Tuesday, November 14, 2006

What About The Crosses Don't You Get?

Three plaintiffs had contended the city government of Las Cruces had violated the First Amendment because of the three crosses on its logo. To them this meant that the city was endorsing a religion. Nevermind, that the city name is "the crosses," that means nothing to the Americans United for Separation of Church and State and the other looney toons who have nothing better to do than create controversy where they should be none.

However, at this point, a federal judge has dismissed the lawsuit saying the city's use of the crosses is secular. U.S. District Judge Robert Brack wrote, "When there is no evidence of the original purpose for adopting a practice, the government may propose possible secular justifications for the challenged practice."

Paul F. Weinbaum, one of the plaintiffs said,
"I told Judge Brack a while back ... that no matter the outcome we will appeal and this case will be appealed.," He has sued the Las Cruces schools on similar grounds, and that case is set for trial Nov. 27.

Note: The other two plaintiffs are Martin J. Boyd and Weinbaum's daughter Olivia, but it is Weinbaum who seems to need this cause to vent his anger at life in general.

Hat tip The Sacramento Bee and The Las Cruces Sun-News.

No comments: