Alabama Town Defies Atheist Demands By Reinstating Bible Verses on Welcome Signs
- Posted on May 10, 2012 at 10:32am by
Billy Hallowell
- Print »
- Email »
The controversial Syvlania town signs (Image Credit: Freedom From Religion Foundation)
Some residents in Sylvania, Alabama, were up in arms last month when the Freedom From Religion Foundation (FFRF) demanded that a Bible verse be removed from four of the town’s signs. After initially bowing to the atheists’ demands, officials are now reversing course and keeping the verse — Ephesians 4:5 — posted on the government placards.
(Related: Alabama Town Bows to Atheists and Removes Bible Verse From Welcome Signs)
The FFRF originally sent a letter to the town claiming that the inclusion of the verse is unconstitutional. In a prompt response, the portions of the signs that included the words, which read, “One Lord, One Faith, and One Baptism,” were painted over. The town’s former mayor, Mitchell Dendy, like many political leaders in towns that face backlash from secular groups like the FFRF, decided that Sylvania simply couldn’t afford a costly legal battle over the signs.
So Dendy, who has since resigned in the midst of misconduct allegations, made the unilateral decision to take the Bible verses down. However, his decision, which was made without the town’s council, became an instant controversy. Residents, frustrated with the decision, flooded the town will angry calls.
The Christian Post has more about the town’s change-of-heart:
A small town in Alabama has decided to put up welcome signs that have Bible verses despite questions about the constitutionality of the signs brought up by a national atheist organization.
Town council members in Sylvania, Ala., voted unanimously on Tuesday to replace the four signs that former mayor Mitchell Dendy had removed two weeks ago before he resigned. [...]
Max Turner, the current acting mayor of Sylvania, told The Christian Post on Wednesday that the town‘s council voted unanimously to overturn Dendy’s decision so that the signs, or at least ones like them, can be restored to their proper places.
Some residents were so stirred by the incident that they took to their front yards to post Biblical signs of their own. But now, in the wake of the original letter, the FFRF’s next steps are uncertain, especially considering that Christian messaging is slated to reappear on the government signs.
If the battle does make its way to court, Tom Brejcha, the president and chief counsel of the Thomas More Society, says that Sylvania will have a better chance of success if a historical Christian history can be proven.
“These things are defensible when put into a historical context. This is probably a town founded by Christians and it has a strong Christian heritage,” Brejcha said in an interview with The Christian Post. ”[The FFRF is] of the mistaken view that the First Amendment guarantees us freedom from religion, which is wrong. The truth is that it stands for freedom of religion, and that‘s a distinction that’s lost on them.”
(H/T: Christian Post)
Popular Stories
MSNBC Host Snaps in Heated Segment: ‘What in the World Is Riskier Than Being a Poor Person in America?’ 682 Comments
Does Misstated Marathon Claim Prove Paul Ryan Is Dishonest? (POLL) 641 Comments
‘Jumah at the DNC’ Speaker: ‘Muslims Visited America Prior to Columbus’ & ‘It Was a Muslim’ Who Guided Him to the ‘New World’ 523 Comments
Obama: RNC Like Watching ‘Black-and-White TV’ Because Romney ‘Did Not Offer a Single New Idea’ 360 Comments
Roseanne Barr: Most Billionaires ‘Violent Pedophiles’ & ‘Heartless’ Cocaine Addicts 313 Comments
Faith
This Is the Creationists‘ Response to Scientist Bill Nye’s Viral Pro-Evolution Video Claiming They Harm Children 156 Comments- Pakistani Muslim Cleric Accused of Framing Disabled Christian Girl in Koran-Burning Case Read More
- ‘Made Up Religion’: TV Historian Enrages Muslims, Receives Threats After Producing UK Documentary Questioning Islam’s Beginnings 193 Comments
Meet the Controversial German Imam Accused of Brutally Beating His Wife & Pushing Sharia Law Read More
‘Self-Proclaimed Messiah’ & Unification Church Leader the Rev. Sun Myung Moon Has Died — Here’s His Life Story Read More
Business
- Germany’s Upcoming Court Ruling Will be Huge for the EU Read More
Ford Looks to Beat Toyota for Best-Selling Car in 2012 With This Model 146 Comments
Bernanke & QE3: Here’s What You Need to Know Read More- ‘Extortion’: Why Did the Labor Department ‘Drop the Hammer’ on Oregon Farmers? 300 Comments
Scathing New Ad Capitalizes on Rep. Ryan‘s ’Fading Obama Posters’ Remark 124 Comments
Technology
- This Is the Creationists‘ Response to Scientist Bill Nye’s Viral Pro-Evolution Video Claiming They Harm Children 156 Comments
‘TaserDrone’: Hackers Weaponize Quadcopter With Actual ‘Shocking’ Technology Read More
Ever Heard of the Wild ‘Burning Man’ Festival in the Middle of the Nev. Desert? Here’s Your Primer Read More
Stanford Develops Technology ‘Better Than Steroids’ for Athlete Recovery Read More
Have You Pretended to Know What ‘the Cloud’ Is? You’re Not Alone Read More
Submitting your tip... please wait!
Comments (300)
RamonPreston
Posted on May 10, 2012 at 11:09amGreat news, everybody! Before this year is over all these atheists will be crying out to God. Nothing like missing meals for a few weeks to change your mind.
Report Post »JGraham III
Posted on May 10, 2012 at 11:35amThe way atheists kick against God is like the man who, upon entering a dark room, switches on the light. He immediately is confronted by a coiled, ready to strike cobra and as a solution to his dilemma turns off the light and declares “there is no cobra in here”. Here is an idea…why doesn’t a smart Christian lawyer start a class action law suit against the Freedom From Religion idiots and the ACLU for violating OUR Constitutional rights to freely practice our “religion” which may or may not include a public declaration to same? I’m sure that there would be millions joining in! Tie them up in litigation for a long long time…
Report Post »Bruce P.
Posted on May 10, 2012 at 11:50amJGRAHAM — no one is preventing the free exercise of your faith nor are they preventing the public expression of it. If this has happened, please, show us.
“One Lord, One Faith, One Baptism” is an establishment of religion. This is not a simply Bible quote that everyone may find universal meaning. This is stating there is ONLY ONE religion allowed. This is an absolute violation of the First Amendment.
Report Post »uv
Posted on May 10, 2012 at 12:49pmjcldwl
Posted on May 10, 2012 at 12:33pm
@ Bruce P.
Hold on Bruce are you ready?
U.S. Constitution Amendment 1
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.
Sylvania and it’s residents are not congress therefore the verse on their sign in no way violates the constitution. They also are not establishing a religion though they can if they want since they are not congress. In fact since it is freedom of religion they most certainly can establish Christianity or any other religion as the official religion of their town if they see fit to, as long as they allow others to worship any religion they want and don’t impede that, they are not violating the constitution. Argue that.
this is deserving of your response, bruce. thank you.
Report Post »JGraham III
Posted on May 10, 2012 at 1:05pm“One Lord, one faith, one baptism“ is of course from Ephesians which if you care to look is written to ”the faithful in Christ Jesus” and in no way is an establishing of Christianity on anyone against their will. What most people miss (but surely not you…) is the second part of the so-called establishment clause which states “Congress shall make no law respecting the establishment of religion NOR prohibiting the free exercise thereof.. My objection to the FFRF people and those like them is that they are by their actions attempting de facto to keep me from practicing my faith PUBLICALLY. By striking down scripture verses from a town’s sign that obviously wants them displayed is doing just that in my opinion. No one is requiring those who live there who may not be christian to believe it or even stay there. But by their noisome meddling the FFRF is attempting to deny the citizens of Sylvania the open statement of their faith that they desire.
Report Post »COFemale
Posted on May 10, 2012 at 1:26pmBruce P tell me what religion is it establishing. Christianity is not a religion, it is a description of any religion who believes in God and Christ. That describes many religions.
See this is where you are not thinking clearly.
Report Post »If a sign is devoid of any scripture, does that mean it endorses atheism?
digijock
Posted on May 10, 2012 at 1:55pm@Bruce: “Just the opposite. You wish to force your faith upon others.” It would seem (at least to me) that you wish to force your atheism upon others. And “”One Lord, One Faith, One Baptism,” is a clear violation of the Constitution.”? It’s not even a sentence. There is no verb. It can’t possibly be a demand, a directive, or otherwise without a verb of some kind. You are stretching mightily to enforce your wishes upon the unwilling. Do you not see the irony of this? Besides, as JCLDWL brilliantly pointed out, the constitution specifically restrains the federal government’s congress from imposing restrictions upon the freedom to practice religion. This town isn’t in any way “congress” or “federal government”. And besides, posting biblical quotations on a sign in no way impedes your ability to practice atheism in the first place. It might make you frustrated, not getting your way. But there is no lawful protection guaranteeing that.
Report Post »digijock
Posted on May 10, 2012 at 1:59pmInterestingly, it would seem that, based on the language of the 1st amendment, congress *could* enact laws restricting matters involving the absence of religion – ie, atheism. Put that in your pipe…
Report Post »And no, I’m not particularly religious, myself. When asked, I claim to be agnostic. But this fanatical atheism has got to stop – you guys are just nuts.
ACLUHater
Posted on May 10, 2012 at 2:05pmAwesome. Can we have more of this?
Report Post »tmbell87
Posted on May 10, 2012 at 2:05pm@UV. As a non-theist, atheist or whatever you choose to label me, I have surprised even myself by my agreement with you. You are right, Sylvania is not congress; therefore, any biblical references they place on their signs is not necessarily an official endorsement through law. Now I personally take no issue with a small town in BFE being archaic but I have one question for you. If instead of getting rid of the messages, the FFRF requested to include messages about being free thinkers or the absence of god, would you support their freedom to do so? Or better yet, what if a muslim group requested to display a crecent moon or messages from the koran? This is not an attack against you but merely a test of your dedication to principles regarding the freedom of expression, even if it means defending the views that you disagree with.
I say keep the messages up. It is apparent that the majority of the town wants it to be there so let it stay. It isn‘t Sylvania’s fault that minority groups such as atheists or muslims aren’t able to organize and maintain a message conveying their beliefs so why should Christians be held back because they are able to do such things? The only important thing to me is that we don’t bar other groups from being to express themselves as well.
Report Post »colt1860
Posted on May 10, 2012 at 2:44pm@tmbell87 I’m against mandated diversity or forced multiculturalism, which is what most liberals or Marxists advocate today. If the city, which is suppose to represent the residents there, voted to put up Buddha as some memorial, that’s fine. As a Christian, I wouldn’t like it, but that’s THEIR power to do so. I might have a march, petition or go out in the street, peacefully, and cause some public outcry over it, BUT I would not sue them or take them to court. If I lose the battle to convince them, or change their mind, so be it. I’ll let it go, or wait until the next elections, or next session. As long as no one is forced to pray to it, or ordered to become a Buddhist. Who cares? I don’t. As a voter, I don’t vote for satnists or former criminals, because there might be a chance they won’t represent me as I see best. Wherefore, I vote for decent, virtuous people, and also for those who hold some beliefs in common with me. In that manner, I KNOW what to expect from them, as elected officials having legislative powers. Now, if the city voted to put a memorial with a cross, and just to be politically correct or not offend anyone else, they begrudgingly, against their judgement or representative authority, had to put up also a Buddha statue, and a statue of Zeus, THAT would be absolutely ridiculous and destructive to our society or common identity. We’re a federal Government consisting of states, counties, cities and towns, NOT some absolutist centralized natio
Bruce P.
Posted on May 10, 2012 at 4:13pmUV, Hold on, I got something for you. It’s called the Supremacy Clause.
Article VI, Cause 2. This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in pursuance thereof; and all treaties made, or which shall be made, under the authority of the United States, shall be the supreme law of the land; and the judges in every state shall be bound thereby, anything in the constitution or laws of any state to the contrary notwithstanding.
Get that? It’s the Supreme Law of the Land. Therefore, it applies to all levels of government, whether federal, state or local. That means the same restrictions placed upon Congress in regards to our civil liberties also apply to state and municipal governments. This means that Congress can take no action that violates the First Amendment, and neither can either state nor town. Including Sylvania.
Report Post »randy
Posted on May 10, 2012 at 4:23pmI say everyone start posting biblical verse right on your front lawn.
Report Post »Let’s see how fast these “Freedom From Religion nut cases run out of money fighting each and every one of us?
marchon
Posted on May 10, 2012 at 4:28pmIf atheists can make demands and say they are Constitutional based on separation of Church and State, Christians can make demands and say they are Constituional based on separation of Church and State also. The edge the Christians have is that the Constitutional separation is based on keeping the Church from being oppressed by the State. Those who would declare that the Church is oppressive need only take heed of the fact the Church organizations offer centuries of charitable as well as spiritual support to people in America and around the world. By all means Revolt. Have a philisophical Revolution. Stand Your Ground! Christians have every many rights as anyone else. Don’t let them fool you, intimidate you, condescend to you or get away with arm twisting. Stand up for your unalienable rights. They will seek out the weak. Don’t be one.
Report Post »Bill Rowland
Posted on May 10, 2012 at 4:46pmYEA, finally someone who will stand up to these loathsome horses rectums. If more of us would challenge them they would go broke trying to sue us all at once.
Stand up and fight for what you believe in, why should the minority tell the rest of us what to do.
OMG 2012
Report Post »PubliusPencilman
Posted on May 10, 2012 at 4:52pmJGraham,
“My objection to the FFRF people and those like them is that they are by their actions attempting de facto to keep me from practicing my faith PUBLICALLY.”
You see, you are confusing the ability to personally practice your faith with the ability to use public institutions for your faith. No one in any way has abridged your individual right to practice your faith, even in public, so your objection makes absolutely no sense. After all, you only represent yourself. representing the public is a different matter entirely. Please tell me you understand the difference.
Report Post »Aviyah
Posted on May 10, 2012 at 5:16pm“why doesn’t a smart Christian lawyer start a class action law suit against the Freedom From Religion idiots and the ACLU for violating OUR Constitutional rights to freely practice our “religion” which may or may not include a public declaration to same?”
There are many “smart Christian lawyers” defending our freedoms. One firm is mentioned in this story, the Thomas More Law Center. Ever heard of Jay Sekulow and the ACLJ? Or Mathew Staver’s Liberty Counsel? They all need our support. They are fighting the Communist take over of our health care system as well. Who do you think it is that’s fighting all this crap in court?
Report Post »wildbill_b
Posted on May 10, 2012 at 6:19pm@ Bruce P.
Report Post »Article VI, Cause 2. This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in pursuance thereof; and all treaties made, or which shall be made, under the authority of the United States, shall be the supreme law of the land;……………..Public education did you no favors. “Laws made in pursuance thereof” means laws that the Constitution allows. Not any law they want to make. The Constitution is we the people RESTRICTING and DEFINING what the government can do. Even a first grader can read “Congress shall make no law” and understand it means, well Congress. Your utter ignorance on the matter can be rectified if you can just find someone who is literate to read this to you. http://publiushuldah.wordpress.com/category/separation-of-church-and-state/ http://publiushuldah.wordpress.com/category/supremacy-clause/ Attempting to argue with your mental superiors will never end well.
encinom
Posted on May 10, 2012 at 6:27pm@uv
Beckerheads need to learn basic civics, the 14th Amendment incorporated the Bill of Rights onto the States and political subdivision of the States. The town is in clear violations of the Constitution and needs to be reminded that in matters of law, the Constitution, not the Bible reigns supreme.
Report Post »encinom
Posted on May 10, 2012 at 6:30pmrandy
Report Post »Posted on May 10, 2012 at 4:23pm
I say everyone start posting biblical verse right on your front lawn.
Let’s see how fast these “Freedom From Religion nut cases run out of money fighting each and every one of us?
_______________
Here is the difference, as long as it is your property you can put the whole freakin’ bible on your lawn, its not a violations of the first Amendment. Once its on town property than the Constitution has been violated.
lordjosh
Posted on May 10, 2012 at 8:58pm“Tom Brejcha, the president and chief counsel of the Thomas More Society, says that Sylvania will have a better chance of success if a historical Christian history can be proven.”
Stop listening to these tools of the game. You don’t need no historical context other than the fact that the first amendmendment grants no authority to the federal government to restrict towns, States, or the people from displaying religious messages. Thats what you tell the fat guy in the black robe.
Report Post »JGraham III
Posted on May 10, 2012 at 9:58pmYo! Publiuspencil-dude:
Report Post »You can rest tonight because I can freely say I understand the difference between private and public practice of my faith. The thorny part of all this argument is that if I were a “public official” (which I am not), I am not currently allowed in some quarters of this nation to have a bible visible or to wear jewelry that smacks of Christianity, or to play ‘christian music’ etc etc etc..all because I might commit the heinous crime of upsetting some fragile non-believer’s estimation of himself. What I don’t think you understand is that if this clear violation of my rights (you cannot prove the above constitute an establishment of christianity no matter how contorted youi wish to become) is allowed to stand and to pass into “law” then it is a short step to telling me that I cannot practice my faith at all because the enlightened ones in the government have deemed it to be subversive or some such other fabrication. It is for this that I say what I do. Do you understand?
colt1860
Posted on May 10, 2012 at 10:12pm@brucep “One Lord, One Faith, One Baptism” is not even remotely an establishment of religion. It’s a phrase, and quotation. There is no system of order, institution, congregation, body of clergymen, or any binding ritual or rule that must be followed by all residents. It is not a law, mandate, order, demand, or anything enforceable or obligatory. This is not stating there is only one religion. Faith is not the same thing as religion. And even then, this sign is not stating there is only one faith “allowed”. That is completely bogus. At no time has the city ever prohibited its residents from expressing their personal faith, nor are voters (any citizen) restricted from electing Buddhists or Jews to the council. If the city was majority Jewish, and they elected a council made up of majority Jews, and the council decided to post, not enact into law, a quotation, from some proverb or historical writing, or other fascinating saying, they have every right. I just came from the Capitol building, and there are paintings and statues depicting Christian symbols, events, and religious men. Some of these were done during the time of our founding fathers. And no one is made to bow down to them. This lawsuit is a joke, and an insult to our history, our heritage, our form of Government, and our federalist Government.
Report Post »the_truth_or_not
Posted on May 10, 2012 at 10:31pmAt BRUCE P.
Could you please answer the same question that I posted hopefully to be asked of to your leader? I have it posted below with Article one. How is it that a sign is a law of respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting there of, or abridging free speech, or press, or infringing on a persons right to peacefully assemble? It seems to me that your point of view is actually Anti-constitutional. You are the one that is trying to abridge free speech.
here is Article one:
Report Post »Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances. Where do you get the idea that there exists in Article One, a total separation of church and state; that Government cannot display any thing of Faith?
ModerationIsBest
Posted on May 11, 2012 at 12:38amIf taxpayer money paid for the sign, it is unconstitutional.
If Muslims want to add a Quran verse onto it, it MUST be allowed.
If Atheists want to add something on the sign, it MUST be allowed.
If followers of Zeus want to put something on the sign, it MUST be allowed.
Freedom from religion is the only true way to have freedom of religion.
Report Post »colt1860
Posted on May 11, 2012 at 12:41pm@ModerationIsBest You’re dead wrong. Only council men can vote on such things. Voters can voice their opinions, but the council will have the last say, until the next session or election.
Report Post »FREEDOMDOG5150
Posted on May 11, 2012 at 1:23pm@Bruce or anyone else who doesn’t agree with Sylvania.
Find me exactly in the Constitution where the words “Separation of Church and State” are. They don’t exist.
Report Post »uv
Posted on May 11, 2012 at 2:30pmBruce P.
Posted on May 10, 2012 at 4:13pm
UV, Hold on, I got something for you. It’s called the Supremacy Clause.
Article VI, Cause 2. This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in pursuance thereof; and all treaties made, or which shall be made, under the authority of the United States, shall be the supreme law of the land; and the judges in every state shall be bound thereby, anything in the constitution or laws of any state to the contrary notwithstanding.
Bruce, this article does not trump any other article or amendment to the Constitution; in particule the very first one. Sorry. The Constitution cannot and does not trump itself.
Report Post »Bruce P.
Posted on May 11, 2012 at 3:45pmTHE TRUTH — if tax-payer money was used to fund it, then it is a violation of the First Amendment.
No one is trying to abridge the right of free speech. The citizens of the town have every right to say and do what they will. The town government, however, does not. Government endorsement of religion is not considered protected speech.
Report Post »TheChepe
Posted on May 14, 2012 at 3:53pmI’m an Atheist, but I don’t really care about this. I mean, to me, it’s not a big deal. Whenever Atheists try to take something down like this, I wonder why waste our time on something that really doesn’t mean that much? Plus, it’s Alabama. Yeah, a state in the deep South is going to take down a sign. It’s a walking deathtrap anyway. I don’t see it as establishing Christianity. I mean, it is only representing the Christian deity, but it‘s not like they’re preventing others from worshiping their gods. Also, once again, who cares? It’s not like this town really matters. It‘s probably full of people who don’t think much and just go “god did it” to everything. It’s whatever. I personally don’t care.
Report Post »nolefan2
Posted on May 10, 2012 at 11:08amI guess to atheists, the government is god.
Report Post »Bruce P.
Posted on May 10, 2012 at 11:47amJust the opposite. You wish to force your faith upon others.
“One Lord, One Faith, One Baptism,” is a clear violation of the Constitution.
Report Post »barstooltestpilot
Posted on May 10, 2012 at 12:31pmWhy is this town not allowed freedom of choice? It appears to me that the town voted to put the signs back the way they were before this issue was raised. If the town objects to the sign, they can replace the council. What misfit just happened to see this sign and was offended? The FFRF should mind their own FFFFNNNNN… business.
Report Post »jcldwl
Posted on May 10, 2012 at 12:33pm@ Bruce P.
Hold on Bruce are you ready?
U.S. Constitution Amendment 1
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.
Sylvania and it’s residents are not congress therefore the verse on their sign in no way violates the constitution. They also are not establishing a religion though they can if they want since they are not congress. In fact since it is freedom of religion they most certainly can establish Christianity or any other religion as the official religion of their town if they see fit to, as long as they allow others to worship any religion they want and don’t impede that, they are not violating the constitution. Argue that.
Report Post »AvengerK
Posted on May 10, 2012 at 12:39pmWhat about your little Star Trek symbol there Brucie? Not forcing your faith on others?
Report Post »bitemebiden
Posted on May 10, 2012 at 12:39pmActually Bruce, this doesn’t force faith… they can simply disregard the quote if they wish.
Report Post »Charles Bronson
Posted on May 10, 2012 at 1:03pm“I guess to atheists, the government is god.”
The only thing I’ve worshiped is a few women. You in your haste to make government godly are making government your god. The United States is not Iran, it is not a theocracy.
“It appears to me that the town voted to put the signs back the way they were before this issue was raised.”
The majority does not get to dictate what religion others must live under.
“Sylvania and it’s residents are not congress therefore the verse on their sign in no way violates the constitution. ~ they most certainly can establish Christianity or any other religion as the official religion of their town if they see fit to”
The 14th amendment prevents any governing body from superseding the constitution. This is why Kalifornia cannot outright ban gun ownership or establish a state religion. A state cannot trump constitutional rights of individuals. Key word is Individual… They are “individual” rights, not “we’re the majority we get to say what goes” rights.
Basically you are wanting to open a Pandora’s box for any religion that gains a majority in a given area. Imagine breaking a law in a county you‘re passing through that is predominantly muslim and going to trial in a court room that has Qur’an quotations. Would you be the least bit comfortable with that?
You people are not Right, Left, Republican, Democrat, Conservative, or Liberal. You’re theocrats.
Report Post »COFemale
Posted on May 10, 2012 at 1:32pmNO Bruce P it is NOT. This is not Congress, it is the people of the town deciding to post Bible scripture. NO religion is being established and YOU are not being told to join. You don’t even have to read the sign. FFRF need to mind their own FN business.
What a bunch of whiners you atheist are. I don’t get may way waaaa, I have to look at scripture waaaa. I am being forced to read the sign waaaaa. Tell me did your mom allow you to whine as a child and give in just to shut you up?
Report Post »colt1860
Posted on May 10, 2012 at 2:57pmThe problem with Socialists, Communists, Fascists and Tyrants is that they assume all power resides with the State first, and the State then benevolently grants us our freedom. Liberals believe that they must petition the government for their rights, while conservatives believe that our rights are God-given, and that the State’s job is to safeguard those rights in the individual, not exploit them. Our Founding Fathers understood that God grants our freedom and liberty to each of us as individuals, and we then voluntarily surrender or delegate some of those freedoms to a government so that we may have an orderly society, but the power is ours first, not the government’s.
“When we view the blessings with which our country has been favored, those which we now enjoy, and the means which we possess of handing them down unimpaired to our latest posterity, our attention is irresistibly drawn to the source from whence they flow. Let us then, unite in offering our most grateful acknowledgments for these blessings to the Divine Author of All Good.” – James Monroe
Bruce P.
Posted on May 10, 2012 at 4:17pmAVENGERK — My symbol is my choice. As I am not a government, I cannot force it upon anyone else. Just as having a cross as a symbol in these threads would not be forcing Christianity upon anyone. Your argument is complete nonsense and shows you have no understanding of the issue.
Report Post »encinom
Posted on May 10, 2012 at 6:34pm@jcldwl
14th Amendment people, incorporates the Bill of Rights to the States. Beckerheads need to learn civics.
Report Post »the_truth_or_not
Posted on May 10, 2012 at 10:46pmBruce P.
Maybe I have not found your post yet? but you have failed to describe where in the constitution their is a separation of church and state. That language does not exist. I find your arguements laughable at best.
Report Post »Bruce P.
Posted on May 11, 2012 at 4:02pmIt is called the Establishment Clause. That is what forms the separation between church and state. You can claim all you want the language is not there but it shows your ignorance of not only the past century of jurisprudence but the understanding of the Founding Fathers themselves (as shown by the letters of Jefferson and Madison).
Report Post »Locked
Posted on May 10, 2012 at 11:07amWhile it is correct to say the courts would likely be against them, I can’t help but shake my head and go “This is really what you think is worth your time and effort?” The group is a bunch of busybodies who will ultimately just ruin their own cause through actions like these.
Report Post »lukerw
Posted on May 10, 2012 at 4:44pmFor the sake of Peace… just Emanate Domain their A$$ out of Town!
Report Post »kickagrandma
Posted on May 10, 2012 at 11:04amYay, Sylvania, Alabama!!!
GOD BLESS AND PROTECT YOU IN JESUS’ SWEET AND MIGHTY NAME, amen.
That’s courage, y’all. Who’s next?
Report Post »AmazingGrace8
Posted on May 10, 2012 at 1:25pmAmen!
These believers ARE God-Pleasers and NOT people pleasers.
Report Post »Obey God and Leave All The Consequences To Him!!!
ThankBabyJesus
Posted on May 10, 2012 at 11:04amnice ;)
Report Post »FromSeaToSea
Posted on May 10, 2012 at 11:04am“It is impossible to rightly govern a nation without God and the Bible.” George Washington
“It is religion and morality alone, which can establish the principles upon which freedom can securely stand.” John Adams
“Religion is of general and public concern and on its proper support depend, in great measure, the peace and good order of government, the safety and happiness of the people. By our form of government, THE CHRISTIAN RELIGION IS THE EASTABLISHED RELIGION, and all sects and denominations of Christians are placed upon the same equal footing, and are equally entitled to protection in their religious liberty.” Samuel Chase,- signor of Declaration of Independence & Supreme Court Justice
We cannot read the history of our rise and development as a nation, without reckoning with the place the Bible has occupied in shaping the advances of the Republic. Where we have been the truest and most consistent in obeying its precepts, we have attained the greatest measure of contentment and prosperity.” Franklin Roosevelt “
Within the covers of the Bible are all the answers for all the problems men face.” Ronald Reagan
Freedom prospers when religion is vibrant and the rule of law under God is acknowledged.
Report Post »Ronald Reagan
PubliusPencilman
Posted on May 10, 2012 at 11:19amHmm… funny how Adams and Washington refer generically to “religion” rather than specifying any one practice… And feel free to quote the place where they said this is a Christian nation and all others should be made to feel like second-class citizens.
Report Post »Blazebanned
Posted on May 10, 2012 at 11:33am@pubicpencildick aka encinom.
For once in your pathetic insignicant life try and make a tiny bit of sense. And if you cant, do us all a favor, and stop breathing our good air, you pos.
Drago.
Report Post »PubliusPencilman
Posted on May 10, 2012 at 4:43pmBlazebanned,
Quite down little one. The adults are talking.
Report Post »RamonPreston
Posted on May 10, 2012 at 11:04amShow your support of God by hanging atheists from your signs. Gays, too.
Report Post »Blazebanned
Posted on May 10, 2012 at 11:35am@ramon aka encinom.
Once again you fail, i dont know why you even follow media matters orders to try and bait people on here,it just doesnt work,dumbass pos.
Drago.
Report Post »Bruce P.
Posted on May 10, 2012 at 11:44amSo much for liberty.
You expose yourself. Those fundamentalists supporting the town’s violation of the Constitution are not concerned with freedom of religious expression but the establishment of one religion, a theocratic government wherein other faiths are not allowed. You want a Christian version of Saudi Arabia.
Report Post »uv
Posted on May 10, 2012 at 12:47pmjcldwl
Posted on May 10, 2012 at 12:33pm
@ Bruce P.
Hold on Bruce are you ready?
U.S. Constitution Amendment 1
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.
Sylvania and it’s residents are not congress therefore the verse on their sign in no way violates the constitution. They also are not establishing a religion though they can if they want since they are not congress. In fact since it is freedom of religion they most certainly can establish Christianity or any other religion as the official religion of their town if they see fit to, as long as they allow others to worship any religion they want and don’t impede that, they are not violating the constitution. Argue that.
this deserves an answer, bruce. thank you.
Report Post »jcldwl
Posted on May 10, 2012 at 1:00pmYou are sick.
Report Post »jcldwl
Posted on May 10, 2012 at 1:02pm@ UV
Thanks but he won’t, it‘s the truth and you can’t argue with the truth.
Report Post »uv
Posted on May 10, 2012 at 1:20pmjcldwl
Posted on May 10, 2012 at 1:02pm
@ UV
Thanks but he won’t, it‘s the truth and you can’t argue with the truth.
JCLDWL,
Report Post »Siting your reference as to not plagarize, but really, I could not improve your post. Thank you for your effort.
Godfather.1
Posted on May 10, 2012 at 6:17pmTo all of you idiots who think that because this town is not Congress that the establishment clause does not apply: The Fourteenth Amendment applied the Bill of Rights to the states. Therefore, the states have to comply with the Bill of Rights which means a state, town, county, city, etc. cannot endorse a religion, something this sign clearly does.
Report Post »the_truth_or_not
Posted on May 10, 2012 at 10:57pmgodfatherone, No one yet has answered why cant the govt. post signs? this is not against the bill of rights as it is not infringing religion. There is no freedom from religion. Nor is there anything in the fourteenth amendment. that stops any govt. from endorsing. Endorsing is not restricting. We are a Christian nation and if you read articles from the founding fathers you would realize this. Again for those of you the feel that Article one has not clearly been posted, here it is. Please tell me how endorsing a religion is against Article one? Thank-you
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
Report Post »Godfather.1
Posted on May 11, 2012 at 11:36amI see in your analysis you left out the clause of the First Amendment that actually applies here. What do you think “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion” means?
Posting this sign is clearly respecting an establishment of religion. Furthermore, the Supreme Court, whether you like it or not, has said that signs like this are patently unconstitutional.
I thought you Beck fans were constitutional scholars.
Report Post »uv
Posted on May 11, 2012 at 2:35pmgodfather, the previous post you replied to is accuarate in stating “the creation of a law” versus the posting of a sign. An “endorsement”, as you allude to, is NOT a law. That, my friend, is where those of us who understand the Constitution can explain the simple words and meanings of the simple words to those who do not comprehend.
Report Post »Godfather.1
Posted on May 11, 2012 at 3:56pmAgain you are wrong. Try reading some Supreme Court cases if you don’t believe me. A government entity cannot do anything that endorses religion, which this sign clearly does.
You may not like it, but when the Supreme Court hands down a decision interpreting the Constitution, that is now the law of the land.
I know teabaggers and Beck fans think they know everything there is to know about the Constitution, even though you only looked at it for the first time yesterday, but the Supreme Court Justices have been studying the Constitution for their entire lives. Do you really believe you understand it better than them?
Unfortunately, my guess is that you do.
Report Post »ReddenBlack
Posted on May 10, 2012 at 11:03am@Gonzo, etc…
Sorry, I have this craaaaazy idea that we should obey they law. So when the constitution says “congress shall make no law abridging the freedom of religion” and then the town abridges my freedom to be athiest by saying that I, as a resident, believe in those nonsense bible verses, that’s breaking the law. It’s not about being “offended” its about breaking the law.
Report Post »RJJinGadsden
Posted on May 10, 2012 at 11:20amIt’s a defiant thumb in the eye of the SCOTUS that actually violated the Constitution in 1963 just as they did when they declared blacks slaves as 3/5ths of a person. Oh yeah, let‘s not forget 0bama’s ignoring two court orders to cease and desist going forward with 0bama Care. His refusal to appear in court regarding his citizenship is another good example.
Report Post »RJJinGadsden
Posted on May 10, 2012 at 11:25amAs for the SCOTUS, let us not forget that there is still a huge display of the Ten Commandments displayed there.
Report Post »Mark0331
Posted on May 10, 2012 at 11:34am@reddenblack…’The First Amendment (Amendment I) to the United States Constitution is part of the Bill of Rights. The amendment prohibits the making of any law respecting an establishment of religion, impeding the free exercise of religion, abridging the freedom of speech, infringing on the freedom of the press, interfering with the right to peaceably assemble or prohibiting the petitioning for a governmental redress of grievances….’… read the whole Amendment, comprehend it. You are wrong.
Report Post »cryinginthedesert
Posted on May 10, 2012 at 11:38amThe town cannot tell you to be christian – that would be unconstitutional. The town is simply reflecting the views of the people living in it. Maybe some atheist’s should have voted against the signage, instead of it passing unanimously.
Report Post »Mark0331
Posted on May 10, 2012 at 11:40am@Reddenblack…Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances…is that easier for you?…just trying to help.
Report Post »Useful_Idiot
Posted on May 10, 2012 at 11:41amScrew the law. Since when has a liberal activist followed the law. If you don’t like the sign, then MOVE!
Report Post »Bruce P.
Posted on May 10, 2012 at 12:23pmOh yes, “screw the law.” Who cares what the Constitution says?
One should not be forced to move because a town is violating the Constitution. Forcing someone to move is oppression.
Report Post »AvengerK
Posted on May 10, 2012 at 12:32pmBruce…love the Star Trek symbol champ……
Report Post »Psychosis
Posted on May 10, 2012 at 12:36pmam i missing something ???
when did CONGRESS make a law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof?
as far as i can tell, none of the people in this small town government work in CONGRESS and thus dont violate the constitution
Report Post »COFemale
Posted on May 10, 2012 at 1:36pmDing ding ding CONGRESS. Since when is this town CONGRESS.
We win you lose. Deal with it.
Report Post »Bruce P.
Posted on May 10, 2012 at 4:20pmCOFEMALE — DING DING DING DING — Supremacy Clause. The same restrictions placed upon Congress in regards to our civil liberties also applies to the states and cities.
We win. You lose.
Report Post »abbygirl1994
Posted on May 10, 2012 at 11:01amI am proud of you Alabama! Now, the rest of America needs to stand up to the lame brain athiests! Yippee! Come on America.. keep up your faith, keep your signs, your crosses etc! And tell athiest to go to hell.. they will anyway.. but tell em anyway! God help us!
Report Post »PubliusPencilman
Posted on May 10, 2012 at 11:12amIt’s that kind of divisive stupidity that demonstrates exactly why signs promoting a specific religion have no place in public institutions or on public signage. Atheists have just as much right to live in this town as anyone else.
Report Post »PATTY HENRY
Posted on May 10, 2012 at 11:18amCONGRATULATIONS SYLVANIA, ALABAMA!! That’s got to be one good town!!! I’m going to look it up on the map. Alabama is beautiful in so many areas anyway, but I love this Spirit. Atheists say they have “no faith”… REALLY???? It takes more faith (to me) to believe that something (no one knows what) exploded at some time (zillions of years ago probably) and then stopped exploding and particles became fish and eyeballs, trees and water, and planets – the earth for example – that rolls around through space but doesn’t break apart.
Report Post »GOD created everything, including SCIENCE. I see no conflict. GOD is the Great Creator! His whole being is creativity. He made us, He Loves us but we’re only “strong” and “useful” if by our own free will we choose GOD over Satan. Then He will lead us, schools us, care for us and encourage us to be the people He created us to be. Back to the exploding rock… name one thing that wasn’t pre-designed… no building, no chair, nothing. (and don’t say Trees and Grass because GOD designed all of it, and this amazing system of life)
So thanks, SYLVANIA, ALABAMA for standing up for GOD, His Creations and pray for the Atheists..they have a lot of faith, it’s just misguided and the being inspiring them now, the Devil, will eventually destroy them for fun…that’s what the devil does.
CougarNick78
Posted on May 10, 2012 at 11:50am@ Publius- cry me a frickin river. The idiot who’s supposedly suing ought to have known a key word in real estate. LOCATION, LOCATION, LOCATION. Let’s see, Deep South, Bible Belt, hmmmmm. They just wanted to cause trouble. It’s not about freedom. It’s about being a spoiled brat and having their way all the time. These have to be Yankee or West Coast grafters.
Report Post »Bruce P.
Posted on May 11, 2012 at 3:50pmCOLT — again, you must rely on insults. Your constant insults regarding my intelligence are telling us more about your own intelligence.
You fail to see the difference between a historic artifact and a government endorsement of religion.
And Bibles are allowed in school. But you cannot TEACH from the Bible.
Report Post »NHwinter
Posted on May 10, 2012 at 11:01amThe FFRF originally sent a letter to the town claiming that the inclusion of the verse is unconstitutional.
it is not unconstitutional. the Constitution clearly says that you cannot prohit the free expression of religion!!!!! Separation of church and state is NOT in the Constitution.
Report Post »RamonPreston
Posted on May 10, 2012 at 11:06amWhat was right is now wrong and everything that was wrong is now right. The founding fathers wouldn’t believe what has happened to this country.
Report Post »PubliusPencilman
Posted on May 10, 2012 at 11:10amExactly, the Constitution protects freedom of religion, which is why this sign that explicitly promotes one specific religion as the religion of this town must be taken down. If the sign said “white people’s town,” it would be considered coercive against other races, and would have to be taken down or painted over. This situation is no different.
Report Post »Locked
Posted on May 10, 2012 at 11:21am@NHWinter
“it is not unconstitutional.”
Your statement is likely false.
Report Post »Bruce P.
Posted on May 10, 2012 at 11:55amThe First Amendment clearly states that the government shall not establish a religion. There is no other way to see “One Lord, One Faith, One Baptism” but as the establishment of a religion. The signs might as well read, “No other faiths welcome.”
Report Post »AvengerK
Posted on May 10, 2012 at 12:33pmBruce…that Star Trek symbol you and your fellow believers use…its’ like Christians with crosses right? You’re proclaiming your beliefs in your religion for the world to acknowledge right?
Report Post »jcldwl
Posted on May 10, 2012 at 1:06pm@ Bruce P.
I already told you earlier and if you are going to quote the constitution get it right. It says Congress not the government. That would be the Congress of the United States of America, not the government of Sylvania.
Report Post »colt1860
Posted on May 10, 2012 at 3:23pm@BruceP. What a crybaby.
You said, “The signs might as well read, ‘No other faiths welcome.’”
That’s the point! Can you read? There is NO sign saying only Christians, Jews or Buddhists are allowed in town. The sign has bible quotation. The bible verse is NOT a law passed by the city. Do you understand basic law or Government? The Liberty Bell in Independence Hall quotes the Bible!
Report Post »Bruce P.
Posted on May 11, 2012 at 2:56amIt is funny. Those that disagree with me in these comments cannot do so without using ad hominems. It exposes the weakness of their arguments.
AVENGERK — you, as a private citizen, are more than welcome to display your faith on your personal being or your property. No one is protesting that. The issue is not personal property or displays of faith, it is about government endorsement of a religion. This shows you know absolutely nothing about this issue.
JCLDWL — you may want to read and attempt to understand the Constitution. It applies not just to Congress but EVERY level of government, from the local level on up. It is called the Supremacy Clause. It is called the 14th Amendment. Do not tell me to read and understand the Constitution when you obviously have never read it nor understand it yourself.
COLT — you as well in an attempt to be condescending and insulting, expose your ignorance. The Liberty Bell was not commissioned by the United States government operating under the Constitution.
The Liberty Bell is an iconic symbol of American independence, located in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania…The bell was commissioned from the London firm of Lester and Pack (today the Whitechapel Bell Foundry) in 1752, and was cast with the lettering (part of Leviticus 25:10) “Proclaim LIBERTY throughout all the land unto all the inhabitants thereof.” http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liberty_Bell
Read that again, 35 years before the Constitution.
Report Post »colt1860
Posted on May 11, 2012 at 12:44pm@Bruce P. How dense are you? It doesn’t matter. The Bell was still there, even after the Constitution. In that case, bibles should be allowed in school, since they were allowed before the Constitution too.
Report Post »BigAl78
Posted on May 15, 2012 at 3:07amAh, I see Avengerk is at it again with the hilarious Star Trek jokes.
Report Post »Greyowl
Posted on May 10, 2012 at 10:58amThank you Sylvania, Alabama!!! I am thrilled to see Christians and like minded Americans standing up to those few who want it all their way or no way.
Report Post »NHwinter
Posted on May 10, 2012 at 10:58amDoes the same apply when atheists post signs with anti-faith messages on them? If a town only had atheists living in it and a Christian moved in, could that individual demand all sign with anti-faith be taken down?
Report Post »PubliusPencilman
Posted on May 10, 2012 at 11:05amAnd what exactly would constitute an “anti-faith” sign?
Report Post »DesertRose1960
Posted on May 10, 2012 at 11:15amAh, there’s the rub. If there were city property signs that proclaimed there was no God, then a Christian could ask that they be removed and win in court. But most of the atheists that I have known have no such signs and they only put them up to provoke a response from the sanctimonious Bible-thumpers who keep insisting that America is a “Christian Nation”. Most atheists just want to go about their lives in peace. You usually only find about they are atheists when people try to proselytize to them.
Report Post »RJJinGadsden
Posted on May 10, 2012 at 11:32amDESERTDOPE, There is one currently in the process of being errected on DC public property.
Report Post »Locked
Posted on May 10, 2012 at 11:54am@Rj
Could I have a link about the sign you’re referring to? First I‘ve heard of it and I’d like to know more. Thanks!
Report Post »Bruce P.
Posted on May 10, 2012 at 12:26pmNHWINTER — atheists are free to post all the anti-faith signs all they want, just as Christians are allowed to post all the pro-Christianity signs they want, as long as it is on private property. No one should post anything, proclaiming any religious belief (to the exclusion of others) on public property.
Report Post »RJJinGadsden
Posted on May 10, 2012 at 12:28pmLOCKED, I simply Googled a phrase like “atheist signs on public property” and ran across that in one of the hits. Now, I just Googled “atheist sign in washington dc” and found several sites. But, I also offer you this tidbit. How many major cities have allowed atheist signs on public transportation buses while not allowing religious announcements or even local church advertisements? You can’t deny this, it has been in the news.
Report Post »RJJinGadsden
Posted on May 10, 2012 at 12:42pmLOCKED, here is another location in Washington state.
Report Post »http://www.kirotv.com/news/news/atheist-sign-joins-capitol-holiday-display-this-ye/nKr6m/
Locked
Posted on May 10, 2012 at 12:45pm@Rj
“I simply Googled a phrase like “atheist signs on public property” and ran across that in one of the hits. Now, I just Googled “atheist sign in washington dc” and found several sites. ”
I see. My Google searching isn’t bringing up a sign on DC public property. Closest I can find are hits about the Nativity scenes on public property around Christmas and how atheists put up displays as well. Was that the one you referred to?
“But, I also offer you this tidbit. How many major cities have allowed atheist signs on public transportation buses while not allowing religious announcements or even local church advertisements? You can’t deny this, it has been in the news.”
I don’t know, how many? Again, using Google, I’m finding hits for London… but that’s not the US, of course. I‘m not denying that it’s happened; I‘m just wondering if you could post the links you’re talking about since it’s been in the news.
But I’m not sure what that has to do with the topic at hand: religious proclamations or endorsements on public property. Private companies and their advertisements are quite a different topic altogether.
Report Post »Locked
Posted on May 10, 2012 at 12:49pm@Rj
Ah, so it was the Nativity displays you were talking about. Perfectly Constitutional as ruled by the SCotUS because by allowing other beliefs (or lack of beliefs) to participate, one faith is not endorsed above others.
I thought you meant an actual sign like the one in the article, not a display on public property with several other belief systems also sharing their messages.
Report Post »RJJinGadsden
Posted on May 10, 2012 at 2:03pmLOCKED, Hmmm, this is not the site that I originally tripped over when I looked earlier, but here is a different one on the same vane.
Report Post »http://www.christianpost.com/news/hundreds-protest-atheist-sign-at-wash-capitol-35834/
Didn’t take me but a couple of seconds to find this story about the buses.
http://www.askmen.com/fine_living/fine-living-news_200/246_atheist-bus-ads-spark-debate.html
If you want more do a better search for yourself please.
RJJinGadsden
Posted on May 10, 2012 at 2:06pmLOCKED, Pardon me, I forgot to add this to the last comment. NO, it was not the Nativity Scenes that I referred to.
Report Post »Locked
Posted on May 10, 2012 at 3:09pm@Rj
“Hmmm, this is not the site that I originally tripped over when I looked earlier, but here is a different one on the same vane.”
That’s the Nativity display controversy: “Gov. Chris Gregoire had permitted an atheist group to include as part of a Christmas-themed display inside the rotunda.”
“Didn’t take me but a couple of seconds to find this story about the buses.”
But you said you had a story where churches weren’t allowed to put up ads, but atheists were. This article is pretty clear that it’s about an atheist group not being allowed to put up signs on buses in Des Moines: “A dispute about bus advertisements seeking to publicize atheist views has touched off a free speech debate after the signs were torn down — then posted again — on the sides of Des Moines city buses.” Again, it’s off-topic, as private businesses can do whatever they like.
“If you want more do a better search for yourself please.”
No, you found similar ones to what I found. Neither were the ones you originally spoke of, however: an atheist sign on public property or Christians being denied ads on buses while atheists’ were allowed.
“Pardon me, I forgot to add this to the last comment. NO, it was not the Nativity Scenes that I referred to.”
I’m not saying you were lying. I just couldn’t find anything in my search, but you said you did. Hence why I wanted a link. I’d still be happy to look at it if you find the article again!
Report Post »RJJinGadsden
Posted on May 10, 2012 at 5:12pmLOCKED, Not trying to imply in any way that you are lying. Please forgive me if that is what you read into this. But, I just went back to that link and you and I are simply not reading the same thing.
Report Post »No, I did not say that I had a particular story at my fingertips regarding the refusal of the city bus lines of the church or religious based signs and advertisements. I merely mentioned that stories of this have been in the news and by my mentioning lately I mean within the past year. Granted I watch Fox News a lot and you will obviously discount me for that, but I do check into CNN and BSNBC a lot too. More than likely I caught those stories on Fox, but a likely source may also have been Beck‘s or Rush’s radio shows. As for me spoon feeding you, it ain’t going to happen. Been round and round with JZS regarding that several times. If you want to prove me wrong, go for it. I usually find it easy to locate some stories in a search engine check because I do a lot of research for my hobbies. I check through Google Chrome which is where I usually get onto The Blaze because of the ease to enlarge the screen picture. But I also use my AOL search which is ‘enhanced’ by Google, but always gives me a much differing listing. Will also go through the Microsoft Browser to search as well as Bing. All give highly different listings from the beginning. But again, I will not do your homework, and try rewording your searches slightly each time.
Daveed
Posted on May 10, 2012 at 10:57amYeah Alabama!! Patriots! God Bless you and your town! Stand strong against Godless Communism, One world government, slavery–no longer worker bees for government and unions.
FREEDOMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMM!
Report Post »pap pap
Posted on May 10, 2012 at 10:51amWhat we need is for judges to say “STFU and Get Outta Here” to the Atheists with such restrictive attitudes.
Walla, no legal expenses.
Report Post »sunnyday9885
Posted on May 10, 2012 at 11:05amAs long as I can post a some Allah quotes on the stop signs, I have no problem with it.
Report Post »HKS
Posted on May 10, 2012 at 11:07amWhat we really need in this country is leadership that stands for American values, it starts at the polls, vote the right people in and get rid of the rest.
Report Post »PubliusPencilman
Posted on May 10, 2012 at 11:13amBrilliant. You plan to counter “restrictive attitudes” by excluding them entirely, which is why they wanted to remove the signs in the first place.
Report Post »Mark0331
Posted on May 10, 2012 at 11:17am@Sunnyday…if the town has an overwhelming majority of Muslims who agree, go for it….Muslims who do not beat their wives and treat and disfigure their daughters like ‘cattle’…and follow the US Constitution and Our Nations Laws and not Sharia…yes…nice try with your ‘statement’ though, amateur ‘stab’ at best…unless your being sarcastic by stating ‘put them on STOP signs’…then great ironic joke.
Report Post »DesertRose1960
Posted on May 10, 2012 at 11:22am@HKS, What do you mean by that, exactly. What do you mean by voting the “right” people in and “getting rid’ of the rest? I happen to agree in free elections and choice, but the opposition has as much right to exist as the winning party. My party won the elections in 2008, I thought we put “the right” people in; I‘ll bet you don’t agree with that. I tolerate your opinion and even wish you better luck next time. My problem comes when your side wins, you folks try to silence, disenfrancise. or down right punish people like me for disagreeing with you.
Report Post »RJJinGadsden
Posted on May 10, 2012 at 11:35amSUNNYDAY9885, State and Federal laws prohibit any such additions to traffic signs.
Report Post »AvengerK
Posted on May 10, 2012 at 11:39amLOL….very good TOKYOROSE….so when the doors were shut on the GOP during the formulation of Obamacare where was your “unbiased” voice proclaiming that both sides should be heard and one not silenced arbitrarily by the other.
Report Post »But then again..you’re a public-sector union hack with a government job right there in DC apparently….you’d sell your soul for your failed ideology, your joke of a party (have you disowned Elizabeth “fauxcahontas” Warren yet?) and your incompetent Barack Obama as long as they’re lining the pockets of your unions.
Useful_Idiot
Posted on May 10, 2012 at 11:44amIslam is NOT a religion. It’s a cult. Period.
Report Post »Bruce P.
Posted on May 10, 2012 at 12:21pmPAP PAP — the “One Lord, One Faith, One Baptism” sign already tells atheist, and anyone of any other beliefs, to get out and don’t come back. It says no one else is welcome. It establishes a religion. Thus, it is unconstitutional.
Report Post »uv
Posted on May 10, 2012 at 12:48pmjcldwl
Posted on May 10, 2012 at 12:33pm
@ Bruce P.
Hold on Bruce are you ready?
U.S. Constitution Amendment 1
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.
Sylvania and it’s residents are not congress therefore the verse on their sign in no way violates the constitution. They also are not establishing a religion though they can if they want since they are not congress. In fact since it is freedom of religion they most certainly can establish Christianity or any other religion as the official religion of their town if they see fit to, as long as they allow others to worship any religion they want and don’t impede that, they are not violating the constitution. Argue that.
this still deserves your answer, bruce.
Report Post »IDONTTHINKSO
Posted on May 10, 2012 at 10:47amWhy doesn’t more people understand? ”[The FFRF is] of the mistaken view that the First Amendment guarantees us freedom from religion, which is wrong. The truth is that it stands for freedom of religion, and that‘s a distinction that’s lost on them.” Final someone got it right! Way to go Sylvania, Ala..
Report Post »I_Will_Not_Comply
Posted on May 10, 2012 at 10:47amNow this is what could be referred to as “the 1% running the country”. A 1% group of freaks and losers trying to tell us how to run our towns? Please.
And some lawyer or group had better come help this town pro bono.
Report Post »inesv
Posted on May 10, 2012 at 10:45amPraise GOD for People that are standing their ground no matter what the cost.
Report Post »dgremark12
Posted on May 10, 2012 at 10:45amGood for them, al least some are fighting back!
Report Post »sy212
Posted on May 10, 2012 at 10:43amI‘m atheist but I don’t believe in cramming my beliefs down your throat. You live in a religious town and want to put a religious verse on your welcome sign, go for it. It’s called culture. It takes all of us to make a society, we don’t have to hate each other.
Report Post »Gonzo
Posted on May 10, 2012 at 10:53amThank you! I think you represent the vast majority of atheists and the militant atheists that cause problems over things like this are a small but vocal minority.
Report Post »Mark0331
Posted on May 10, 2012 at 11:04am@SY212…many thanks…you get it and understand the 1st Amendment. I care not what you ‘believe’, you care not what I ‘believe’, just be a decent person…its called courtesy and FREEDOM.
Report Post »CougarNick78
Posted on May 10, 2012 at 11:12amKudos to you, Sy. Kudos. At least you’re no Pete Stark or DICK Dawkins type, unlike Encinom and a few other lefties here…..
Report Post »AvengerK
Posted on May 10, 2012 at 11:14amSY212…thank you also. I don’t try to convert you to christianity and you understand that some communities are the way they are and should be left to their daily lives.
Report Post »God bless you (and that’s not to insult you).
Dismayed Veteran
Posted on May 10, 2012 at 11:35amSy
Thank you. There is enough hate in the world, we don’t have to manufacture our own.
Report Post »macporsche71
Posted on May 10, 2012 at 1:22pmSy,
Thank you for your kind words, to bad many here opposing this sign don’t just understand what your saying. I’m sure if you came to my house for diner, you wouldn’t mind us praying before we eat. So tonight in your honor I will forgo my prayers before diner thinking of the only kind athiest here.
Best wishes and safe travels to you.
Report Post »Stoic one
Posted on May 10, 2012 at 10:43amAbout time.
Report Post »GetRight
Posted on May 10, 2012 at 10:43amWay to go Sylvania! Finally some people standing up to FFRF! Proud to be a fellow Alabama Christian!
Report Post »BurntHills
Posted on May 10, 2012 at 10:40amteh obama-led atheists (communists) have taken their 45 Declared Goals and have expanded them to include every single expression of Faith across America.
45 Declared Goals of the Communist TakeOver of America (1963):
Report Post »#27. Infiltrate the churches and replace revealed religion with “social” religion. Discredit the Bible and emphasize the need for intellectual maturity, which does not need a “religious crutch.”
#28. Eliminate prayer or any phase of religious expression in the schools (AND IN PUBLIC EVERYWHERE) on the ground that it violates the principle of “separation of church and state.”
Locked
Posted on May 10, 2012 at 11:02amJust an FYI, those 45 goals were written by Cleon Skousen in his book “The Naked Communist,” which warned of the rise of Communism. No actual socialist ever made such a list; they were what Skousen believed would be their goals. Saying they are the “Declared Goals” is quite the exaggeration; while most line up with various socialist groups’ views, implying there is some sinister “List” governing all the actions of socialists is a falsity. It’s akin to having an atheist write up a list that all Christians want to accomplish. How much stock would you put in such a list?
I’d recommend reading the entire list: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Naked_Communist
Many conservatives and Constitutionalists would approve of several points today, such as doing away with loyalty oaths, resisting the outlawing of political parties, and getting rid of the House Un-American Activities Committee (which happened in 1975). Many others are outdated, as the USSR is gone.
Report Post »ReddenBlack
Posted on May 10, 2012 at 10:39amThats fine, we can get a federal order demanding the verses be taken down. Then, if they don’t comply, the city council can be held in federal jail without a trial until the law is obeyed.
Report Post »Gonzo
Posted on May 10, 2012 at 10:47amWhy are you so stinking bitter that you would care what some small town in Alabama wants on their signs anyway? Grow up, it‘s not the rest of the world’s job to make sure you go through life without ever being offended.
Report Post »Coralchristie
Posted on May 10, 2012 at 10:51amSo get your court order that enforces an unconstitutional use of federal power. Standing against tyranny is important even though costly. Those who attack others freedom of speech and their right to display that freedom are more akin to Nazi’s than anything else.
Report Post »CougarNick78
Posted on May 10, 2012 at 10:52amFOAD you godless jackhole. We? YOU are the 2-3% that are acting like brats. States Rights, MF.
Report Post »CougarNick78
Posted on May 10, 2012 at 10:57amAnd one more thing, BRING IT ON! I don’t forsee MANY Southern local & state judges cowtowing to the feds, you Nazi D-Bag.
Report Post »Mark0331
Posted on May 10, 2012 at 10:59amReally, you want to live in a world like that?…your ‘side’ uses twisted logic and you need a Government to step in to everything and control through laws and ‘orders’…First, try reading and comprehending the 1st Amendment, 8th Grade kids do it everyday…Secondly, move to N.Korea where you will live with orders everyday on how to eat,live,dress,think etc..you scream for someone to dictate to you because you cannot fathom reason nor reason on your own…pathetic…your hatred of Religion has left you lacking in basic reading comprehension skills…you are, with every post you write, the poster child for the brainwashed and misinformed…think for yourself, do not regurgitate talking points from some leftist rag or off some OWS poster….do not reply, because I will not and do not care to ‘spar’ with the brainwashed…Have a great day.
Report Post »Intense66
Posted on May 10, 2012 at 11:06amBest of luck to you guys there in Alabama! I have to say…I love the Sooner state. Earlier this week I was driving through a small town and on a chain link fence surrounding an elementary school, they had used styrofoam cups inserted into the chain link to write “Pray for ……. (boys name)” along with a cross also made of styrofoam cups. Yes, a school and I loved it, I also then said a quick prayer for the little boy who I didn’t even know or know exactly why he needed prayers, but it didn’t matter! I would dare any of these FFRF people to come and challange that as they would be quickly run out of town. We stand together strong and united out here in the Bible belt.
Report Post »nolefan2
Posted on May 10, 2012 at 11:06amWhy are you atheists so afraid of God? You don’t believe He exists. That which doesn‘t exist can’t hurt you, can it? You would be better spending your time on something other than harassing people about something you don’t believe in.
Report Post »ReddenBlack
Posted on May 10, 2012 at 11:09am@Gonzo, etc…
Sorry, I have this craaaaazy idea that we should obey they law. So when the constitution says “congress shall make no law abridging the freedom of religion” and then the town abridges my freedom to be athiest by saying that I, as a resident, believe in those nonsense bible verses, that’s breaking the law. It’s not about being “offended” its about breaking the law.
Report Post »AvengerK
Posted on May 10, 2012 at 11:15amREDDENBLACK….did you take Christmas day off from work last year?
Report Post »ReddenBlack
Posted on May 10, 2012 at 11:29am@avengerk YUP, whats your point? Of course, since I work for myself, I can kind of do that everyday.
But even if I were going to play along with you, the fact that it’s a federal holiday is wrong too. It lessend by the fact that there is one federal holiday in every month, including MLK day and columbus day which have no religious significance at all.
But I’ll just get right to the point, yes, I don’t like that most business close on xmas. Although, since most employees don’t have the keys to the office, it would be kind of hard to protest by going to work.
Report Post »RJJinGadsden
Posted on May 10, 2012 at 11:42amHaving been to Sylvania many, many times, I would imagine that if should a court order occur. The owner of the nearest private property would likely gladly have the sign located there. Just a few feet from the right of way, but in plain sight.
Report Post »AvengerK
Posted on May 10, 2012 at 12:31pmSo let me get this straight REDDENBLACK….you recognize a Christian holiday when it suits you? Yes? Give your kids Christmas presents too?
Futhermore, local, state and federal bodies recognize the same holiday…and yes it’s listed as a Holiday. So when you lobby for the removal of the holiday from the national calendar, I’ll take your bitter atheist crap more seriously. I‘ll tell you why you dont’ lobby to remove Christmas from the national calendar. It‘s because you’ll hurt your little war on Christianity by creating a PR disaster for yourselves. People like their Christmas holidays. So until I see you put your money where your mealy mouth is..you’re a joke.
Furthermore, I’ve worked on holidays in the past. Managers don’t mind their subordinates coming in during off hours to get work done with proper approvals. So spare me your ridiculous “don’t have the keys” garbage.
Report Post »Bruce P.
Posted on May 10, 2012 at 12:32pmRRJING — that is all well and fine. If someone wants to put such a sign on PRIVATE property, that is their right and no one can stop them.
Report Post »TEIN
Posted on May 10, 2012 at 12:50pm@Reddenblack, what you just described is a Federal government endorsement of an Atheist state ran religion, based on the theology of secularism….Atheist is based on belief like any religion, but if it can mandate by federal decree its governing theology and enforced by court and law, then welcome to the state religion of Atheistism….
Report Post »momrules
Posted on May 10, 2012 at 10:38amPray and fight on Alabama Christians. It is YOUR town, not the weak ex- mayors ot the FFRF’s.
The FFRF is a battle regiment of Satan.
Report Post »BurntHills
Posted on May 10, 2012 at 10:37amgood for them! stand strong!! atheism is one more arm of communism.
Report Post »