The one monument atheists want down

Wednesday, February 15, 2017
 | 
Charlie Butts (OneNewsNow.com)

10 Commandments monument (Bloomfield, NM)A small New Mexico town is taking on court battles to retain a historical display at city hall.

In 2007, the city of Bloomfield, population 8,000, erected a stone Ten Commandments monument at city hall. Two atheists didn't like it and filed suit to have it removed. In 2014, a federal judge ruled the monument unconstitutional.

Alliance Defending Freedom senior legal counsel Jonathan Scruggs tells OneNewsNow the city also erected other monuments to comply with court decisions in other jurisdictions. All of the monuments were privately funded and placed in a public forum in order to beautify the city.

"A Declaration of Independence, a Bill of Rights monument, a monument of the Gettysburg Address – all these monuments share a common theme of acknowledging our history and heritage in America," Scruggs explains. "Unfortunately, the Tenth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals disagreed."

Scruggs

According to Scruggs, the Tenth Circuit essentially said that because the Ten Commandments monument was set up first and the other historical items later, favoritism was shown toward religious elements – thus inferring a religious purpose behind the monument.

"We don't think that the legality of it should turn on something like that and should turn on what actually is presently in the area," Scruggs says. "You have all these monuments [in the display], and the Ten Commandments monument is actually the smallest compared to the Declaration of Independence and the others."

On behalf of the town of Bloomfield, ADF is appealing to the U.S. Supreme Court to hear the case and clarify what the Establishment Clause requires. The high court, says ADF, has ruled in the past that a passive monument – like the one in Bloomfield – accompanied by others acknowledging America's religious heritage cannot be interpreted as an establishment of religion.

We moderate all reader comments, usually within 24 hours of posting (longer on weekends). Please limit your comment to 300 words or less and ensure it addresses the article - NOT another reader's comments. Comments that contain a link (URL), an inordinate number of words in ALL CAPS, rude remarks directed at other readers, or profanity/vulgarity will not be approved. More details

SIGN UP FOR OUR DAILY NEWSBRIEF

SUBSCRIBE

VOTE IN OUR POLL

How would you describe Obama's last-minute rule preventing abortion-providers from being denied federal funding?

CAST YOUR VOTE

GET PUSH NOTIFICATIONS

SUBSCRIBE

LATEST AP HEADLINES

Could 'Nexit' follow Brexit after Dutch elections?
Iraqi forces advance on Islamic State-held western Mosul
Malaysia looks for 4 North Korean suspects who left country
US vice president visits former Nazi concentration camp
Last-2nd launch delay for SpaceX at historic moon pad
Silver: NBA will keep eye on state's inclusion policies
Arpaio successor pulls back on immigration holds in jails
DC Council chair: Council to revisit paid family leave bill

LATEST FROM THE WEB

Priebus: NY Times 'fake news'
Christian's Muslim attackers 'tormented by visions of blood'
McCain defends the media in NBC interview
Leftists, Establishment conservatives freak out over MILO CPAC speech
Bolton emerging as frontrunner to replace Flynn

CARTOON OF THE DAY

Cartoon of the Day

REASON & COMPANY

NEXT STORY
O’Reilly: Wash. florist SSM case could go to SCOTUS

U.S. Supreme CourtIn the wake of the Washington State Supreme Court ruling against a Christian florist who would not to serve a same-sex “wedding” because such unions go against her deeply held religious beliefs, a debate is continuing to brew between conservative Christian leaders and top Democrats on the controversial matter – a matter that could very likely go all the way to the Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS), according to a statement posted by The O’Reilly Factor.