Dark Christianity
dark_christian
.::: .::..:.::.:.
Back August 16th, 2005 Forward
dogemperor [userpic]
...and hopefully the Good Guys will have more victories against dominionists

(Edited to make it a bit clearer that the dominionists *lost* for once. Never ever type before coffee :3)

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,165696,00.html

Apparently, town with dominionist influence--which was actually invoking Jesus before town council meeting--gets sued by Wiccan, and the Wiccan *wins* (for once).

Town has only $15,000 insurance, and may have to end up paying over $65,000 in court costs in result (the courts are still ruling on whether court costs are to be awarded).

(Of minor interest--one of the major folks supporting the dominionists is (shock, shock) an AoG preacher at a church with a not-terribly-dissimilar name to the one I walked away from (though in a completely different state). They've claimed if the courts rule for payment of court costs by the town, the church will cover it...I dare say the next step after *that* should be revocation of the church's tax exempt status. If they can shell out $65,000 for court costs to spite someone who sued for violation of the *Constitution*, I think they can afford to pay their damned taxes.)

EDIT:

Backgrounder )

For what it's worth, South Carolina is also a state that has been specifically targeted by dominionists for invasion with the goal of ultimate secession.

the hive of scum and villany responsible )

Some further backgrounder:

http://www.religioustolerance.org/wicgf.htm

Info on the other case that could be tried with this (should this go to the Supremes, as the dominionists are threatening to):

http://www.wildhunt.org/2004/11/catching-up-so-much-of-my-and-worlds.html

EDIT AGAIN:

Here's the actual court docket, for the legal minded:

http://pacer.ca4.uscourts.gov/opinion.pdf/032069.P.pdf

Fark.com has been reporting on this and many of the links regarding information are from the discussion thread (http://forums.fark.com/cgi/fark/comments.pl?IDLink=1622014). Props where props are deserved :3

EDIT YET AGAIN:

Apparently, per at least one source, the Supremes refused to review the case, hence the court ruling stands (This per the Religioustolerance.org link above).

Also, not only is she *still* not being heard at town hall meetings (regarding a matter of public safety, at that), but the town is making noises about possibly defying the court ruling:
http://www.heraldonline.com/local/story/4987993p-4556234c.html

Back August 16th, 2005 Forward