OK for Las Cruces to Have Three Crosses on Its City Seal:
So says a Tenth Circuit opinion handed down today. (The court also upholds the use of similar imagery in some other government displays around town.)
The Supreme Court has held that government endorsement of religion usually violates the Establishment Clause, and quite a few circuit cases have applied this test to strike down the use of religious imagery in city seals. But the Tenth Circuit concludes — in my view, quite correctly — that "Las Cruces's unique history explains why the City's name translates as 'The Crosses' and, relatedly, why the City uses crosses in its symbol," and this explanation shows that reasonable observers wouldn't see the seal as an attempt to endorse Christianity.
Here's the star of the show:
Admittedly, I think that icon looks like something you would find at some strange sun-worshipping cult.
What would a normal sun-worshipping cult's icon look like?
On the whole, though, a city whose name, translated into English, is "The Crosses" should be able to include, you know, crosses in its seal. I think the 10th Circuit got the case right.
Ask the DNC Convention? ;)
Pamela Anderson.
And don't stop at Las Cruces. How dare a government entity imply that Francis of Assisi was a saint! Make them change the name to "Mr. Francis."
By the way, note the citation to Wikipedia on page 29 of the opinion!
If you look at America's and the West's cultural heritage, it's every bit as pagan as it is Christian. Does having the 5th day of the week named after my favorite Deity Thor the Thunder God signify Thor Worship? Or does having the third month of the year named after Mars bringer of war imply we are a Greek God worshipping nation? If we can get the secular side to understand these things are the equivalent of Mars and Thor worship perhaps they'd stop filing these lawsuits. But we also need to get the religious side to understand America was NOT founded to be a "Christian Nation" in a public or civil sense. They irk the secular side on with their species "Christian Nation" arguments.
Las Signos Más.
Speaking from the secular side, I think the vast majority here do understand it. But there's always somebody, and it only takes one to file a lawsuit. (Way to go Paul Weinbaum!)
Not Sun worship, Son worship.
It isn't only secularists that need to get a life.
I think somebody should have sued and, if the law is truly majestic, the 5th Circuit should have forbidden the Navy to accommodate religion in such a silly way.
Wait 'till the Ward Churchill/Michael Newdow contingent realizes what Indiana was named after.
The dog?
And maybe change San Francisco to Mr. Francisco?
9.12.2008 6:55pm
That's Senor Francisco to you, gringo.
What? It's named "Indiana" because our largest city is Indianapolis. That means "State that has Indianapolis".
I have swum off beaches named Misquamiket, Quanankatog, and drunk Narragansett beer. Lived in CT, MA, MI. I've traveled in states where half the counties have an Indian name and the other half have names vaguely reminiscent of the Revolutionary War or the War of 1812. (And a few towns obviously named by veterans of the Mexican-American War) Somewhere in there are probably a hundred references to a deity. I think we could profitably direct the ACLU's excess energy thataway.
AIM vs. ACLU. You could sell tickets.
This atheist agrees. It's kind of a neat design.