At least I know of no better way to put it. A federal court in New York has ruled that it's impermissible to display Nativity scenes on public property during the Christmas season even as it is permissible to display the Jewish menorah symbol during Hannukah and the Muslim star-and-crescent during Ramadan. The 2-1 majority argument is that the latter two symbols are "secular" even as the former is "religious".
Just whom are they kidding? Not the dissenting judge, Chester Straub, who "said it is clear to him that New York City's current policy violates the Establishment Clause by sending the message that Judaism and Islam are favored while Christianity is disfavored." Indeed, the majority's reasoning is even more specious than it was in Roe v Wade. The plaintiff's attorney is licking his chops at the prospect of bringing the case before the US Supreme Court, whose two newest members are conservative Catholics. I share his enthusiasm.
The prescription quoted in the first example arises from the fact described in the second.
ReplyDeletePeople - including our wonderful elected officials - still think the constitution provides for the "Seperation of Church and State" law. I'd give 10000.00 to angbody who can find that phrase anywhere in our constutution. We are somewhat at fault because we sort of took a hands off approach let all these people get elected and now we've become nearly slaves to it.
ReplyDeleteAnyway, I participated for a couple of years here in New Orleans a Live nativity Scene in front of the ACLU building in the neutral ground (median). It was quite entertaining. Especially when a few of the men presented Mr. Cook with his Christmas present - a little wooden nativity scene. BTW, nobody came to the door but there were plenty of shadows under it. They hung it on the door handle. Wasn't thats sweet?