigorously defend the foolish.

[tallhappy]

What does what you said have to do with suing her for it in our legal system?

[jlogajan]

The left, and nearly all atheist are lefties and vice versa, remind me of rebellious kids.

Reread the story. The vandalism is by your Christian brothers and sisters.

[LouD]

Um, what exactly does one do at an "atheist station" besides not pray?