Atheists that claim they are tolerant explain this

Post Reply New Topic

Why is an atheist group in Wisconsin filing a lawsuit to have a Nativity scene in Texas taken down?

Christian pastors in Henderson County, Texas, are fighting back against atheists who are demanding that a nativity scene located on a courthouse lawn be taken down.

The group behind the complains, the Wisconsin-based Freedom From Religion Foundation, frequently targets faith and religion projects that are placed on public lands. The group sent a letter to the county that explains how a local resident, who wishes to remain nameless, is offended by the scene.

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/intimid ... mediately/

1. Because the Constitution guarantees separation of Church and State, and the Federal government allows such lawsuits.

2. Because, just as certain Christians can't let the rest of us enjoy life, there are certain Atheists that can't leave well-enough alone.

3. Because they can.

4. The Devil made them do it.

5. I couldn't stop them.

Problem with your argument is that the group filing the lawsuit is in Wisconsin, I don't even think they have grounds to sue.



Fair point.



Hope they end up paying for the court fees.



Thought you didn't believe in the Devil.



Was that a joke or are you actually affiliated with that group?

Wisconsin residents as far as I know don't pay taxes to the state of Texas.

A courthouse lawn is public property, it has been financed in part by the atheists. So, if you want to push a religion, do it in your property, kay?

Quite simple, really: We cannot be a secular society if the we allow the government to promote religion. This is part of the separation between church and state. It is the same reason I am annoyed that political correctness makes it so that figures who happen to be religious but also happen to be great cannot be honored for their secular contributions without a big fuss. With that said, I find it hard to see how a nativity seen could have any secular value.

Now, I prefer the French system of secularism, known as Laïcité, to our system, where no one is supposed to be offended and everyone is supposed to be made comfortable by such things as permitting Muslim women to wear hijab in during PE (as at one of my two high schools), removing depictions of Muhammad intended to honor him from courthouses, not holding religious institutions accountable to anti-discrimination legislation (the Catholic Church is still permitted to ban women from the priesthood), allowing religious people to bash gays (in Minnesota) and not taxing religious institutions.

I wasn't aware that Wisconsin paid taxes to the state of Texas...

They would have a stronger case if they were residents of Texas, but as it stands right now, it looks more like something that they have no standing to sue in the first place.

Wtf are you on about Texas for, he was quoting himself (and you) from what I can only assume is another thread where you're whining about basically the same thing, except instead of Wisconsin it happened to have been Texas at the time. Jaysus

That the suers are from Wiscomsim does not change the fact that a nativity scene in a courthouse lawn is illegal promotion of a religion. As your only defense is trying to fabricate a legal loophole [can't complain about breeaking the constitution outside your own state], I'll go and guess that even you get that this at least goes against the spirit of the constitution and all that freedom of religion thing.

I guess that for you, the constitution is only worth a damn in the case of guns. The rest can be flushed down the toilet. But I'd say a lot of people seem to care more about the constitution as a whole.

Last edited by Vexcalibur on 10 Dec 2011, 7:06 pm, edited 1 time in total.

http://www.lc.org/resources/nativity.htm

Sorry but Nativity Scenes on Public Property are Constitutional, there are certain rules that have to be followed concerning them, but Texas arguably has the stronger case because Christmas is a National Holiday.

The group - Freedom From Religion Foundation" - is BASED in Wisconsin, but seems to have members in Texas. They do not have an actual chapter there yet.

Any volunteers?

Last edited by Fnord on 10 Dec 2011, 7:11 pm, edited 2 times in total.

10 points to Fnord.
In order to have standing, the Wisconsin-based group is suing on behalf of people who live in the town where the creche has been set up (Duh!). They do not sue to have creches removed from churches or private property, only from public property like courthouses or state capitols (Duh!).

Freedom of religion is clear as one of the intentions of the constitution, that the 70s supreme court failed to do their job right in an attempt to pander to Christian majority is not a surprise, but it does not mean nativity scenes are constitutional.

Besides, I will take a wild guess that, unlike what the paper you linked says, the pushy Christians are not allowing a secular nativity scene. Edit: I tried very hard to read your article and it actually states so.

Even under the standards of the lc.org link you provided, the city hall is breaking the constitution by allowing only the Christian nativity scene, that's an endorsement of Christianity. If they want to keep the nativity scene, the solution is easy, allow scenes from secular groups and groups affiliated to other religions.
----
Also, the site you linked in the OP sucks terribly. Instead of letting me read the article, it blocks it with a popup form that "demands" I sign up to their letter. At least have some decency to link to sites that are not deadset on spamming me and breaking my privacy.

Last edited by Vexcalibur on 10 Dec 2011, 7:15 pm, edited 1 time in total.

I want a Santabot on that courthouse lawn, pronto!

I'd prefer a Godzilla tree