Either take the quote I offered in context, or be whooshed. If you can be neither, let me introduce you to dense.
After re-reading denis’s posts, and a short e-mail discussion, I believe I owe him an apology.
Denis, I am sorry to have branded you a “hateful zealot”. I jumped to conclusions about you and lumped you in with a small minority of atheist extremists. I am pleased to find that I was mistaken about you, and you have my sincerest apologies if my words offended you in any way. I look forward to any future discussions we may have.
peace,
-AMWAG
Just to be clear, I didn’t come down on you. It seems you’re very willing to discuss this issue, unlike county. Marley had an excellent recap earlier as to why a TC monument, regardless of the presence or non-presence of taxpayer assistance, promotes or lends the appearance of promotion of religious doctrine or support from the government. Additionally, any significant time spent by the local government protecting its falsely perceived right to display the Ten Commandments costs the government and taxpayers money - a cost that is often overlooked.
I hope that helps.
Trying to prevent the government from spending public money on promoting one particular religion.
Nobody’s preventing you as an individual from engaging in whatever religious practice you may choose. If somebody tried to, the ACLU would be there to fight for you.
See, the thing is that government represents all of us. Even those of us who don’t share your religion. Why should tax dollars be spent promoting your religion? (or my religion, or any religion?) The ACLU isn’t repressing you, it’s protecting the rest of us from your attempts at repression.
Pretty late in the thread to be asking this (sorry if someone already addressed this and I missed it):
and
Do you think that the Rev. Barry W. Lynn, Americans United’s executive director, is a hateful zealot or an atheist extremist? Some theists are also interested in protecting religious freedom.
You are a presumptious ass. You know nothing about my God or Lack Thereof. And, any religion I might have has nothing to do with anything I have posted.
“Discomfort” my ass.
As far as my post being offensive to you, well, hey, this is the pit. I do not give a flying fuck if you are offended. Catch on to that zippy. And, I guess you can read “subtle” offenses into just about anything if you look hard enough. Try just reading the words and skip your moronic “subtle” interpretations for a change.
Fine, then answer this direct question, no assumptions attached:
How would you feel if “In God We Trust” was changed to “In Allah We Trust” or “In Krishna We Trust” as one of our national mottos?
In Pennsylvania, in fact, two people can marry themselves, and only need a witness. It appears to come from Quaker tradition. You still need a license. We got married in the Ethical Culture Society in Philadelphia, better than a JP and with no mention of any magic pixies in the ceremony.
Of course not. I was thinking more of organizations like the Freedom From Religion Foundation whose stated purpose is to “keep state and church separate”. When they stick to that, I don’t have much of a problem with 'em, but they go overboard. They spend so much time on efforts like their newest “action alert”: Write TIME over “Why Did Jesus Have to Die?” Cover Story urging members to chastise a private publication and to dwell especially on the “barbarism of tale”, that I have a hard time respecting them. These are the same people who put “warning labels” on Gideon Bibles.
They say they just want to preserve the separation of church and state, but you get the feeling they are less about the separation of religion than they are about its eradication.
You know what the city should do is zone the 10x10 piece of ground the momument sits on, as say, Industrial, and sell it to an agreeable company. Then it’s no longer a matter of church and state. Nothing says that a private company cannot display the 10 Commandments.
I’ve already pointed out that there is case law which makes your zoning scheme illegal in at least some jurisdictions. Try reading the thread all the way through.
from Otto:
Why? When I have little people like you to fill in the details for me 
More to the point, unless this little town in PA is one of your “some”, then my idea is still valid…so bite me.
I believe what Otto was trying to say is that “your idea” came up on page one, and that’s it’s really fucking annoying to try to fill in half-wits who come into a thread on page 3 and offer some moronic suggestion that’s already been discussed at length.
No it isn’t valid, at least not as written. If you give preferential treatment to an organization buying the land in order to preserve the monument, you are in distinct danger of violating the Establishment Clause. You’d have to sell it (and without looking at the title to the land, we don’t know even if it can be sold) to the highest bidder, which might include an organizaton pledged to demolish the monument, are deface it. Also by selling a small plot of land in the middle of land you retain, you might get in to all sorts of problems regarding easements et al.
You are a dildo.
Is there some reason you are not answering this question?
Yes, Munch, I’m willing to discuss the matter at length. I used the phrase “came down on me” as you’d accused me of overstating a point which in all honesty I do not believe I had. In other news:
From the beginning, the Borough Manager and Council have sought to avoid costly litigation, as they smelled this to be the stinky diaper that it is early on. Proposed solutions have either failed to come to fruition, or have been rejected by the original complaintant.
What continues to trouble me is this: the issue is not the result of a grass roots campaign by locals, a referendum, or petition. Were any of the above true, my point would be moot, and the OP would never have been typed.
This town is straight out of a 1960’s TV show. Some folks don’t lock their doors, you can see cars with keys in the ignition, people you don’t know wave to you (all four fingers at once), and establishment of credit can take place on a handshake.
The monument doesn’t hurt anybody, and the folks who live there aren’t fired up, so why can’t it be left alone? Who suffers injury if the status quo is maintained? 
I bet you dollars to donuts that there are local people who really do care about the issue but are afraid to speak up.
The mayor of my hometown was quoted in the Minneapolis Star-Tribune as saying that nobody here is upset about the ten commandments monument in our park. This is false - I am upset.
Don’t get me wrong - I’m not claiming that a majority of people here give a darn either way on the issue. But no matter how many people in town feel the way I do, it will always appear that there are fewer of us than there really are. Nobody wants to be known as the Town Atheist, or the Town Trouble-maker.
If you feel strongly enough to state your convictions to me BlackKnight then why not go public? Even if I disagree with the ideology of a man, if he is willing to publicly state his case and offer a rational supporting argument, I will respect him and defend his right to take a point of opposition.
Yes.