Quote:
Originally Posted by ebacon
A good lawyer could muddy the waters by arguing that the home runs on government money and therefore performs a quasi-governmental function. As such it the home must provide its government sponsored patients some free speech/free religion rights.
But at the end of the day, yeah, I think it's a stupid debate. The person that complained to management should be ratted out and made to answer to his neighbors as to why his opinion is soooo much more important than the group that wants the tree. And you know that there was only one complainant and he's a know-it-all douchebag.
|
He could also argue that if the home runs on government funding, that the tree, as Whell so merrily pointed out, is a religious symbol and we have a "separation of church and state" issue on our hands.
Regards,
Dave