I expect anyone who bothers to read this blog probably already knows this, but Constitutionally, there is a distinction between government speech and private speech. When the government speaks, among other things, it is governed by the Establishment Clause (“Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion” — this has been interpreted to extend to government generally and not just Congress.) Private citizens are not bound by the Establishment Clause.
In Knightstown, there is a large evergreen in the town square. The town decorates it with lights and such during Christmas. One of the decorations is a large cross on top of the tree. That is apparently the only religious symbol. The ACLU filed suit and the town declined to fight the suit, taking the cross down.
This has provoked outrage in the usual fashion. One of the common arguments is that not allowing the government to put up a cross is, itself, a violation of the Free Exercise clause (“Congress shall make no law respecting . . . the free exercise [of religion].”) I’m not sure if this is people being deliberately obtuse or if they simply don’t understand the distinction: private citizens have the right to exercise religion freely; government is restricted from making laws with respect to the establishment of religion. Private individuals are not restricted from establishing religion; government does not have a right to exercise religion.
If the tree and the cross had been on private ground, no lawsuit would have been filed by the ACLU (and, if it had, they would have lost). The critical distinction here is that the cross was government speech. I went to the comment section of a news article (I know, I know) and the commenters studiously ignored the distinction between government and private speech. Rather than comment there, I thought I’d just scream into the void from the friendly confines of my own blog.
You aren’t alone. Reading the letters to the editor of the Journal Courier every morning does more to get me fired up for the day than drinking a whole pot of coffee.
There is no doubt an inverse relationship between the volume/length/vitriol of a given individual’s rant about liberal courts and elected officials trampling on Constitutional rights and that writer/speaker’s actual understanding of the US Constitution.
I was in Decatur two years ago and the courthouse lawn had a creche. There were no other Christmas decorations. I went through Albion last week and the courthouse had a creche, but it also had Santa in his sleigh and the reindeers. Some giant candles, too.
I remember a friend who did municpal and school representation in two small towns and for one rural Indiana county. He used to talk about the “eight reindeer rule.” He said if the creche is part of a holiday display that includes secular themes, Santa and his sleigh, reindeer, a star and maybe a Menorah, that the creche was permissible. That is what Noble County apparently did.
Dog, I think you said you do municipal work. Is sort of mixed holiday themes with a creche still permissible?
I guess there should be ten reindeer, if you add Rudolph and Olive, the Other Reindeer.
I haven’t researched the particulars of religious displays in awhile. My general sense is that the question is whether, given the context of the display, whether a citizen is likely to perceive the display as promoting a particular religion. The more secular stuff you have mixed in with the religious display, the better your chances. And, in particular, if you have a variety of religious symbols displayed, you’re probably going to be o.k.
In Knightstown, they apparently had some lights with one — and only one — big religious symbol at the very top of the tree.
Yes, I could see where other religious symbols would mute claims of a preference toward one particular faith. I read stories of secularists wanting to put up satanic symbols as kind of a picque or a dig on he local leaders.
Hanukkah starts on Christmas Eve this year. It is an interesting holiday in that it is not a high Jewish Holiday. Its celebration has only become prominent in recent history mainly because of its proximity to Christmas. It gives Jewish kids something to celebrate around Christmas. So in a sense, it is part secular and part religious, just as Christmas shares both of those features.
So if a municipality puts up a Menorah as part of its holiday celebration, it is getting a “twofer.” A religious holiday that draws much of its meaning for secular reasons.
Merry Christmas and Happy Hanukkah to all. But most of all, Happy Festivus which comes tomorrow, December 23rd.
I have an aluminum Festivus Pole that I put up every festival. We will have the Festivus Dinner of home made marina with fresh fettucine. Dinner is followed by The Airing of Grievances which usually begins with yelling and howls of execration. Punches are rarely thrown, but obscene gerunds, crude references to anatomy and questions of lineage are raised. This is usually followed by loud demands for reimbursement and indemnification for incidents within the past year.
Finally the Feats of Strength and the probing search for Festivus Miracles.
Doug: Could you please contact me? I have a few questions and you seem qualified to answer.
As I’ve said before, I wonder when people who believe will understand that government and religion aren’t peanut butter and chocolate.
“I went to the comment section of a news article (I know, I know) and the commenters studiously ignored the distinction between government and private speech.”
Of course. Americans are the dumbest fucking people on the planet.
It’s really difficult to “suffer fools gladly” because there is that little voice inside us that believes, at heart, everyone is reasonable and willing to listen to reason or may be interested in facts. But when folks believe that reason and facts are just “phony highfalluten liberal talk” they confirm that responding to them is as productive as sticking your head in the toilet. These are the same ones who still believe, according to best data, that Pres. Obama is not a citizen and that Clinton didn’t get more votes, a,ong other delusions. My Facebook posts gives them a voice, and despite my interest in seeing how bottom feeders feed, unfriending or hiding their comments keeps my blood pressure down.
“there is that little voice inside us that believes, at heart, everyone is reasonable and willing to listen to reason or may be interested in facts.”
Utter nonsense. Republicans have no interest in facts or reason.
Witness ObamaCare. Voter fraud. Climate change. Trickle down economics…..
Republicans have been selling bullshit for at least 35 years.
Facts have a known liberal bias.
I have never heard of a Christmas tree with a cross on top. But I don’t know everything. So, I went to Google Images and typed in ‘Christmas tree”. I scrolled and scrolled and no image with a cross on top.
Which leads me to speculate, whoever was in charge of decorating was looking for controversy. To stir the pot. Why? Seems anti-Christmas spirit to me.
Fortunately the town made the right decision not to fight.
Personally, I’m dedicated to celebrating Christmas by honoring it’s original Yuletide meaning.
We’ll protect home and hearth from the dark spirits with evergreen branches, then sacrifice a beef (in the form of prime rib) to Odin, toasting the turn of the solstice and the coming of longer days with copious amounts of ale.
You may be screaming “into the void” Doug, but it helps to hear it, along with these enlightened comments.
I live close enough to Knightstown that my Facebook feed is flooded with people who don’t understand the First Amendment.
My favorite part so far have been the people who have outed the guy who brought the suit and encourage others to harass him so he leaves town. True picture of Christian love and charity.
I also love the fact that the pictures and videos are full of people out of central casting for small town hick. It is a parade of people with a Duck Dynasty beards dressed in full cammo opining about those “damn liberals” while smoking a cig and holding a beer.
Look, I am a small town guy who hobby farms, loves to shoot clays and hunt, watches a fair bit a football and enjoys an adult beverage, but don’t lump me in with those dolts.
What I think is hilarious about the libs is how when Conservative Patriots wanted to explore seceding from the U.S., the statists were all up in arms. Now that the libs want to secede, not a peep from the same statists. Leave. We’ll let you. We’ll give you some land and some coast, and you can have your liberal lives on it.
Patriot secessionist is an oxymoron. And if you find your statement “hilarious” you might want to get that checked out. It’s an extreme emotional response given the not particularly hilarious context. It’d be like if my Dad made a mildly bad pun and I collapsed to the floor, convulsing in laughter.
Also, what does secession have to do with the Establishment Clause and the distinction between public & private speech?
This topic provoked an extreme amount of discussion at a class (unrelated topic) that I attend. People could not get ahold of the difference between public speech and private speech, disparaged the suit-bringer (why did he not object before this year?), since he is in the minority he should shut up, laws are not made to protect the minority what about the “rights” of the majority being protected, this is bad law, the supreme court is wrong and needs to be overturned, the cross is a town tradition and therefore should be immune to challenge, the country was founded on Christian principles like crosses, etc etc etc. Honestly, I was the only one (and these are generally better than average educated people) on my side of the issue and left the class with my blood boiling and questioning if I want to go there again.
Along these same lines, how about today’s USA Today news story of the Congressman from CA who, because he was offended by a winning student art entry that was part of an exhibit hanging in the US Capitol Building, took it upon himself to remove it from the wall where it was hanging and deliver it to the office of the Congressman whose district the student artist is from. Good lesson in civics, huh? It wasn’t a pretty picture, true, but I think it was a student making a bigger statement than the part that was offensive, which I guess was lost on the offended congressman. And of course now MILLIONS more people will see it than would have had he just left it on the wall.