Sign In | Create an Account | Welcome, . My Account | Logout | Subscribe | Submit News | Contact Us | All Access E-Edition | Home RSS
 
 
 

Stratton fighting a losing battle

April 9, 2014

We stand with Stratton Mayor John Abdalla’s decision to put crosses back on the village building through the Easter holiday — a holiday which is religious in its very nature — though we know it’s a......

« Back to Article

 
 
sort: oldest | newest

Comments

(7)

Jeffersonian

Apr-14-14 5:08 PM

RSimpson: Tolerance doesn't require one to stand by and do nothing while the law is being broken. I fully support the right of everyone to practice their faith. What none of us should tolerate is someone using the government to promote their religion. The FFRF has members in every state and responds when church-state violations are brought to their attention by local members. Whether it's crosses on a village building or a cross in the city logo, it sends a clear message that Christianity is the preferred belief. Hagrid: Courts interpret the law, because that is their role as established in the Constitution, Article III (I've read the whole thing, including all the amendments!)If you don't like the separation of church and state, I'm afraid it's you who will have to change the law, starting with the Bill of Rights. By the way, if the symbol under discussion was that of Islam, Hinduism or any other religion, I would feel just as strongly about it.

2 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Hagrid

Apr-14-14 3:38 PM

I wish people, most certainly our courts, would stop interpreting our laws.

The First Amendment clearly states that the government cannot It does not say government cannot ESTABLISH a religion. It does not say the government cannot recognize religions, it does not say government cannot recognize/celebrate religious holidays.

Interesting that it is not Christians restricting Hanukkah, or Ramadan, or Krishna Jayanti. In fact, many Christians embrace the holidays of other religions and celibrate with them. It is mostly those without faith that are bothered. It is also interesting that it is Christianity that is attacked, not Islam, or other religions.

If you do not want government to partake in religious cerimony, if you want a true seeration of church and state, CHANGE THE LAW. But stop twisting into something it is not.

READ the first amendment. Accept it for what it clearly states.

0 Agrees | 4 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Rsimpson43952

Apr-14-14 11:23 AM

I'm not sure why it's such a difficult concept for Atheists to understand that tolerance goes both ways. You can not refuse to have an inkling of tolerance for Christianity yet in the same breath demand tolerance for your own beliefs. You keep saying it has nothing to with being offended yet the majority of the bully lawsuits filed or threatened to be filed cite the fact they're offended by seeing Christian imagery. I see you failed to answer my question, that group doesn't live in Stratton so what business is it of theirs? This is a ridiculous as the lawsuit over the Steubenville seal. The seal had nothing to do with pushing Christianity on anyone. The seal was merely reflecting the fact the Franciscan University has been and will continue to be a major part of Steubenville but yet again people who don't even live here want to put their two cents in. I personally feel this group is only doing this for attention and money.

0 Agrees | 4 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Jeffersonian

Apr-13-14 2:24 PM

I'm not sure why church-state separation is such a difficult concept for so many to understand. It doesn't matter how many people in a community want something - if it's illegal, it's illegal. As MjtheProphet explained, "The government is supposed to remain neutral on matters of religion, because it is supposed to represent everyone in the community regardless of their religious beliefs." And it's not about anyone being offended by the crosses, it's about someone in government violating the law...which should offend every citizen. See more at: ***********heraldstaronline****/page/content****ment/id/597367/Stratton-fighting-a-losing-battle.html?nav=5005#comment597367

3 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Rsimpson43952

Apr-12-14 2:41 PM

I think it's all a bunch of BS. The people in Stratton want the crosses there so what gives people the right who don't even live there to put their two cents in? Atheists are bullies plain and simple. They constantly whine about how Christian imagery offends them. My opinion is if a cross offends you then you must now be as strong in your beliefs as you like to think. Christians aren't out there condemning other religions yet Christianity is always under attack everyday from every angle. What makes the rights of Atheists above those of Christians? Once Atheists threatened to sue a mother who had placed a cross on the highway to memorialize the untimely death of her son solely to bully her into taking down the cross I lost respect for them. They're bullies and they're whiners. Their actions do not reflect their so called beliefs. Where is their tolerance of Christianity? Where is their empathy for the grieving mother they attempted to bully?

0 Agrees | 3 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Jeffersonian

Apr-11-14 2:39 PM

There is so much wrong with this editorial, I almost don't know where to begin. First, I agree completely with MJtheProphet above. Also, it doesn't matter how long the crosses have been there...putting them on a public building is a violation of the constitution. The fact that Easter falls in this month doesn't make the display any less unconstitutional. The first New England settlers did come here to escape religious persecution...and then promptly began to persecute settlers from other faiths. That's one of the reasons the founders wrote into the first amendment not just the free exercise clause, but also the establishment clause...to ensure that those in government couldn't use their authority or the apparatus of government to promote their own private religious beliefs. For over 200 years the courts have consistently upheld this prohibition. The only accurate statement here is that it is "a losing battle"...because it's illegal.

3 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

MJtheProphet

Apr-11-14 1:19 PM

"It's a losing battle because the United States has become a multicultural nation bent on pleasing everyone."

No, it's a losing battle because having religious symbols on public buildings is blatantly illegal. It's not a matter of people not liking the crosses, it's a matter of following the law.

The government is supposed to remain neutral on matters of religion, because it is supposed to represent everyone in the community regardless of their religious beliefs. Religious symbols on public buildings aren't offensive, they're just illegal.

4 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Showing 7 of 7 comments
 
 

Post a Comment

You must first login before you can comment.

*Your email address:
*Password:
Remember my email address.
or
 
 
 

EZToUse.com

I am looking for: