Every now and then there is a lawsuit that really defines the desperation of a failing social movement. The recent decision of one of America’s most intolerant religious organizations, American Atheists, provides a prime example. This group of anti-Christian zealots has filed a lawsuit they will surely lose. But they will suffer an even more resounding defeat in the court of public opinion. Put simply, the lawsuit will demonstrate that atheism is largely the result of emotional inferiority rather than intellectual superiority.
If you think my claims are over-stated, just read the following excerpt from their civil (actually it is quite un-civil) legal complaint:
“The plaintiffs, and each of them, have suffered, are suffering, and will continue to suffer damages, both physical and emotional, from the existence of the challenged cross. Named plaintiffs have suffered, inter alia, dyspepsia, symptoms of depression, headaches, anxiety, and mental pain and anguish from the knowledge that they are made to feel officially excluded from the ranks of citizens who were directly injured by the 9/11 attack and the lack of acknowledgement of the more than 1,000 non-Christian individuals who were killed at the World Trade Center.”
That’s right, ladies and gentlemen, you heard it right. The American Atheists are suing over the two giant World Trade Center beams that remained standing and formed a cross at Ground Zero on 911. The cross, which gave comfort to millions, is now in a taxpayer-funded museum. And the atheists are hoping to exploit it for millions.
When I read about these allegations on the American Atheists website it made me break wind, cry, and toss and turn in bed for the next several nights. I’m just kidding. I don’t get gas or get emotional when exposed to other points of view because I’m a grown man. That is why this lawsuit is so embarrassing. Almost all of the plaintiffs are grown men. They are mostly grown white men who have easy lives – at least until they see a cross and start barfing and farting and crying and lying awake at night.
American Center for Law and Justice (ACLJ) attorney David French recently noted that anti-establishment plaintiffs have for decades simply claimed that they were “offended observers” of religious displays or, I would add, “offended listeners” to public prayers. But, according to French, federal courts are increasingly rejecting such arguments.