The Social Network & Community JUST for Firefighters
Nativity Allowed at Charleston Firehouse
CHARLESTON, S.C. - A South Carolina fire station that removed a nativity display following a complaint has put it back up after adding other holiday decorations.
The Charleston Fire Department announced Tuesday that one of its stations has modified its holiday display to comply with U.S. Supreme Court rulings. It has added a menorah, Kwanzaa Kinara, Santa Claus, elves and reindeer.
Chief Thomas Carr Jr. says the nativity scene is one part of celebrating the holiday season.
The Wisconsin-based Freedom From Religion Foundation sent a letter dated Dec. 17 asking city officials to remove the display because it promoted one religion over another. It was taken down in response.
Foundation co-president Annie Laurie Gaylor says the change is a sham but appears to fall in the law.
Related
Charleston Firehouse Ordered to Remove Nativity Scene
Copyright 2009 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.
The Charleston Fire Department announced Tuesday that one of its stations has modified its holiday display to comply with U.S. Supreme Court rulings. It has added a menorah, Kwanzaa Kinara, Santa Claus, elves and reindeer.
Chief Thomas Carr Jr. says the nativity scene is one part of celebrating the holiday season.
The Wisconsin-based Freedom From Religion Foundation sent a letter dated Dec. 17 asking city officials to remove the display because it promoted one religion over another. It was taken down in response.
Foundation co-president Annie Laurie Gaylor says the change is a sham but appears to fall in the law.
Related
Charleston Firehouse Ordered to Remove Nativity Scene
Copyright 2009 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.
Replies to This Discussion
-
Permalink Reply by Ben Waller on
-
Firefighter Hourly and the Charleston Post and Courier both have the story in more detail.
-
Permalink Reply by Art "ChiefReason" Goodrich on
-
Annie Laurie Gaylor has no concept of what a "sham" really is.
I believe a "sham" is when a few exert more power than the many.
A "sham" is when one believes that they speak for all.
A "sham" is requesting that a nativity scene be taken down.
SHAM WOW!
-
Permalink Reply by Wade Kunstmann on
-
I thank God for the Nativity, without it I would be a lost soul. I pray that people like Annie and her lost followers come to know the truth before it's too late. It's a shame that groups like this do not understand that without the birth of Jesus Christ they would not have what they so loosely term the "holiday season" to celebrate. It is a "sham" to call CHRISTmas anything other than what it is: The celebration of the Birth of Jesus Christ.
Be safe Brothers and Sisters and Merry Christmas!!
Wade
(John 15: 12,13)
-
Permalink Reply by Jack/dt on
-
Mike, they're dead and so can no longer think. We can only infer from their writings.
-
-
Sham
1. something that is not what it purports to be; a spurious imitation; fraud or hoax.
Seems rather apropos to the ongoing discussions.
-
-
So that's the only thing that jesus gave, a holiday? Seems rather hollow an effort.
Who is Annie and how do you know that is a lost follower?
-
-
I'll be praying for you Jack.
-
-
Jack, c'mon, dude, Wade's post didn't say "only" and you know it.
You've raised some valid points here, but when you start replying to things that weren't said as if someone else had actually said them, that's a straw man, plain and simple.
-
-
...unless they're in heaven, in which case they may actually be thinking.
-
Permalink Reply by Vic Silverfish on
-
If the city lawyers have determined the display to be secular (celebrating "the season" rather than a specific holiday) then I guess it falls in line with the Establishment Clause. I've got to give the guys credit on this one, I would not have thought out nearly so artful a dodge.
Mike France, you wonder what the Founding Fathers would have thought, I advise you to read some of their writings and find out! Might I suggest you start with Thomas Paine, or have a look at some history: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deism#Deism_in_the_United_States
-
Permalink Reply by John Crabbe on
-
I believe a "sham" is when a few exert more power than the many.
A "sham" is when one believes that they speak for all.
A "sham" is requesting that a nativity scene be taken down.
Is it really a case of "few exerting more power than the many" or is it about equality for all? As in this case the Nativity was allowed back up because other religious symbols and secular displays were also put up alongside of it. Equality. No one religion or belief is being prioritized here, it is a public building and as such people of the public, including the minority voices, has the same equal voice as those who may be in the majority.
So regarding "one believes they speak for all" what if the Nativity was displayed outside a firehouse in say Skokie, IL (is that close to you Art?) which is predominently Jewish. Wouldn't that be considered then the few may be speaking for all?
Is the Nativity scene really being requested to be taken down, or instead was this the easiest solution to provide fair and equal representation of all religions? After all, the FFRF thinks it's a "sham" that the display was allowed, but allowing displays from all religions is the equality and legality, they are griping for. However, what does this start to look like outside a public building? Maybe perhaps more like a circus, than tolerance of symbology of all faiths.
Speaking from experience and my personal opinion, allowing all faiths to display symbology in the same limited space really does nothing to promote the views of everyone and the display does promote a view more circus like than a professional. It promotes an appearance of indecisiveness. I do not share the same views of the FFRF and believe it is an organization comprised of "clowns" who have nothing better to do than file lawsuits (their primary source of income). Yet, a public building is still a public building and the minority representation has the same rights and access to such a place as those in the majority. Personal freedoms and personal beliefs are not being attacked or quashed when the symbols of one's personal faiths are instructed to be removed from the public place. Is it really "caving" to the minority views or is it more of a decision, unpopular as it may be, than to appear "wishy washy" and allow a display circus in leiu of a professional appearance?
© 2024 Created by Firefighter Nation WebChief.
Powered by
