Groundbreaking ATHEIST MONUMENT To Be Unveiled At Florida Courthouse

[Segami]

The Bradford County courthouse in Starke, Florida is getting a new monument. Well, it’s a bench, actually. A bench engraved with atheistic quotes. It will be the very first atheist monument on government property. This is, as Joe Biden would say, a big effing deal. The courthouse already has one monument: a six-ton stone slab bearing the Ten Commandments. That monument was paid for by a Christian Men’s Fellowship group. The American Atheists filed a lawsuit last year to have it removed, claiming that it violated the First Amendment. The atheist group was able to reach a settlement with the county – this new stone bench. American Atheists President David Silverman said in a news release:

“We have maintained from the beginning that the Ten Commandments doesn’t belong on government property. There is no secular purpose for the monument whatsoever and it makes atheists feel like second-class citizens. But if keeping it there means we have the right to install our own monument, then installing our own is exactly what we’ll do.”
http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2013/05/29/florida-courthouse-to-see-countrys-first-atheist-monument/

The unveiling will take place on June 29 at noon, marking a milestone in the history of American free speech. While there are many courthouses in the country that boast some kind of Ten Commandments monument, there are none – indeed, no government building of any kind – that have a monument representative of any other religious or non-religious groups. But this is America and our First Amendment enshrines both freedom of (and from) religion and freedom of speech. For this reason alone, the American Atheists’ monument will be groundbreaking. As for the Community Men’s Fellowship, they are taking it very well. On their Facebook page, they wrote:

“We want you all to remember that this issue was won on the basis of this being a free speech issue, so don’t be alarmed when the American Atheists want to erect their own sign or monument. It’s their right. As for us, we will continue to honor the Lord and that’s what matters.”

https://www.facebook.com/permalink.php?story_fbid=599781366718510&id=192924297404221

Now that’s what I call gracious. Their page is public so, if you feel so moved, you can go leave a message thanking them for being both Christian and American. I did. As for what will be on the atheist monument, The American Atheists’ press release tells us that an excerpt from the Treaty of Triploi will figure prominently. That paper, which was written by then-president John Adams includes the statement:

“The United States is in no sense founded on the Christian religion”
http://news.atheists.org/2013/05/29/press-release-atheists-to-unveil-florida-courthouse-monument/

There are also quotes from Thomas Jefferson, Madalyn Murray O’Hair, Benjamin Franklin and even a few excerpts from the Bible. Those will quote biblical punishments for breaking the Ten Commandments. An interesting choice.

cont'




http://www.addictinginfo.org/2013/05/31/groundbreaking-atheist-monument-to-be-unveiled-at-florida-courthouse/

[Buzz Clik]

1. When will atheists open their first temple?

[Segami]

2. To worship what....?

[Zorra]

3. Nothing? nt

[Ready4Change]

76. Seems fair.

They think all other churches exist to worship nothing, so why shouldn't they have one too?

[Buzz Clik]

4. No idea.

The idea of an atheist monument -- even just a bench -- is odd enough.

[sinkingfeeling]

26. Like having ten commandment monuments on the public square?

[Buzz Clik]

39. I don't like that at all, but I understand it.

Misguided fundies think they get closer to God by constructing idols.

[cordelia]

7. Richard Dawkins

[Puzzledtraveller]

12. This guy?

[sibelian]

115. Reality?

It's certainly pretty and meaningful enough.

I don't see why not.

[KansDem]

19. Here...

It's where I go to seek inner peace and fulfillment and to get a glimpse of the hereafter.

[Buzz Clik]

38. I've BEEN there! I hope I didn't defile it.

[Chan790]

20. There is one in London, England. Lots in US if you count Ethical Societies.

http://www.dw.de/godless-gatherings-in-londons-atheist-church/a-16709978

The Supreme Court does: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Washington_Ethical_Society_v._District_of_Columbia

[Buzz Clik]

41. Alrighty then.

I got nothin'

[Spitfire of ATJ]

92. Already have...

They are part of our search for the nature of the universe.

[Puzzledtraveller]

5. Oy vey!

[Javaman]

6. As an Atheist, I find this silly. nt

[Puzzledtraveller]

8. A religion is not dependent on a belief in a deity.

This is territory atheists should not be interested in going isn't it?

[Segami]

11. Why silly...?

“The monument emphasizes the role secularism has played in American history,” said Public Relations Director Dave Muscato. “And the Bible quotes make it clear that the Ten Commandments are not the ‘great moral code’ they’re often portrayed to be. Don’t kill, don’t steal? Of course. But worship only the Judeo-Christian god? That conflicts overtly with the very first right in the Bill of Rights, freedom of religion.”

“When it comes to government and religion, there are only two ways to show equality: all or none,” said Ken Loukinen, Regional Operations Director. “I am glad that Bradford County has chosen to show equality and will be a great example for other cities in Florida and the United States.”

The monument is being furnished by American Atheists via a grant from the Stiefel Freethought Foundation.

http://news.atheists.org/2013/05/29/press-release-atheists-to-unveil-florida-courthouse-monument/

[Javaman]

14. Erecting a monument to a non-belief.

that's silly.

[MindPilot]

30. It is not a "monumentent to non-belief".

It is a worldview part of which confines superstition and mythology to fiction.

Since Christianity is the default, atheists are always at a disadvantage by having to define themselves by what they are not.

Basically since they get to keep their bible quotes, we get to have our Ingersall quotes.

[Javaman]

44. I still find it silly.

I've been an atheist since the age of 7.

And I still don't see the point. Especially, under the auspicious of Atheism.

If any "monument" must be erected to "commemorate" Atheism, it should be to a famous person whom embodied it.

Aside from that. still silly.

[Segami]

46. You may be missing AA's 'intent' for erecting the bench...

see post #37.

[Javaman]

49. Unless I have questonable reading skills...

post #37 agrees with me.

"The only sane way to show equality on this issue when it comes to government is for them to stay the hell out of it. Period. Accepting a compromise that lets them keep up a clear religious endorsement of one particular limited grouping of those religions in front of a government courthouse just because they let you put up a second monument you like better is IDIOTIC. This isn't some groundbreaking accomplishment, it's a SETBACK."

[Segami]

51. My mistake...sorry.

see post #43.

[Javaman]

56. Still doesn't work for me...

Frankly, I think just filing a civil suit, as many people have done successfully in the past, to have the 10 commandments removed, would have been better.

Because in the end, in a few years, this monument will fade into the background just like the 10 commandments had until someone points it out again. And the whole mess starts all over, yet again.

putting up a "counter argument stone" makes sure this will be in the news for a long time and resolves nothing.

[Segami]

62. They did file a civil suit.

On May, 24, 2012, American Atheists and Daniel Cooney, a resident of Bradford County and member of American Atheists, filed suit in the United States District Court, Middle District of Florida. The civil complaint can be read in its entirety here.

In the complaint, American Atheists and Mr. Cooney demanded a declaratory judgement stating that the display of the monument violates the United States Consitution, specifically the Establishment Clause and an injuction requiring the removal of the monument.

http://atheists.org/legal/current/bradford-county

[Javaman]

63. Great. And they are still in mediations.

perhaps after the resolution of the mediations, then they should have petitioned to put up a rock. In the end, I still find it silly. Both by the Atheists and whomever represents the 10 commandments.

this is nothing more than a nuclear arms race with rocks writ small.

[AtheistCrusader]

53. The idea was probably to force their hand.

If they opposed it (which you know they want to do), then all of the other monuments get ripped out too.

Looks like they've called the Atheists bluff for the moment, so now there will ALSO be this bench. The better option would have been to have none of them.

[Javaman]

57. Exactly...

filling the area with more and more monuments to whatever is just completely silly and counter productive in the long run.

filing a civil suit, as many have successfully done in the past, would have been more effective.

[MindPilot]

75. I think they did, and in the choice of all or nothing, this time we got "all"

I would prefer the nothing, but with "all" decision they were probably hoping the atheists would just walk away.

[Javaman]

78. Well that's a hell of a Hobbsian choice.

pretty dumb on the ruling body.

If that is indeed the case, because I just read the report on it and it stated they were still in mediation, but never the less, I would start a drive to raise money for as many religions as possible no matter how unique or rare they are to be represented with a big rock.

[MindPilot]

82. It is, but that is how our courts today look at these cases.

I agree with you--they opted for "all" let 'em have ALL!

[Jim Lane]

90. Considering the long run, this may promote the removal of all religious monuments.

You write that "filling the area with more and more monuments to whatever is just completely silly and counter productive in the long run."

I agree it's silly and removal of all would be better. But, with this precedent, can't the Muslims now demand to put up something saying that there is no God but Allah and Mohammad, PBUH, is his messenger? (Do the Sunnis and the Shiites each get a monument?) In addition, there are certainly some Jews in that county and maybe some Buddhists and whatnot. After all these other monuments are erected, and the authorities then have to try to find a few square feet of empty space for a rock saying "All hail Satan, praise the Dark Lord," they might decide that the whole thing is getting out of hand and just clean house.

That will also spare them from having to litigate whether a Festivus pole is a religious display entitled to equal treatment.

[Segami]

93. +1

Sounds like AA is pushing forward their point through the back door.

[sibelian]

116. I'm quite happy with the atheists bench.

I think it's a good idea.

[liberal_at_heart]

64. maybe we could all be a little more tolerant and allow more people of different backgrounds to

express themselves.

[Javaman]

65. Different backgrounds?

as I stated above, I'm an Atheist.

Call me kooky, but generally speaking all Atheists do not believe in a supreme being or entity.

on edit: if you are talking about the 10 commandments, it's not a matter of being tolerant. it's a matter of the constitution and the very first amendment.

you know, "the United States Constitution 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. It was adopted on December 15, 1791, as one of the ten amendments that comprise the Bill of Rights.

The 10 commandments should be removed. That being there is establishing of religion for that area.

[liberal_at_heart]

67. I mean different beliefs or non beliefs. Maybe you don't feel the need to have a statue but

someone else obviously does. Why are we so obsessed with telling people what they can or cannot do just because it is something we don't want to do? So you don't want or need a statue. What about the people who do feel the need or desire for a statue. Should they not be able to have one just because you don't want one?

[Javaman]

68. reread what I just wrote. I added something nt

[Javaman]

71. It's not a matter of it being up to me or my opinion.

Although I'm an Atheist, I feel the same way about the monument that the Atheists in Florida put up.

Having many "monuments" solves nothing. If we are to be equal under the eyes of the law, me as an atheist am already at a loss when I see the 10 commandments on the front lawn of the court house. See how it works? And the same goes for anyone else that sees the Atheists monument.

there should nothing on that lawn representing any religion or belief of any kind.

[liberal_at_heart]

70. that's why we should allow all faiths, all beliefs, and non beliefs to express themselves.

I don't think keeping all forms of expression out of the public square is the answer. I think allowing all forms of expression in the public square is the answer.

[Javaman]

73. Okay, then...

what of the courthouses in the U.S. that don't have lawns or places to display "monuments"?

No, in order for people to feel they are equal under the eyes of the law, there should be nothing representing any religion or beliefs that could put them in doubt even before they walk through the courthouse doors.

And even trying to attempt to represent all religions and belief systems would put the monument makers for a single court house in business from now until forever. it's virtually impossible to erect a "monument" for every particular religion and belief.

[Zoeisright]

40. It's a monument to common sense.

Grow up.

[Javaman]

47. My, aren't you the charmer.

So my voicing my opinion on a move by a group of atheists is childish in your opinion.

Huh, how about that.

I find it odd that someone must erect a monument to "common sense" as you say, instead of just teaching it.

I'm sure a big rock will go a long way to displaying what the concept of common sense is alright.

By that logic, the big rock with the 10 commandments have been teaching people not to murder for centuries.

[Spitfire of ATJ]

94. Actually, it provides evidence for future generations that not EVERYONE was religious.

[Javaman]

104. We need a monument to state that?

how odd.

[Spitfire of ATJ]

105. Look at archeology now...

Every circle of stones that turns out to be a calendar is STILL stubbornly called a "temple".

[Javaman]

108. time...

something from 3000+ years ago will always fail the test of time unless there is a written record.

So that example is not really the best one.

Currently Nuclear regulators are trying to come up with a sign of some sort to convey to future civilization the meaning of "toxic nuclear fuel rods" that someone will be able to be understood 30,000 years from now. To me, that is way more important than some crazy monument to any religion or non-belief.

we get so caught up in the minutia of life that sometimes we forget just how ridiculous we are as a species.

[Spitfire of ATJ]

109. Do a poll and find out how many people want to make being non-Christian a crime.

[Javaman]

110. I'm an Atheist. I don't care about polls

or who want to make it a crime.

As I stated before, just as christians can learn quite a bit from Matthew 6:6 so can we Atheists.

the monument is still silly.

[Spitfire of ATJ]

112. The symbol is,...looks like something "Atom Ant" would wear on his chest.

[Javaman]

113. Yeah,, and 30,000 years from now they will know exactly what that means.

hell we can't even decipher the Mayan pictograph based language that was in use less that 1500 years ago.

[Spitfire of ATJ]

114. They'll claim it's from a religion that worshiped atomic power....

[Javaman]

117. I love that movie!

I was a bigger fan of the second one than the first one.

[gcomeau]

37. It's silly.

"“When it comes to government and religion, there are only two ways to show equality: all or none,”"

And that quote is why it's silly. ALL or none??? That is just stupid. There are like 5000 religions out there, you want to throw 5000 monuments to them up in front of all the government buildings in the United States in the name of "equality"?

The only sane way to show equality on this issue when it comes to government is for them to stay the hell out of it. Period. Accepting a compromise that lets them keep up a clear religious endorsement of one particular limited grouping of those religions in front of a government courthouse just because they let you put up a second monument you like better is IDIOTIC. This isn't some groundbreaking accomplishment, it's a SETBACK.

[Segami]

43. Quite frankly, I believe the American Atheists organization

will agree with you wholeheartedly!......" putting up a monument you like better is IDIOTIC."


Is it a setback?....I don't think so if their plan is to expose the endorsement of one or more particular religious groups while limiting or blocking the same access to other religious groups.......all or none!

I am speculating that the focus of the American Atheist organization is to 'force the issue' on the practice of erecting religious (Christian) monuments on government properties.

[gcomeau]

52. If they wanted to demonstrate the idiocy and force the issue...

...then they should have arranged for mass demands of monuments to hundreds of different religions to be put up... to the point where they'd practically end up walling off the building.

THAT would have made the point. This is still just silly and stupid and counterproductive.

[Segami]

58. You may not agree with AA's strategy....

but its only a matter of time before other groups demand the SAME consideration for their religious monument. It is forcing the issue as far as I'm concerned. You may not agree with their tactics but it will force this issue one way or another.

[Javaman]

59. I can't predict the future...

but I have this feeling that whomever does put up another "monument" won't garner nearly the same media as this did. And so in the end, you have a courthouse lawn cluttered with a never ending parade of one rock after another, and how does that solve the problem?

it doesn't.

The best would have been filing a civil lawsuit to have the 10 commandments removed as others have done successfully around the nation.

[HappyMe]

61. I think this could backfire big time.

Say a local synagogue wants an obelisk with a Star of David on it. They can't turn them down, just as they can't turn down a Wiccan monument.

The front of that courthouse is going to start to look like a cemetery.

[Segami]

69. Backfire....I doubt it!

If anything, it is exposing the hypocrisy.

You just can't erect a selected few monuments while refusing others.

Let them remove ALL religious monuments from government properties if they don't allow other religious groups the SAME ACCESS of erecting their monuments on government properties.

[HappyMe]

72. Whatever you say.

Your monument will be standing there with all the other religious monuments that are going to go up.

[Segami]

74. That is silly.

No one in their right mind would wager their rent money the substance of your statement.

Thats just NOT in the real world.

[HappyMe]

80. Really?

The ten commanments are there and your atheist thing is there.

Who's to say other religions don't step up and demand that their thingys get put up. No, the silly thing is putting the atheist thing up. Sue them to get the other removed, don't make the problem worse with a thing of your own.

[gcomeau]

66. Not going to work.

Going at it this way is, I repeat, counterproductive.

Instead of making the point that this is stupid, they've legitimized it.

Sure, maybe a third or even... maybe... POSSIBLY a fourth group will come along all by themselves on their own initiative and ask for one too. So what? That's not going to accomplish anything either. What are AA going to say about it now that they're gone on the record stating that it's a totally acceptable practice and put their own up? So maybe, perhaps, possibly at the end of this we end up with 3 or 4 monuments that shouldn't be there up at the courthouse and with AA on the record saying that yeah, it's all good! How the hell is that better?

[Javaman]

81. +1 nt

[Segami]

83. You accept " that 3 or 4 monuments " will be erected

and " with AA on the record saying that yeah, it's all good! "

Why stop at 3 or 4 monuments? Do you honestly believe that all kinds of religious monuments are going to be erected in front of the courthouses or other government buildings?

Sorry, but thats just NOT going to materialize in this political environment....IMHO!

[gcomeau]

88. I said that was best case that could be hoped for with this approach.

And that best case is REALLY BAD. Yeah, a more likely outcome is nothing more happens and all we've seen is AA going on the record as legitimizing displays endorsing specific religions in government buildings and property. Which is also really bad.

Therefore, this strategy is stupid.

[liberal_at_heart]

17. It may seem silly but it may help build more tolerance on both sides

I've told my evangelical father many times that Christians might not receive so much resistence to public displays of religious expression if they would allow others to publicly express their beliefs as well. And it sounds like the men's group who had the Ten Commandments put up is doing so. And in doing so they not only show tolerance but help to create tolerance on the other side. Personally, I would love to see more public displays of belief or non belief. India is a good example of people being allowed to express their beliefs in the public square. There Hindus, Buddhists, Sikhs, Jainists, Taoists, Muslims, Christians, everyone can express themselves. I like this and I love that the Christian men's group is being so tolerant. It sounds like a good thing to me.

[FSogol]

24. I agree. What a waste of time, money, effort, etc. n/t

[awoke_in_2003]

103. Me too. nt

[frogmarch]

9. Why?

We don't need no stinkin' monuments.

[Ligyron]

10. ... and defacement of said monument will no doubt begin June 29th that night.

I live fairly close and am seriously considering going there for the opening. If I remember right, he locals put an electric Jeebus cross on the town water tower at one point. A Prison is the local economy there.

[Drale]

13. They came to a settlement?

So are they going to put up a monument with Islamic quotes? Or Buddhist? Or Jewish? Why only Christian and Athiest, it shows me that people still believe Christianity is the only true religion.

[MindPilot]

32. The door is open to that now. n/t

[el_bryanto]

15. I've never really understood the purpose of putting up the 10 commandments

Other than to make it clear that this is a Christian County and non-Christians (including Atheists, Muslims, Buddhists, and so on) just are second class citizens.

But I suppose if they are going to be allowed to put up their "In your face" monument, than why not allow others to do the same - seems like a step in the right direction.

Good on Bradford County

Bryant

[Mariana]

85. Most of the Ten Commandments are frankly anti-American.

Some of them directly contradict the Bill of Rights, and others prohibit thoughts, rather than actions. I don't know why anyone would want such ideas displayed on public property, and especially not on or near a courthouse, of all places!

[el_bryanto]

91. I don't know about most of them

The first four are specifically religious, and if assumed to be law would contradict the bill of rights. The other 6 are more ethical - although I suppose the prohibition against coveting is prohibiting thoughts feelings. I guess Honor your father and mother is also a matter of the mind and heart. So that leaves 4 that are ok - Adultery, Murder, Lying and Stealing.

The argument in favor of having them up is that they are ancient laws - they form the foundation for what we think of as laws. But that's kind of nonsensical - the Hammurabi Code has just as strong a claim to that position, as do the laws of Ancient Rome or Athens or Sparta, but nobody is putting those up.

Bryant

[Mariana]

101. Six out of ten is most of them.

Even of the other four, only two are normally considered crimes, except in very limited and specific circumstances. Lying is only illegal when one is under oath or is trying to commit fraud. And are there even any adultery cases being prosecuted anywhere in this country anymore?

That leaves two Commandments that actually correspond to what we consider to be crimes.

Since they are almost all completely irrelevant to our system of law and justice, the Ten Commandments don't belong anywhere near any courthouse.

[el_bryanto]

102. yes - should have edited my post after i finished - was sort of thinking outloud nt

[HappyMe]

16. Seems like kind of an odd thing to do.

But if that's what they want..

[Segami]

18. American Atheists are forcing the issue......"all or nothing".

When another tax-paying religious group decides they also want to erect their own monument on public property, the "all or nothing" position will definitely be tested.....it won't be long before another religious group demands to erect their own religious monument or symbol and push this issue to a boil.

[HappyMe]

21. I hope Budhists and all

sorts of religions stick monuments there.


I'm glad I don't have to deal with all this stupid monument war stuff here.

[Lunacee_2013]

22. I may believe in some form of a God, but this seems fair to me.

If ppl can put up monuments to honor what they think, why can't atheists? I just see it as a piece of art that's suppose to make you think.

[LostOne4Ever]

23. Im hoping

That the next monument is Wiccan!

ooooh or to Islam! Can't forget Scientology! Or the Buddha! Or how about one to trickster/Coyote! Oh boy this is going to get fun!

[HappyMe]

27. Sure, why not.

Cake the front of that courthouse with monuments! The more, the merrier.

[backscatter712]

45. Let's set up a FSM monument!

or a Satan monument!

or a Cthulhu monument!

[backscatter712]

48. Actually, I think this painting should be put up at every courthouse!

[LostOne4Ever]

100. YES!!!! (nt)

[OldEurope]

50. And the Spaghettimonster!

RAMEN!

[sinkingfeeling]

25. How much you want to bet the bench is blown up within a year?

[Segami]

35. You may be right...

but I believe the focus of the American Atheist organization is to 'force the issue' on erecting religious monuments on government properties.

Blowing up the bench will only produce headlines once again, challenging the Bill of Rights, freedom of religion issue and pushing this story to the forefront.

[Deep13]

28. cool.

The point of it is two-fold. First, it is a rebuttal to Christianity. Second, by enforcing non-discrimination in religious displays, it discourages the infiltration of religion into governmental property.

[HappyMe]

33. I'm not sure about that.

I think it opens the door for all religions to want to put up a monument there.

[djean111]

29. It just makes me think of Atomic Something.

As an atheist, the whole "atheist symbol" thing seems weird.
But then again, I am not a joiner or whatever, so things like that of any kind seem weird to me. I see no need to identify with other atheists in general, I guess.
I hate to think that, instead of removing religious symbols from government properties, we will just double the number of unneeded symbolic thingies.

[undeterred]

31. happy atheist symbol

[djean111]

34. Bwah!!!

Still looks like a deceitful ad or symbol in a Duke Power commercial. ""Nuke plants are GOOD!!!!"
Like BP's cheery sun or flower or whatever it is.

[HappyMe]

36. Yeah, it does

have that happy nuke thing going for it!

[Walk away]

42. Does this make Atheists more accessible to believers????

I am a life long Atheist and I have never had a symbol. I have always thought that symbols were for people who needed something to represent some "thing" like a Christ, Allah or Beelzebub. What on Earth do I need a symbol for?

[liberal_at_heart]

60. well just because you don't doesn't mean someone else doesn't.

I see nothing wrong with allowing someone who feels left out and discriminated against a symbol and a chance to have their beliefs expressed and accepted.

[hrmjustin]

54. Interesting design!

I am not for putting religious things in government buildings at all. I am not sure this should be there either, but as long as the religious stuff is there I say keep this there as well.

[Pragdem]

55. As an atheist, I consider this a stupid idea.

As much as the 10 commandments being plastered everywhere.

I understand the point they're trying to make, but nothing constructive will result from it.

[Mariana]

77. What is it about the Ten Commandments?

Especially at courthouses? Several of the Commandments directly contradict the Bill of Rights. Why would anyone want such anti-American statements displayed on public property?

[madrchsod]

79. both are childish

i think christ would wonder why nothing he said is etched in stone.personally i like the praying in the dark not on the street corner and that`s lost on a lot today`s christians. as for the atheist bench it seems to me a see we can do this too.

by the time everything is said and done it`s somewhere for someone to sit on their ass to rest. now that`s something everyone can agree on.

[Egalitarian Thug]

96. Few of his followers seem to pay much attention to what he is reported to have said. n/t

[Fla Dem]

84. Unfortunately the bench does not resolve the underlying issue.

"The American Atheists filed a lawsuit last year to have it removed, claiming that it violated the First Amendment. The atheist group was able to reach a settlement with the county – this new stone bench."

I take from this the lawsuit never reach court. Therefore the separation of church and state principle was never argued or ruled on. I'm glad the atheists got their bench and there are some good quotes inscribed on it, but a better result would have been the removal of the Ten Commandments slab.

[Segami]

87. I believe their long term intent

is to have ALL monuments removed, Ten Commandments, Bench et al.

[NCTraveler]

86. Fundy Atheists.

We have it all in Florida. Come visit, it is a fun ride.

[HappyMe]

89. !!!

Well, it certainly seems to be action packed.

[Anymouse]

98. Yeah, we're all fundamentalists . . .

. . . propounding the Gospel of Reason, and the Epistle of Logic.

[kentauros]

95. So, when do we get to put up a monument to J.R. "BoB" Dobbs?

I'm thinking the design should be a giant pipe, perhaps with holograms of "BoB" at the sucking end and tiny Nazi UFOs floating out of the perpetual smoke. We could etch all of our slogans into the pipe, while the smoke would smell of hashish.

It would also double as a marriage ceremony altar.

Sounds like a plan to me!

[Anymouse]

97. And as soon as the Satanists . . .

. . . or Westboro Baptist Church want a monument, watch how fast they all go away.

[LostOne4Ever]

111. I dont think Satanists would be taken seriously

From my understanding most Satanists are atheists who are celebrating a revolt against authority.

I think a Wiccan monument would get under their skins far more as its a legitimate religion that they absolutely hate. Or maybe a monument to islam.

[Sugarcoated]

99. LOL

[distantearlywarning]

106. A settlement?

Since when do we get to reach "settlements" about aspects of the US Constitution?

I don't want the ten commandments OR an "atheist monument" on my local courthouse. I don't want ANYTHING on my local courthouse that has ANYTHING to do with religion at all. Period.

IMO, this is a seriously fucked up compromise and a seriously fucked up precedent.

[Capt. Obvious]

107. Before reading responses to this thread

I'm going to guess that some members will pretend to be persecuted and whine about atheists being jerks (and throw in a jab that atheism is a religion)