The story of the statue of Our Lady of Sorrows has its origin in a lottery of Easter, where a municipal employee won the statue, and instead to take her home, prayerfully decided to give it to the City.
He turned to the man who so obviously second- -man, commanded the town of PaternĂ², namely, the Deputy Secretary Dr. F. Crisafi, who accepted this obvious considering its decision (see attached link).
The altar of Our Lady of Sorrows was then placed in the local input of the Town Hall a few days earlier on 07/05/2007.
Peter Galvan, the undersigned, being employed part-time and contract work at the UO
I was in doubt throughout the morning, then saw a group of municipal employees who took turns in reciting the prayers to the Virgin Mary statue and decided to act. I wrote a report to the Commander of service (04.07.2007, see attachment) pointing out the location of this statue in a public building open to the public is an explicit declaration of membership of the Public Administration to the Roman Catholic Church in violation of Constitutional that enshrine the right to freedom of religion, the principle of secularity of the state, and other constitutional provisions and laws that derive from them. Therefore considered it appropriate to remove the statue of Our Lady of Sorrows and the restoration of sites.
I did not have any feedback.
So on 16/05/2007 I sent a letter to the Mayor, the Director-General, to the dating of Labour, the Ombudsperson and the Commander
The case caused a sensation, so much so that told about the papers. In tribute to the Freedom of Religion and the Constitution the Republican mayor of Paterno's lawyer suggested to me by the press to request the transfer, colleagues and advisers are said to fall away, while Mr. Councillor for. Culture undertook to organize in communities made of Prayer agreement with a local priest (see attachments).
The legal case can be inferred from the documents attached thereto. We lost in the first instance, won the appeal and lost on appeal, with abstruse and contradictory judgments in which what is stated in law is denied by the facts.
reading acts, each draw their own conclusions by themselves.
As far as I'm concerned, I have the impression that the magistrates have wanted to circumvent the problem, dealing with theoretical aspects and leaving out the case.
The consequences of this aberrant behavior are: according to the latest public administration can do whatever he wants!
disengaged from any moral or legal obligation, not to mention constitutional religious symbols may require its employees EVEN WITHOUT AN ADMINISTRATIVE ACT.
For me, however, that have been isolated, discriminated against, I also suffered abuse and insults through the press, all normal for the judiciary, what I have now is simply the "annoyance" than any non-Catholic must endure passively in any Catholic country.
I wonder what would make me still a reality of the violation of the law: deportation to concentration camps?
0 comments:
Post a Comment