Hi y'all - the ffrf have filed a lawsuit. I'm happy to contribute, but I fear they will lose this one!
On Nov 26, 2:04 pm, "Jason (Memphis)" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I think that Daniels meant respect for religious beliefs but no > respects for ideas that contradict those religious beliefs, that is, > selective respect for those who think like him and disrespects and > censorship for those who don't. ;-) > > Jason > > On Nov 25, 6:51 pm, ornamentalmind <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > ""We didn't say they had to (take it down), but they respected the > > concerns > > of residents," Daniels said. " > > > Clearly, IF respect of the concerns of residents were the issue, there > > would be no churches in cities that have atheists...oh, wait...did I > > say that? !!!! > > > On Nov 25, 1:33 pm, CrossBow <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > Controversial 'Imagine No Religion' billboard removed in Rancho > > > Cucamonga By > > > Joe Smilor on November 20, 2008 10:01 PM > > > > A billboard with the message "Imagine No Religion" is no more. > > > > Sign company General Outdoor removed the sign by the Freedom From Religion > > > Foundation on Thursday after it received a request by Rancho Cucamonga to > > > do > > > so. > > > > According to Redevelopment Director Linda Daniels, City Hall had received > > > 90 > > > calls of complaint since Wednesday. > > > > "We contacted the sign company and asked if there was a way to get it > > > removed," Daniels said. > > > > The billboard -- which went up last week on the southwest corner of > > > Archibald Avenue and Foothill Boulevard -- is part of a national billboard > > > campaign by the Wisconsin-based group advocating the separation of church > > > and state. > > > > The foundation's co-president, Annie Laurie Gaylor, said the billboard is > > > meant to encourage a debate on religion by using the John Lennon-inspired > > > message. > > > > Gaylor was shocked over the city's role in the billboard's demise. > > > > "The city has no business suggesting our billboard be censored," Gaylor > > > said. "They're not allowed to interfere over religious controversy." > > > > It was the second billboard to come down following city request. > > > > In September, the city asked a different sign company to take down an > > > advertisement on Foothill Boulevard advertising a vagina rejuvenation > > > procedure. > > > > Daniels said the city did not demand General Outdoor take down the > > > "Imagine > > > No Religion" sign. > > > > "We didn't say they had to (take it down), but they respected the concerns > > > of residents," Daniels said. > > > > The sign was the first in California for the foundation, whose members are > > > atheists and agnostics. > > > > Gaylor said sign companies have declined business before, but no company > > > has > > > taken down a sign after it went up. > > > > The group currently has signs in Atlanta, Phoenix and Seattle. > > > > "My gosh, we have a billboard in Colorado Springs right now, about a mile > > > from Focus on the Family," said Gaylor, referring to the evangelical > > > organization headquartered in Colorado Springs. "If we can have it in > > > Colorado Springs, why not in Rancho Cucamonga? It doesn't speak well for > > > the > > > state of tolerance if you have to stifle your critics." > > > > Peter Scheer, executive director of the California First Amendment > > > Coalition, said the city's actions are "dangerously close" to censorship > > > and > > > a violation of the First Amendment. > > > > "A city government has no business trying to dictate or influence the > > > content of an advertising image, particularly one that's political and > > > controversial as this is simply because some people don't like it and > > > complained about it," Scheer said. "The whole point of the First Amendment > > > is to protect speech that is unpopular, to protect the views that are in > > > the > > > political minority, as long as they don't cross the line and use the > > > speech > > > for some seriously unlawful purpose, which clearly did not happen here." > > > > Scheer said the city may not have forced General Outdoor to take down the > > > sign, but it's obvious the company did not act independently. > > > > "It's pretty clear that if the city didn't pick up the phone, the image > > > would still be there," Scheer said. > > > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] Hide quoted text - > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text - --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Memphis Freethought Alliance" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/memphisfreethoughtalliance?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
