Michigan Man Sues for Right to Put Back Nativity Scene on Public Median, page 5

privacy

Pages: << 2 3 4 5 >>
ATS Members have flagged this thread 3 times

reply posted on 30-10-2009 @ 09:09 AM by x2Strongx

All these holidays are really just ways to make us into consumers. Why not ban all of them... but, then again... wouldn't that make all all the businesses fail and then we would have to do a bail-out on companies that make plastic Santas, stuffed Easter bunnies, etc... Then the suppliers that furnish plastic and other resources would fail.

reply posted on 30-10-2009 @ 09:18 AM by mikellmikell

I recently bought some property that has a triangle in the middle of a 4 lane highway. I could use it to create controversy and free advertising !! We own the propery so it would all fall apart in the end but free publicity for my new business in the meantime. I just looked it's 98' x 127' lots of room.

reply posted on 30-10-2009 @ 09:58 AM by Lemon.Fresh

I want to know who exactly a nativity scene is hurting?

I mean . . . who's eyes are being burned out by a plastic Jesus

Oh, and by the way, Atheism is indeed, a religion, and it was pronounced as such in the 7th Circuit court. Link

reply posted on 30-10-2009 @ 11:08 AM by TheRedneck

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

reply posted on 30-10-2009 @ 11:21 AM by nixie_nox

reply to post by TheRedneck

Oh man Redneck if I had my way campaigns of any kind would last three days and all you could have was an office with the campaigner spokesperson to go talk to if you want. No more commercials, signs, you name it.

reply posted on 30-10-2009 @ 12:25 PM by Hack28

Lets just put up a santa.......wait jewish people......what about rudolph......wait PETA.......I got it a big happy face.......wait damn dental assosciation of America.

reply posted on 30-10-2009 @ 12:31 PM by whatukno

Sorry to come in late.

As long as I can put WUKKY is GOD on a sign in every nativity scene, it's all good. Put up whatever you like.

Don't want that? Want to argue against that? Then don't put up a nativity scene.
If I am allowed to put up a WUKKY is GOD sign right next to a nativity scene, than by all means put one up. I won't stop you or even try.

[edit on 10/30/2009 by whatukno]

reply posted on 30-10-2009 @ 01:12 PM by Benevolent Heretic

Originally posted by x2Strongx
All these holidays are really just ways to make us into consumers. Why not ban all of them...

I agree completely! Not that they should be banned, but that their purpose is to push consumers into overdrive. That's why my husband and I don't do holidays. We opt out of the consumer frenzy. It's WONDERFUL!

Originally posted by TheRedneck
BH, I am amazed. We actually agree!

I'm not amazed.

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.

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.

A definite no-no!