Discussion:
Missouri city moves giant cross off public land after asshole atheist group complains
(too old to reply)
Black Dick Sucking Democrat Ed Buck
2019-01-13 13:45:35 UTC
Permalink
A city in Missouri announced a giant cross located in Christian
County will be moved off public land after an atheist group
complained.

In November, the Wisconsin-based Freedom From Religion
Foundation, or FFRF, sent a letter to Ozark, a city of less than
20,000, targeting a giant lighted blue cross that was part of
the city's annual Christmas Lights in Finley River Park.

FFRF's legal director, Rebecca Markert, wrote the illuminated
cross is not a permissible city holiday decoration, pointing to
a federal court case that found a cross unconstitutional as part
of a city display because it is not a common Christmas symbol
but a Christian one.

When the city announced it would take down the cross because
having a religious symbol on public property would result in a
lawsuit "we will not win," the mayor received hundreds of phone
calls.

"Everybody wants it up," Mayor Rick Gardner told the Springfield
News-Leader. "One lady is crying. This is part of Ozark. This is
Christian County, for Pete's sake."

City officials quickly reissued a statement saying that the
cross would remain until the issue was resolved "in the interest
of all parties."

Last week, the city announced the cross will be moved to the
south side of the park on land owned by the Christian County A&M
Society.

“In striving to balance the court of law with the court of
public opinion, we have identified a solution that will relocate
the cross from its current location on city-owned property to a
privately owned parcel of property," the statement on Facebook
reads.

The FFRF celebrated the move as a step in the right direction.

“From the beginning, we’ve asked the city of Ozark to remove
this cross or direct that it be moved to private property, where
it would be more appropriately displayed,” Markert said. “FFRF
is pleased to learn that the city finally agreed to relocate the
cross to private property. This is a good step in honoring the
separation between state and church and a victory for the
Constitution.”

Reaction from the community has been mixed.

While some initially complained that the city caved to a group
of outsiders, many celebrated the announcement.

"It was moved, yes, but to a better and more visible location,"
Ragan Thompson-Sartin, who started a "Keepers of the Cross"
Facebook page, told Fox News. "I say that's a definite win."

https://www.foxnews.com/faith-values/missouri-city-moves-giant-
cross-off-public-land-after-atheist-group-complains
BeamMeUpScotty
2019-01-13 14:37:11 UTC
Permalink
Post by Black Dick Sucking Democrat Ed Buck
A city in Missouri announced a giant cross located in Christian
County will be moved off public land after an atheist group
complained.
In November, the Wisconsin-based Freedom From Religion
Foundation, or FFRF, sent a letter to Ozark, a city of less than
20,000, targeting a giant lighted blue cross that was part of
the city's annual Christmas Lights in Finley River Park.
https://www.foxnews.com/faith-values/missouri-city-moves-giant-
cross-off-public-land-after-atheist-group-complains
Wouldn't the "Christmas" lighting be the same thing? SO how can a judge
ban one and NOT the other?

A light or a cross or a tree, they're all religious symbols... as is
the sun in the public sky and the dirt to someone praying to Gaia.

I'm pretty sure if you can pray to Gaia then you can pray to Jesus on
the same public property. Are Atheists going to demand that the dirt be
paved over or all conifers be cut down on public property and all lights
on public property be turned off because someone looks at them and sees
a religious symbol?


Why do Atheists allow gay symbols like a rainbow when there is no proof
that gays are any more real than gods, in fact the courts have never
proven that gays are something other than mentally ill heterosexuals.

Which means that gays are as unreal to the logic of Atheists as are gods
and if one is a religion then why don't they claim that gays are a
religion with religious symbols, if they were honest and used a
consistent logic they'd be demanding that gay parades in public areas
and gay symbols like rainbows and Phallus symbols and unicorns would be
banned on public property.

But Atheists don't want to make things fair or equal they want to attack
Christians precisely because the Christians don't believe in gays but do
believe in Jesus, they treat gays as mentally ill heterosexuals, which
is what they are until the Atheists or the government can prove
otherwise with REAL science.
--
That's Karma


*Rumination*
157 - Regardless of education all Liberals are equally stupid, it's the
nature of Liberalism and Social Justice, for all of them to want to be
educated to be equally stupid.
Mitchell Holman
2019-01-13 18:50:48 UTC
Permalink
Post by BeamMeUpScotty
Post by Black Dick Sucking Democrat Ed Buck
A city in Missouri announced a giant cross located in Christian
County will be moved off public land after an atheist group
complained.
In November, the Wisconsin-based Freedom From Religion
Foundation, or FFRF, sent a letter to Ozark, a city of less than
20,000, targeting a giant lighted blue cross that was part of
the city's annual Christmas Lights in Finley River Park.
https://www.foxnews.com/faith-values/missouri-city-moves-giant-
cross-off-public-land-after-atheist-group-complains
Wouldn't the "Christmas" lighting be the same thing? SO how can a judge
ban one and NOT the other?
A light or a cross or a tree, they're all religious symbols... as is
the sun in the public sky and the dirt to someone praying to Gaia.
I'm pretty sure if you can pray to Gaia then you can pray to Jesus on
the same public property. Are Atheists going to demand that the dirt be
paved over or all conifers be cut down on public property and all lights
on public property be turned off because someone looks at them and sees
a religious symbol?
Why do Atheists allow gay symbols like a rainbow when there is no proof
that gays are any more real than gods, in fact the courts have never
proven that gays are something other than mentally ill heterosexuals.
Which means that gays are as unreal to the logic of Atheists as are gods
and if one is a religion then why don't they claim that gays are a
religion with religious symbols, if they were honest and used a
consistent logic they'd be demanding that gay parades in public areas
and gay symbols like rainbows and Phallus symbols and unicorns would be
banned on public property.
But Atheists don't want to make things fair or equal they want to attack
Christians precisely because the Christians don't believe in gays but do
believe in Jesus, they treat gays as mentally ill heterosexuals, which
is what they are until the Atheists or the government can prove
otherwise with REAL science.
The article makes no mention of gays.

Is this just more of your homophobia at work?
Siri Cruise
2019-01-13 21:41:46 UTC
Permalink
Post by BeamMeUpScotty
Post by BeamMeUpScotty
Post by Black Dick Sucking Democrat Ed Buck
A city in Missouri announced a giant cross located in Christian
County will be moved off public land after an atheist group
complained.
In November, the Wisconsin-based Freedom From Religion
Foundation, or FFRF, sent a letter to Ozark, a city of less than
20,000, targeting a giant lighted blue cross that was part of
the city's annual Christmas Lights in Finley River Park.
https://www.foxnews.com/faith-values/missouri-city-moves-giant-
cross-off-public-land-after-atheist-group-complains
Wouldn't the "Christmas" lighting be the same thing? SO how can a judge
ban one and NOT the other?
A light or a cross or a tree, they're all religious symbols... as is
the sun in the public sky and the dirt to someone praying to Gaia.
I'm pretty sure if you can pray to Gaia then you can pray to Jesus on
the same public property. Are Atheists going to demand that the dirt
be
Post by BeamMeUpScotty
paved over or all conifers be cut down on public property and all
lights
Post by BeamMeUpScotty
on public property be turned off because someone looks at them and sees
a religious symbol?
Why do Atheists allow gay symbols like a rainbow when there is no proof
that gays are any more real than gods, in fact the courts have never
proven that gays are something other than mentally ill heterosexuals.
Which means that gays are as unreal to the logic of Atheists as are
gods
Post by BeamMeUpScotty
and if one is a religion then why don't they claim that gays are a
religion with religious symbols, if they were honest and used a
consistent logic they'd be demanding that gay parades in public areas
and gay symbols like rainbows and Phallus symbols and unicorns would be
banned on public property.
But Atheists don't want to make things fair or equal they want to
attack
Post by BeamMeUpScotty
Christians precisely because the Christians don't believe in gays but
do
Post by BeamMeUpScotty
believe in Jesus, they treat gays as mentally ill heterosexuals, which
is what they are until the Atheists or the government can prove
otherwise with REAL science.
The article makes no mention of gays.
Is this just more of your homophobia at work?
Ha-ha. Who is the more foolish? The fool Scotty or the fool who parses Scotty?
--
:-<> Siri Seal of Disavowal #000-001. Disavowed. Denied. Deleted. @
'I desire mercy, not sacrifice.' /|\
The first law of discordiamism: The more energy This post / \
to make order is nore energy made into entropy. insults Islam. Mohammed
BeamMeUpScotty
2019-01-13 14:56:04 UTC
Permalink
Post by Black Dick Sucking Democrat Ed Buck
A city in Missouri announced a giant cross located in Christian
County will be moved off public land after an atheist group
complained.
In November, the Wisconsin-based Freedom From Religion
Foundation, or FFRF, sent a letter to Ozark, a city of less than
20,000, targeting a giant lighted blue cross that was part of
the city's annual Christmas Lights in Finley River Park.
https://www.foxnews.com/faith-values/missouri-city-moves-giant-
cross-off-public-land-after-atheist-group-complains
Wouldn't the "Christmas" lighting be the same thing? SO how can a judge
ban one and NOT the other?

A light or a cross or a tree, they're all religious symbols... as is
the sun in the public sky and the dirt to someone praying to Gaia.

I'm pretty sure if you can pray to Gaia then you can pray to Jesus on
the same public property. Are Atheists going to demand that the dirt be
paved over or all conifers be cut down on public property and all lights
on public property be turned off because someone looks at them and sees
a religious symbol?


Why do Atheists allow gay symbols like a rainbow when there is no proof
that gays are any more real than gods, in fact the courts have never
proven that gays are something other than mentally ill heterosexuals.

Which means that gays are as unreal to the logic of Atheists as are gods
and if one is a religion then why don't they claim that gays are a
religion with religious symbols, if they were honest and used a
consistent logic they'd be demanding that gay parades in public areas
and gay symbols like rainbows and Phallus symbols and unicorns would be
banned on public property.

But Atheists don't want to make things fair or equal they want to attack
Christians precisely because the Christians don't believe in gays but do
believe in Jesus, they treat gays as mentally ill heterosexuals, which
is what they are until the Atheists or the government can prove
otherwise with REAL science.

In reality the Atheist movement which is a religion because it's acting
like one is deeply committed to gays as part of their being anti
Christian and the gays taking an Atheist sacrament and in return for
their being holy soldiers against the Christians in this religious
battle, the gay marriage was supported by the Atheists since the gay is
NOW part of the Atheist religion.

The gays were excluded from Christian religion so they found a religion
that would accept them. Ironically when they attack Christians symbols
on public property they attack gay symbols on PUBLIC property without
realizing that when applied equally the laws make gays and their symbols
illegal on public property. They aren't real and their symbols are
religious.... And at some point that will be the ruling of a judge,
they really can't avoid the truth that they are a religion forever.
--
That's Karma


*Rumination*
157 - Regardless of education all Liberals are equally stupid, it's the
nature of Liberalism and Social Justice, for all of them to want to be
educated to be equally stupid.
Loading...