The Social Network & Community JUST for Firefighters
Massachusetts FD Ordered to Remove Merry Christmas Sign
NORTH ANDOVER, Mass. - An annual "Merry Christmas" sign on a North Andover fire station has been ordered removed.
Town officials told firefighters last week to take down the homemade sign after they said people complained.
Fire Chief William Martineau said Monday that the sign was made by firefighters about 50 years ago and never had been an issue before.
The order comes a week after selectmen voted to allow a menorah display on the town common for only one day instead of all eight days of Hanukkah. They said a new town common policy only allows displays to stay up for one day, no matter what they are.
Town Manager Mark Rees said the town's public buildings should not be displaying things specific to a particular religion.
___
Information from: Eagle Tribune, http://www.eagletribune.com
Related
Bah! Humbug!: Town outlaws Merry Christmas sign
Copyright 2009 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.
Fire Chief William Martineau said Monday that the sign was made by firefighters about 50 years ago and never had been an issue before.
The order comes a week after selectmen voted to allow a menorah display on the town common for only one day instead of all eight days of Hanukkah. They said a new town common policy only allows displays to stay up for one day, no matter what they are.
Town Manager Mark Rees said the town's public buildings should not be displaying things specific to a particular religion.
___
Information from: Eagle Tribune, http://www.eagletribune.com
Related
Bah! Humbug!: Town outlaws Merry Christmas sign
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 This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.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 Raymond T Berger Sr. on
-
Just another example of the narrow minded foolishness that has infected this country and some of our elected leaders!!!!!
-
Permalink Reply by Shawn on
-
John, I'm not going to get into the great slavery debate save to say, slavery was evil saying or even displaying Merry Christmas is not.
Between yesterday and today (when I've had time) I HAVE read the posts. As for the name calling, I think you mis-spoke I think you meant the minority as it would seem that the majority opposes this issue and your viewpoint...sorry.
Peace
-
Permalink Reply by Derek R. on
-
ok...so Jack....seems like what you are saying is that the people who wish to put up their lights and signs to decorate their property are the "whackers" of the religious world? Kinda like the lights and stickers on pov's in the fireservice world? Maybe they are so proud to be whatever religion, that they feel the need to show it to everyone. I enjoyed what you wrote. It made sense to me. I'm just being silly. But, there are people out there who feel the need to demonstrate their beliefs to show whatever.If that need is so strong, should they be allowed to do so? Maybe to help spread a little holiday cheer? I am totally with you about it being the season of materialism. All about how much you can spend and hoping for the biggest gift. Sickening. I make it a point every year to mention to family and friends that I wish to recieve nothing for the holiday. If they feel the need to give me a gift, then invite me to dinner or give me a hug or something. Anyways, that is a whole other topic there.
-
Permalink Reply by Rob Young on
-
You are correct, not everyone is Christian, but that's not the point. It seems that Christians always have to bow to the "political correctness" of others in society who feel that either Christians shouldn't be allowed to celebrate their Christianity, or believe all religions should be banned. This is far bigger than just the issue of this town not allowing the Merry Christmas sign, or the Menorah to be displayed as would be traditionally done. It goes to the heart of the fact that the seperation of Church and state issues in our Constitution has been so grossly over done that our religious rights as a country are infringed upon everyday. It only takes one lonely, bitter person to get a Christmas sign removed because they say it offends them (not necessarily the case here but just part of my point), where as the entire rest of the town wants the sign up, and yet it comes down because a few politicians are affraid of a law suit. In my opinion this country was built on religious tolerance (not everyone agrees obviously), but tolerance is often misinterpretend and turned around so badly that no one gets to display their religious beliefs.
-
Permalink Reply by Michael Elefante on
-
It's a terrible state we are allowing ourselves to be put in. Mr. Rees deserves to get coal in his stocking. I retired this past January after 37 years on the job, the preveious year some one complained about the Merry Christmas and Happy Birthday Baby Jesus sign my guys had been putting out for years. Needless to say the mayor and the Fire Chief both back us and signs remained, I have heard of no other complaint and the signs will be there this year.
MERRY CHRISTMAS AND HAPPY BIRTHDAY BABY JESUS
-
Permalink Reply by bryan lamb on
-
So how about the people who dont belive in chrismas pushing there belifes on the rest of us who do, what about our right to freedom of religion? They have gone to far with this crap! Its just a sign with words...... doesnt say nothing about joining any religion how is that offensive? We have a guy in our town who wanted to change the name of the city becouse in english it means the crosses, and (he is an atheist) he isnt even from our city he moved here from somewhere else what a world we live in
-
Permalink Reply by Jack/dt on
-
What, only if you've served for 20 years can you understand diversity and tolerance. Try being in the service in the 70's when the military mirrored the racial unrest of this nation.
"I never said separarion of Church and State was a disease. What I said was that it was the "culture of political correctness" that was a disease.." And you don't think that that is hyperbole? In this instance the 'political correctness' emanates from the issue of separation of church and state.
"So why do I (or anyone else)have to give in to the beliefs (or lack of) the "minority" " No one said you or anyone else had to give in, you're quite welcome to continue on believing and celebrating as you wish. The issue here was one of fairness to the rabbi. But then obviously he was a minority. Oh and yes, this statement too is hyperbole.
"Ok, maybe you didn't directly call anyone names but, seriously, there were some comments you made that were apparently sarcastic and contemptuous and the way I read them gave ME that impression." And where exactly is your indignation and coming-to-my-defense when I was called "Reply by john clare 12 minutes ago
should be jackass not jackdt its freedom of religion you f'ing MASSHOLE"?
"...comments you made that were apparently sarcastic and contemptuous... "
Gee...do ya think! So telling someone to go to hell or leave this country or any other number of insults doesn't offend you nearly as much as my presumed contempt and sarcasm? Really?
"Name calling isn't necessary..." Really, how about it being wrong? Or it being rude and immature?
I've read where people have said that if one disagrees (with them, the majority here) that one should leave the country, or go to hell. None of which seems very christian to me. And when did it become unamerican to disagree?
"Please don't speculate about what I have/have not read or about what I do/ do not agree with." I don't think I've speculated a bit about what you believe, you've made it very clear.
-
-
Derek, don't put words into my mouth even kidding. It's very apparent that many do not fully read or comprehend what others write and I don't want someone claiming I've called them a whacker. I've said it numerous times that people are and should be allowed and welcome to celebrate as they wish, they simply are not allowed to 'decorate' public buildings or if they are allowed to do so it is with equality to any other religion or group that likewise wants to 'celebrate.'
The issue has nothing to do with freedom of speech or religion or the abrogation of the aforementioned. It was an inequality that prompted the rabbi to consider a lawsuit to allow the menorah to stay in place for 8 days. Rather than capitulate the town ordered all such displays from public property. Had they let the menorah stay for 8 days there would have been no issue. In fact I think that the town manager/council may very well have not like the idea of a jewish symbol in the town square during 'their' xmas season. Perhaps the majority of north andover ma don't like jews, it's hard to tell for sure.
-
-
It doesn't matter that these symbols were not original to the Christmas celebration. I have read the history of the church, I have read where many of the symbols come from, why the 25th of December was chosen as the date to celebrate Christ's birth, and I also realize that there are other holidays celebrated in the month of December. The majority of Americans do state some religion, and of those, the majority are still Christian. Still, these are the points we should be arguing. We should be arguing that this Merry Christmas sign and the Menorah, and any other religious symbols should be allowed to be displayed. The fact is that this law in this town discriminates against all "displays" by virtue of the fact that most holidays are celebrated for more than one day. The law as refered to in the article states that "displays" can only be up for one day. Well this seems overly restrictive. But what bothers me more is that Town Manager Mark Rees said the town's public buildings should not be displaying things specific to a particular religion. This is correct in one sence, but over reaching in the other. This is a major problem in this country. We want to believe we are tolerant, but by tolerant we seem to say that anyone can practice their particular religion, or have their particular belief, as long as I don't have to be exposed to it. That's not tolerance! Tolerance would be if I were an atheist but didn't get all worked up because the local county courthouse allowed the local church to put out a nativity scene on the court house lawn in the middle of town. That would be tolerant. Or if the local Independent Fundamental Baptist Church didn't protest when a mosque was going to be build across the street. That would be tolerance. But to say no one should display their religous beliefs, even if it's on a public building, is not tolerance, and it goes way beyond the seperation of church and state in the Constitution.
-
-
I could be wrong, but I think jesus would be like 2009 years old this year. Hardly a baby anymore.
-
-
Oh my how dare someone move in from another city and then want to change things That is why we need stronger immigration reform.
-
-
Rob I kind of agree with you, if I've understood correctly what you've written. If I have then you are indeed right. The only explanation I can come up with regarding the one day policy is that the town government did not want to have a jewish symbol there during xmas. What other reason could there be for their decision?
Only allowing the display of the menorah for one day as opposed to the requested 8 caused the rabbi to challenge the town on the basis of fairness and equity, which then prompted the town to have the f.d. sign removed and banned all displays. So I guess their rationale was that rather than allow a non-christian symbol they preferred to ban all displays. And that would truly be intolerance of the highest kind.
© 2024 Created by Firefighter Nation WebChief.
Powered by
