"Santa Monica's attorney, Barry A. Rosenbaum, said the city is "very pleased" with the ruling. The judge, he said, "understood the government interests and that [groups wanting to put up displays] have a number of alternatives to erect displays." "
The residents should be happy - less money they'll be spending to guard plywood cutouts from vandals or to oversee a lottery to allocate space fairly, only to have people whine that they want more than their fair share. So again, why can't churches use their own property instead of government property to set up a nativity?Answer Question
Answer by Dardenella at 12:24 PM on Nov. 20, 2012
Answer by Sebbiemama at 1:55 PM on Nov. 20, 2012
Answer by Nos4 at 2:50 PM on Nov. 20, 2012
Answer by sahmamax2 at 8:44 PM on Nov. 20, 2012
Answer by Simply_Janeen at 1:28 PM on Nov. 24, 2012
The problem is not with the atheist who fairly won a spot in the lottery and put up a display that was meaningful to him. The problem is with the groups that felt that they deserved special privileges granting them alone the right to put their religious scenes on public property. I don't know what that part of the country is like, but in my part, you can't throw a stone without hitting a church. There is plenty of space that is available on church property to display whatever sort of nativity scene they wish, and be assured that it will be well within view of the public. There is absolutely no reason that that sort of display should be erected and protected on public property. None.
Answer by jsbenkert at 12:28 PM on Dec. 7, 2012