Supreme Court to consider monuments in public parks

[babylonsister]

Supreme Court to consider monuments in public parks
By Michael Doyle | McClatchy Newspapers


WASHINGTON — A monumental controversy may force Supreme Court conservatives to choose between veterans and public piety.

In a closely watched case, justices will consider on Wednesday when cities and states can be compelled to display donated monuments that may contain religious messages. The resulting decision could shape what public parks look like nationwide.

"If the authorities place a statue of Ulysses S. Grant in the park, the First Amendment does not require them also to install a statue of Robert E. Lee," the attorneys general of Florida, Texas and 11 other states declared in a legal filing.

However, a Utah-based religion called Summum contends that once a city accepts the donation of a private display or monument, it must accept others as well. The church leaders want a monument displaying Summum's "Seven Aphorisms" placed in Pioneer Park in Pleasant Grove City, Utah.

The Seven Aphorisms are complex, but are summed up in words including "psychokinesis," "vibration" and "gender." The unconventional character of the religion shouldn't undermine its constitutional rights, advocates say.

The city park already includes numerous monuments including one containing the Ten Commandments.

"The city has never denied a single other request to donate a display; only Summum has been barred from the park," argued Summum's appellate attorney, Walter Dellinger, a Duke University law school professor, who added that "the record shows a targeted anti-Summum gerrymander, aimed at suppressing one particularly disfavored religious view."

more...

http://www.mcclatchydc.com/251/story/55631.html