theists...
The
Woonsocket Call reported April 23 2012 that the city
is exploring its options. “I have no intention of removing
the cross under any circumstances,” the newspaper quoted
Mayor Fontaine saying.
It gives me great
pleasure and pride to say I once
lived in Woonsocket & vicinity,
after hearing and reading of all
the good people back there who
are standing up and being
counted for their religious
belief's. Congratulations are in
order for the Pepin Lumber Co.
family for their mass-production
of christian crosses for the
legal defense fund.
Congratulations are also in
order for Richard Fagnant For
the production of T shirts for
this cause, and his effort to
aid the defense fund. I have a
suggestion that may save
Woonsocket and residents a lot
of headaches as well as cash. As
follows: The City of Woonsocket
could possibly donate that
portion of land that the cross
is displayed on, to a church, or
sell it for one dollar, therefor
it would no longer be considered
public property. Thank you, God
bless you all & GOD BLESS
AMERICA.
|
Reload
Since 1972 Who we are... Back |
A Formal Organization of
Atheists -
Updated
2012-06-02 |
|
It's Happening again... The Woonsocket Cross Controversy |
|
|
Links
|
|
|
To donate to
KEEP the Woonsocket memorial please mail your donation to: |
|
|
THE
CALL |
|
| May 29, 2012 | Woonsocket remembers its heroes |
| May 29, 2012 | State takes over city finances |
| May 27, 2012 | City to state: HELP! |
| May 27, 2012 Robert Allard |
Pepin Lumber / Richard Fagnant Woonsocket Cross |
| May 27, 2012 GodVlogger |
ILLEGAL cross will cost LOTS of money
$15,000 is merely
a drop in the bucket of what it
will cost to defend the ILLEGAL
cross.
These cases cost hundreds of thousands of dollars, sometimes into the low millions of dollars depending how far you hang in there, only to end up paying not only your own legal fees but ALSO the fees of the atheist group that wins the lawsuit against you. Meanwhile, the groups that promise money or free legal help often end up bailing out once it gets to court and they realize that they can not win a case of defending something that is illegal. The town can run all the bake sales it wants to raise a few pennies here and there, but in the end the WISE thing to do will be to find a way to move the cross to a respectable and even more prominent location (saves face for the town) that is NOT on government property (thus it will no longer be illegal and the town will not waste the money). |
| May 27, 2012 GodVlogge |
Move the cross, using the $15,000
While $15,000
will not pay even 10-percent of
the cost of the lawsuit to
defend the illegal cross.....
$15,000 would be LOTS of money to spend on a beautiful display of the cross on some non-government property. Damn, for $15,000 it could be the best, most amazing display in Rhode Island.... OR... instead you could waste the money (and about a half-million dollars more) trying to defend the illegal cross, only to lose in the end. Will the local politicians be brave enough to do what is correct and fiscally responsible for their city, or will they cave in to all the hoopla and religious fervor while taking their city finances further down the tubes??? ~~ GodVlogger (on YouTube) |
| May 24, 2012 by Chris Allen | Woonsocket will need a lot more money to take this to court. Utah just lost its case to keep its memorial cross monuments on public property. The U.S. Supreme court ordered the crosses removed and ordered Utah to pay nearly $400,000 in court costs. See http://tinyurl.com/77r9qxq. Even if Woonsocket gets "free" legal support from the Liberty Counsel or the ACLJ, those organizations will not pay those assessed court costs if Woonsocket loses. |
| May 3, 2012 bigpouliot |
Saying a prayer
before the city councel meeting The people who rallied yesterday are the same people who would rally if there was a monument that had a budist, muslim, hindu or any other religions icon. There would be outrage. I also have a problem with saying a prayer before the city councel meeting. If i request a jewish or muslim prayer before the city council meeting, would I get it. Absolutely not. You either include all or none. Just because the majority is Cristian, doesn't meen that everyone is. The constitution says seperation of church and state. It is about time that is enforced. |
| May 3, 2012 Snoopys Woodstock | The cross stands for love. How can love be illegal and disrespectful? |
| May 2, 2012 RUSS OLIVO | Hundreds rally in defense of memorial |
| May 2, 2012 by The Chorus |
2010 Salazar vs. Buono (Wikipedia: Salazar v. Buono, 559 U.S. ___ (2010) was a decision by the Supreme Court of the United States regarding the establishment clause of the First Amendment to the United States Constitution. The case concerned the legality of the Mojave Memorial Cross, a Latin cross which was placed atop a prominent rock outcropping, by the VFW foundation, in 1934 to honor war dead. The Supreme Court ruled that the cross may stay, but also sent the case back to a lower court, making the issue currently unresolved. [Washington Post]) |
| May 2, 2012 Ruth1940 |
History and Civics Lessons Badly Needed
A cross has never
been a symbol for the United
States of America or for
veterans. People of all
religions and none (such as Pat
Tillman) have served (and died
for) our country. To have put
the cross up in the first place
was likely simply ignorant, but
to insist on keeping it after
being advised is unconscionable.
It is reasonable to believe that some Jewish Americans think of the centuries of Christian ant-Semitism when they see crosses and that Muslims would be reminded of the Crusades. Apparently many in this town are unaware of the war heros of religions different from theirs. Or are they unaware of the history of the cross in connection with Christianity? Surely they have better uses of their money than to fight this. Religionists just love to spread the myth that there are no atheists in foxholes (much as they like to spread their myths about gods) Some other atheists in foxholes: Militaryatheists.org |
|
May 1, 2012 RUSS OLIVO |
Michigan man visits City Hall to give fund $1,000 |
|
May 24, 2012 Chris Allen |
$15,000 to defend cross monument |
| May 11, 2012 |
The city of Woonsocket has raised $15,000 for a fund established to defend against a potential lawsuit over a monument topped with a cross that has drawn a complaint from an atheist group. Mayor Leo Fontaine said this week that donations have been coming in from around the country. A local lumber company that's been making and selling Latin Crosses... [continued] [more] |
|
|
|
|
|
From Chris Allen In case you don't already know, our recent victory in Utah in the Highway Patrol Cross case makes a great precedent to point out to R.I. I heard your discussion on the radio, and this case is very similar. You're even getting the same rationalizations back that we got. In Utah the Highway Patrol Association started erecting 12 foot steel crosses on public property with the UHP logo on them to memorialize troopers who died in the line of duty. They argued that the crosses were not religious, just traditional memorials. We won in a strong decision from the Tenth Circuit Appeals Court, and the U.S. Supreme Court denied certiorari. The Supreme Court met three times to consider it, and Clarence Thomas wrote a dissent to the denial. The list of briefs filed against us is a virtual Who's Who of the religious right. All the crosses on public property have now been removed to private property, and the UHP logo has been removed as ordered. It's all collected and listed at: Atheists.org/content/steel-crosses-utah-highways, including legal briefs on both sides, news articles, and some speeches. I Hope this helps you to persuade the mayor of Woonsocket ( FFRF.org/news/releases/ffrf-contests-more-Rhode-island-religion/) to remove his cross. |
|
|
