ACLU - BS

Ponycat · Post by **Ponycat** » Tue Aug 08, 2006 9:49 am

So I guess public officials can't partake in anything religious. Thanks ACLU your really looking out for us.

ACLU vs. NOLA Parish

The American Civil Liberties Union is protesting a Hurricane Katrina memorial in Saint Bernard Parish, Louisiana, because it features a cross and the face of Jesus. State ACLU Executive Director Joe Cook says the government promotion of a religious symbol violates the Constitution and therefore the project should be killed.

But Parish President Henry Rodriguez says the memorial will be located on private land and is being funded by private donations. Rodriguez was not receptive to the ACLU's complaints saying, "They can kiss my backside," though that is not the word he used. He says he and others volunteered their time for the project.

The ACLU insists that even if the memorial is privately funded some public officials are working on it and their efforts amount to government endorsement of religion.

Post by **SonomaCat** » Tue Aug 08, 2006 10:11 am

Yeah ... I disagree with the ACLU on this one. If it's on private property and privately funded, I don't think government should have any real say in it. And if the public officials are doing this on their own time, it seems like a no-brainer to me.

Ponycat · Post by **Ponycat** » Tue Aug 08, 2006 10:16 am

Bay Area Cat wrote:Yeah ... I disagree with the ACLU on this one. If it's on private property and privately funded, I don't think government should have any real say in it. And if the public officials are doing this on their own time, it seems like a no-brainer to me.

I haven't been able to find any more specifics , but as it's written it seems the ACLU is in the wrong.

The article is from the Fox News Grapevine. In the interest of full disclosure.

Post by **SonomaCat** » Tue Aug 08, 2006 10:19 am

I found another article that spoke to it (but I didn't think to save the link), but the only potential argument that it added was that the land the monument is going on is in a public waterway that has widened through time. So the land was originally private dry land, but now it is underwater.

I'm not sure how stream access laws work there, but it sounds like research is ongoing as to whether that "land" is still private land, or if it is instead public land.