BH, I am amazed. We actually agree!
Assuming no hazard (and I have to admit, the poster who mentioned Mary flying out into traffic made an excellent point), the refusal of any display on
purely religious grounds is in itself unconstitutional. As a citizen of the United States of America, I have the same rights to utilize public lands
as any other citizen, for any reasonable use that does not infringe upon the rights of others. That means I can walk through a park reading a Bible.
It means I can walk through a courthouse. It means I can place signs on the road outside my house (still public land) advertising a yard sale
(assuming such signs are legal in my area for others).
It does not mean I can remove things placed there by others because I don't like them. How many times during election cycles do I see signs
advertising the politician
du jour, usually someone I do not like? Plenty, let me tell you! But it is illegal for me to remove such signs, even
if they become 'litter'. As a citizen, the politicians and their supporters have the right to erect signs advertising their particular opinion, just
as I do.
There are common-sense regulations. Hazards, for one, are not allowed for obvious motorists safety. I cannot obstruct traffic, because that would
interfere with others' ability to utilize the public property. I cannot paint a public building because I don't like its color. I cannot block
information from others or improperly use space, such as would be the case if I set up a Nativity scene in front of the Probate Judge's office.
However, to deny the right to place a temporary display solely on the grounds that someone might be offended by its religious overtones is creating a
law which prohibits the free exercise of religion, something that is specifically stated in the US Constitution.
Now, someone can claim that I would be up in arms over a Muslim or pagan or Jewish symbol all they want (and they probably will). But that
opinion of my motives does not establish my motives. The truth is that while I would not like it, there are many things I do not like but which
I must endure in order to obey the laws and spirit of the constitution and of society (political signs chief among this list). I would still defend
the right of the person who erected such a display to do so.
That attitude seems to fly out the window when certain people are concerned however. Some do indeed seem to believe that despite their cries of
"public land; it isn't your land", it somehow becomes their land when something they do not like is done to or on it.
reply to post by OldDragger
Read and learn?
I am familiar with the Judge Roy Moore case, and I can tell you it was less about religion that it was about politics. Feel free to look to your left
and see my location.
TheRedneck
Even though we disagree on some things, I've noticed that you're a level headed person. And the Constitution means more to me
than anyone's opinions about what should and shouldn't be allowed on public lands. 
