New Mexico city sued over religious symbols...

[Charade]

Las Cruses translates to "The Crosses".

I don't think they'll win unless they change the city name too!

Lawsuit seeks to remove crosses from city’s logo
By Steve Ramirez
Sep 23, 2005, 12:01 am

Email this article
Printer friendly page

A federal lawsuit seeking to stop the city of Las Cruces from using three crosses in its emblem has been filed in U.S. District Court in Albuquerque.
City officials said they will fight to keep the emblem.
The lawsuit was filed late Friday by Paul Weinbaum, on behalf of his daughter, Olivia, and Martin J. Boyd. According to court documents, Weinbaum’s address is just southeast of the Las Cruces city limits, but Boyd lives within the city.
The lawsuit claims the city’s use of the emblem violates the establishment clause of the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution by placing religious symbols on public property and by expending public funds to promote religion. The lawsuit also accuses the city of violating the Civil Rights Act of 1964 by requiring prospective employees to sign job applications that include a religious symbol, and that the city has invaded the privacy of Weinbaum’s and Boyd’s homes with government-sponsored proselytizing.
The lawsuit does not seek any monetary damages from the city. Weinbaum said he just wants the city to quit using the symbol.
“The point here is that this is not for profit whatsoever,” Weinbaum said of the lawsuit. “We want our First Amendment rights back, our full rights as citizens.”
The lawsuit claims the city has violated the First Amendment by forcing the Weinbaums and Boyd to view the “pervasive religious symbols endorsed by the city of Las Cruces and the state of New Mexico,” and that the Weinbaums and Boyd have been made to feel excluded from public participation in government activities.
The plaintiffs also asked for a temporary injunction against the city.
“The city of Las Cruces, New Mexico uses its ‘logo,’ a Latin crosses symbol, consisting of three Latin crosses enclosed in a sunburst, that is closely associated with the Christian religion,” says a portion of the motion for temporary injunction. “Latin crosses in any configuration are recognized throughout the world as Christian symbols.
“This symbol serves no governmental purpose other than to be divisive, to alienate, and disenfranchise Weinbaum, his minor daughter and Boyd.”
The motion for temporary injunction also claims the Las Cruces City Council has never voted on adopting the symbol for official use.
Also, city officials cannot provide any historical documentation to substantiate its claim that the Latin crosses represent the history and people of the city.
Weinbaum said there is no attempt to have the city change its name.
“There is not one place in that lawsuit that says the name of the city should be changed,” Weinbaum said. “There have been other stories in the past that claimed that. But that is not correct, never has been correct, and is not correct now.”
Named as defendants are Las Cruces Mayor William “Bill” Mattiace, and City Councilors Dolores Archuleta, Dolores Connor, Jose Frietze, Ken Miyagishima, Wesley Strain and Steve Trowbridge.
Other defendants include City Manager Terrence Moore, Assistant City Manager Maryann Ustick, Public Information Director Udell Vigil, and Facilities Department Director Brian Denmark.
District Attorney Susana Martinez, Attorney General Patricia Madrid and Gov. Bill Richardson have also been named as defendants.
Mattiace said the city intends to fight the lawsuit.
“We have had to defend ourselves before and we’re ready to do it again,” Mattiace said. “The crosses have a basis for being in our logo. We will hold course and will defend that.”
City Attorney Fermin Rubio said the lawsuit doesn’t raise any new issues from attempts made in 2003 to get the city to stop using the logo. Then, the New Mexico Department of Transportation was going to remove two city logos at the Spruce Street underpass and on north Main Street, at the Interstate 25 interchange.
But Richardson issued an executive order to keep the department from removing those logos.
Richardson spokesman Jon Goldstein said Tuesday the governor’s office had received a copy of the lawsuit. But no additional comment on it would be made until staff members and lawyers for the governor have had an opportunity to review it.
The lawsuit has been assigned to U.S. Magistrate Lourdes Martinez of Las Cruces.
No future court hearings have been scheduled yet. Lawyers for the defendants will have 20 days to submit a formal response to the allegations before a hearing is set.

Steve Ramirez can be reached at sramirez@lcsun-news.com

 

[Lisa loves Pooh]

Why is he suing on behalf of his daughter?

 

[EsmeraldaX]

Some people just are not happy unless they have something to whine about.

 

[lyeag]

..... here we go again. I am tired of this ... there are PLENTY of things I see every day that offend me and what I believe. I don't expect the government to protect me from being offended. It is part of life. Get over it...

 

[chadfromdallas]

..... here we go again. I am tired of this ... there are PLENTY of things I see every day that offend me and what I believe. I don't expect the government to protect me from being offended. It is part of life. Get over it...

It is?

 

[Charade]

It is?

 

[EsmeraldaX]

It is?

Yes, Chad.

Dealing with minor things that you find offensive is a part of life. The world does not revolve around you or me or anyone else. We all have to live here together. Having a religious symbol on a public document that has been there for decades and merely makes some feel "umcomfortable" is not forcing religion on them nor is it the gov't endorsing religion. It's a historical thing that is there because of WHO founded the town.

Now, if the town said "you must practice Christianity or get out" or if they said "If you practice Wicca you will be jailed" THAT is what the forefathers of this country did not want.

But a couple of crosses on a logo for a city that was founded by religious people and called Las Cruces...not so much. That is just a matter of whiny, miserable people with nothing better to focus their time and energy on who are obviously so hypersensitive to religious symbols they don't like that they need them removed from sight.

I personally can not imagine going through life that easily offended.

 

[chadfromdallas]

well then...