Judge rules Ten Commandments monument must go
Judge rules Ten Commandments monument must go
A federal judge on Thursday ruled that a New Mexico city must remove a monument inscribed with the Ten Commandments from the lawn in front of Bloomfield City Hall.
Senior U.S. District Judge James A. Parker said in his ruling in a lawsuit filed by the American Civil Liberties Union that the monument amounts to government speech and has the "principal effect of endorsing religion."
Because of the context and history surrounding the granite monument, Parker said Bloomfield clearly violated the First Amendment's Establishment Clause. He gave a Sept. 10 deadline for its removal.
The suit was filed in 2012 on behalf of two Bloomfield residents who practice the Wiccan religion.
Peter Simonson, ACLU of New Mexico executive director, called the decision a victory for protection against government-supported religion.
"We firmly support the right of individuals, religious groups, and community associations to publicly display religious monuments, but the government should not be in the business of picking which sets of religious beliefs belong at City Hall," Simonson said Friday.
According to previous court testimony, plaintiff Jane Felix said the display "says that anybody who doesn't agree with this monument on city grounds is an outsider."
"It has no place on City Hall property," Felix said in March.
City attorneys say private individuals erected and paid for the monument under a 2007 city resolution. That resolution allows people to erect historical monuments of their choosing.
Bloomfield Mayor Scott Eckstein said he was surprised the judge would rule against "a historical document."
"The intent from the beginning was that the lawn was going to be used for historical purposes, and that's what the council voted on," Eckstein told the Daily Times ( http://bit.ly/XMgAqu ).
The city has 30 days to file an appeal. City attorney Ryan Lane said he will review the opinion and tell the city council if there is basis for one.
The 6-foot-tall monument was erected in July 2011 by a former city councilor and weighs 3,000 pounds.
Tags
Who is online
79 visitors
Peter Simonson, ACLU of New Mexico executive director, called the decision a victory for protection against government-supported religion.
Pretty sad isn't it?
Pretty much...
Do you think these two people who believe in witchcraft (Wicca) would have a problem if there was a monument of their symbol. I doubt it.
...
You can click on the link above and read what is written on the bottom of the monument.
Here is their symbol....
I think they should put it right across the street facing the door the judge walks out every day, so maybe it will have some influence on him.
I understand the Constitution as to how this could be considered separation of government and religion. I think the will of the people should have a little more bearing than the will of one man and two witches especially when the monument only expresses things we should all strive for in our lives. Still separation of government and religion is an argument used today to eliminate many of the best things that should epitomize this country.
How about we put up a monument to the great spirit of the Navajo?
I think the ACLU needs to look at its roots again.
No tax money was spent on this. However; if you want to spend tax money on something similar, please do so for every group that wants representation, should be less than a thousand. Will that make you happy.
It could become the stonehenge of ideology. Wouldn't that be something.
I don't feel particularly oppressed, not being a believer. So would you like to get into a discussion about why 'public' property is not open to the public?
So let's get down to the niceties, the constitution says 'Congress shall make no law', how does that extend to state and local?
Please use 'fuck' all you want. I don't give a fuck.
"but the government should not be in the business of picking which sets of religious beliefs belong at City Hall,"
Well said John.
I REALLY hope I don't have to take down another article today!!!!
MiG said:
No. It is the speech of every individual that needs protecting, not the speech of the biggest group. Duh.
Those in the minority may have more power if the constitution backs their stance. It is not the biggest group gets to do whatever they want. If that were the case, the Constitution might as well not be there at all.
Yup
What if the people of the town made a decision to erect a monument on the grounds of its City Hall, that to one particular religion while simultaneously deciding that no other religion will be so represented on or within 100 yards of those same grounds?
I repeat to everybody.....please.. don't make me take down this article too.
Nona, you shouldn't have to take down any articles. That is what the mods are for.
As to the members who are getting cited. Be respectful of the person who put up the articles. If you don't like each other, don't talk to each other.
I will be watching the article Nona. Don't take it down because a few people can't read the CoC.
I for one would like to see some Sharia law tablets on that same lawn ... maybe a nice depiction of a handectomy for thievery .
Please don't remove the article. I apologize for anything I may have said to make you feel you must do so. I'm not usually so crass in my language.
Gotta log back in to work now, but hope to comment more tomorrow.
ok..
Good glad to see a judge remove the religious symbol for only the christian faith. After reading can a statue of Mohamed be erected right next to it if citizens or other than the tax payers pay for it. I bet many religions would be more than willing to pay for their religious documents to be planted at city hall. Who ever told the City and State and Federal governments that this is a Christian only country.
Yep Christians cut off their head or burned them at the stake. Oh Sorry Petey what religion are you fronting for. In fact the guillotine was used in Christian countries instead of the pocket knife or saber or other type of cutting instrument to behead. Prior to the Guillotine I believe it was the double bladed axe and a bushel basket. Basket was used with the Guillotine as well. Why is it so horrific when other countries do it hang gas injection electrocution is still dead but often more suffering. One way is just as ghastly as the rest. In many countries like England it was a public social event with huge crowds. In the US we used a mixture hanging, beheading, Burning depending on the finding of the Church or the court. All were still social events. What we were not civilized? When did we become civilized? NEVER!
Things like this are what makes America great, isn't it? Now, while all of this is happening, all over the country mind you...not just here, why aren't people who believe on God saying more to complain about these judgements by the court. The separation of Church and State is used to benefit those people at war with people who believe in a higher power. What happened to freedom of speech, isn't this a community's expression of such?
WC
"That's not what the no believers want, we just want you to practice your religious voodoo bullshit on your own private property." Well, the gloves come off, huh! Voodoo, no that is absolutely a stupid remark, spoken by a true nihilist. My reference to war was a war of words, yours to destruction...I bet you would love to burn a few churches down, show them Christians who God really is, huh! I don't believe that any nihilist like yourself has been dragged into a church and made to listen to the rhetoric, no one has forced you into communion, or made you wear a cross.
WC
I feel that the judge was right in his decision. I do not think or believe that any religious organization should have the right to seed their religious beliefs in our school, government building and lawns, or on any other public property.
This has nothing to do with bashing religion, but everything to do with the separation of church and state.
How do you feel about Christmas trees?