When the US Constitution declared our Freedom of Speech there was not an asterisk next to it saying "unless it offends, questions or challenges Christianity." A great deal of Christians have failed to acknowledge the non-existence of that asterisk and protest against anything they don't want to hear. They take it upon themselves to decide what the rest of us can and not watch, hear or listen to. Clearly a great deal of Christian protests attacking the freedom of speech are not always as successful as they desire but in many cases Christians get their way and freedom gets buried six feet under. Just to give you an example or two, when a billboard by the Freedom from Religion Foundation was put up in the town of Rancho Cucamonga its message "Imagine no Religion" created a frenzy. Due to a barrage of phone calls from Christians General Outdoor Advertising was forced to take down the billboard and refund the FfRF. When the classic Monty Python file "The Life of Brian" was being released Christian activists have successfully got it band from several states and even entire countries. In the world of film Christian protestors around the world marched against Monty Python's "The Life of Brian." Due to religious attacks it was dropped by theaters, banned by councils, states (especially in the Bible Belt of the US) and even entire countries such as Norway. When an item jokes about or challenges Christianity it is considered an "attack on their faith" or "offensive." Even if something is offensive people have the right to be offended. Everyone deserves the right to freedom of speech even if what is being said is not appreciated by all. If you don't like something then censor your own life, don't censor the lives of others.

Censorship In the film and entertainment industry religion has played a strong part deciding what is acceptable for other people. Film censorship came about by various religious groups such as the "Catholic Legion of Decency" encouraging boycotts and threats of content that conflicted with their strict personal views religious dogma. A TV ad campaign featuring lingerie-clad women praying for beautiful hair has been banned by the advertising watchdog because it might offend Christians.

---

FFRF Sues City of Rancho Cucamonga over Censorship of "Imagine No Religion" Billboard

Nov. 26, 2008

The national Freedom From Religion Foundation is filing a lawsuit today in federal court against the City of Rancho Cucamonga, Calif., for taking actions which led to the censorship of its "Imagine No Religion" billboard on Archibald and Foothill Blvd, Route 66.

The Madison, Wis.-based Foundation, the nation's largest national association of freethinkers (atheists and agnostics) and a state/church watchdog, said City violated the Foundation's rights under the Establishment Clause and Free Speech Clause of the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.

The Foundation's pretty sign, which was evidently destroyed by General Outdoor Co. after its removal on Nov. 21, had a stained-glass window motif asking viewers to "Imagine No Religion" and advertising the Foundation's name and website, ffrf.org.

The Foundation had prepaid for the board and contracted for a two-month run beginning in mid-November. The Board had been up for less than a week when it was removed at the apparent instigation of Linda Daniels, Rancho Cucamonga Development Director.

"The Defendants' actions conveyed a message that religion is favored, preferred, and promoted by the City of Rancho Cucamonga and its officials, despite subsequent attempts to cover up the Defendants' involvement in sending an objectively understood message disapproving FFRF's billboard," said the Foundation.

The Foundation Complaint noted:

"The Defendants' actions, including by interfering with and contributing to cause FFRF's message to be removed from the public realm, were undertaken precisely because of the content of FFRF's message, including the Defendants' perception that FFRF was expressing an idea that some members of society found offensive or disagreeable.

"The Defendants' actions, including by interfering with and contributing to cause FFRF's message to be silenced, were taken under color of law, and in violation of FFRF's Free Speech rights under the First Amendment to the United States Constitution."

The Foundation charged that the city's actions were "undertaken in willful, wanton and intentional disregard of FFRF's rights."

"The principal function of free speech under our system of government is to invite dispute, and such speech may best serve its purpose when it induces a condition of unrest, creates dissatisfaction with conditions are they are, or even stirs people to anger.

"The bedrock principle underlying the scope of the free speech protection of the First Amendment is that government officials may not interfere with the expression of an idea simply because some persons allegedly consider the idea offensive or disagreeable to their views."

The Foundation is seeking reasonable compensatory and punitive damages and attorney's fees.

The lawsuit is being filed in U.S. District Court, Central District of California. Local counsel is Robert Seeman, 818-241-6907 and Foundation counsel is Richard Bolton of Madison, Wis.

Read Legal Complaint Case No. 2:08-cv-7833 (pdf)

The Freedom From Religion Foundation, based in Madison, Wis., is a national association of freethinkers (atheists, agnostics) that has been working since 1978 to keep church and state separate.
Reposted from ffrf.org