"'FFRF Victory in Ellwood City, Pa.--Crèche Will Go'

"Freedom from Religion Foundation (FFRF), Press Release, 20 December 2011

"FFRF thanks the Borough Council of Ellwood City for honoring the Constitution in the face of a cross-toting mob and a mayor who would rather preach than lead. After weeks of communication with FFRF over their original letter on December 1, 2011, the Borough council, at the recommendation of their attorney, passed a resolution yesterday that will remove the nativity scene from public grounds for good after this year.

"The council voted 4-2 in favor of moving the banner to private property.

"Borough Attorney Edward Leymaire presented the councilwith the two options: to 'to keep the display in front of the municipal building, with the addition of a banner supplied by [FFRF], or to maintain the display as it is forthis year and move it onto private property the following year.' Council President Anthony DeCarbo voted in favor of moving the nativity to private property because, 'We took an oath to uphold the Constitution of the United States and of the state of Pennsylvania.' FFRF commends DeCarbo and the other three council members for making the sensible and constitutional choice.

"Mayor Court, who originally offered to hang FFRF's banner only to break his word after FFRF had mailed the banner, did not agreewith the decision, but had no vote.

"FFRF's banner reads:

'At this Season of the Winter Solstice, may reason prevail. There are no gods, no devils, no angels, no heaven or hell. Religion is but myth and superstition that hardens hearts and enslaves minds.'

"'This whole kerfuffle shows why the Founders wisely chose to build a wall of separation between state and church--because religion in government is so very divisive,' said FFRF Co-President Annie Laurie Gaylor. The solution was simple: move the nativity to private property.

"FFRF would also like to thank Prof. Stephen Hirtle of Pittsburgh for his time and dedication to upholding the constitutional principle of the separation of state and church.

"The Freedom From Religion Foundation, based in Madison, Wis., a 501(c)(3) nonprofit educational charity, is the nation's largest association of freethinkers (atheists, agnostics), and has been working since 1978 to keep religion and government separate."
_____


Reaction to the Decision by the Holy Huffers

"ELLWOOD CITY (KDKA) — Constitutional law isn’t much on the mind of 3-year-old Xavier who stopped by the manger on the Ellwood City Municipal building’s front lawn.

"Earlier this month, 500 or more protesters turned out after the Wisconsin-based Freedom From Religion Foundation threatened legal action if the crèche remained on public property.

“'I can tell you this--I [will not] back down,' Ellwood City Mayor Anthony Court said, determined not to budge.

"The nativity display was surrounded by secular and other symbols of the season to bring it more in line with Supreme Court rulings.

"But limited borough funds and fears of lengthy litigation prompted council to vote 4-to-2 Monday night to leave the crèche where it is this year and move it in 2012 to a far less controversial spot.

“'Well, my stance hasn’t changed,' Mayor Court said. He says council was offered only two options.

'“One to put their banner up or to move the nativity scene,' Court explained. 'Council opted to move the nativity scene.'

"The banner, proposed by the anti-religious group, reads: 'There are no gods, no devils, no heaven or hell. Religion is but a myth and superstition that hardens hearts and enslaves minds.'

"Reaction to council’s decision is mixed.

“'I believe in keeping church and state separate,' says Joe Moczan, 'But I think they’re pushing the issue way too far for little things like this.'

“'I just think it’s dumb,' says Diane Cynkar, 'It’s been there all these years and what harm is it doing? Why move it?'

"Annie Laurie Gaylor, president of the Freedom From Religion Foundation, told KDKA’s Mary Robb Jackson in a phone call that they never intended to ban the nativity scene – only to get it off public property.

"She says they’re pleased that their concerns are satisfied and that reason and the constitution prevailed."

("Ellwood City To Move Nativity Scene in 2012," CBS News, KDKA-TV, Pittsburg, Pennsylvania, filed by Mary Robb Jacison from Ellwood City, Pennsylvania, 20 December 2011; see photograph of the Nativity scene to be removed at: http://pittsburgh.cbslocal.com/2011/12/20/ellwood-city-to-move-nativity-scene-in-2012/)
____


For the letter sent by FFRF to the Ellwood Borough Council on 1 December 2011, explaining why its display of the creche on government property violated constitutional precedent, see:

http://ffrf.org/uploads/legal/Ellwood%20City%20Creche%20Letter%202011.pdf



Edited 8 time(s). Last edit at 12/21/2011 01:44AM by steve benson.

There's this (he said) atheist talk show host I listen to. Very nice guy I gather from listening to his program. Seems there's this city that has Nativity scenes throughout the town put on by the local churches. The places for the scenes are given out via a lottery. Well I guess a bunch of local anti religion people decided to overrun the lottery by putting in multiple lottery requests and were able to win several of the locations and basically sabotage the event. The talk show host was actually disgusted by the atheist's underhanded ploy. You think by posting signs, writing articles, or making doodles in newspapers that you will convert people to your way of thinking? It's cute and funny - I laugh at this myself - but no. BTW I'm going to be skiing in Utah from the 2nd to the 7th of January. Anyone wanna meet up in SLC or Park City just let me know.

con·vert (kn-vûrt)
v. con·vert·ed, con·vert·ing, con·verts
v.tr.
1. To change (something) into another form, substance, state, or product; transform

I think you're talking about the whole situation in Santa Monica, California.

I am not sure how I feel about this. I am an atheist. I am also a huge fan of everything Christmas and very nostalgic. I KINDA don't mind the historic or established religious bits of Christmas being on public or government ground. It just doesn't bother me and I know it brings joy to others.

On the other hand, if we give them an inch they will take a mile. There is a separation of church and state. It should be a very clear and thick line. It should be strictly enforced. Maybe even the Christmas trees (my personal favorite thing of the season) shouldn't be put up in government buildings.

I don't think this will win over anyone to my way of thinking. I do think it is the most correct way to carry things out, according to the Constitution.

... scores of churches can be found.

On the other hand, every municipality sports but one city hall.

Is it too much to ask that christians display their beliefs where they belong which would be on church grounds?

The Constitution doesn't think so, nor do I.

Timothy



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 12/21/2011 06:41AM by Timothy.

doesnt the White House have a big ole Christmas tree? how does that fit in? aint it government property?

things that make ya go hmmmmmmmmmmm..:)

I'd like to see this trend.

The usual justification is that schools are teaching about religion and culture by holding these concerts, not promoting religion (which is the criteria for constitutionality.) The schools that I've seen are careful to include songs about Hanukkah and Kwanzaa to be inclusive.

How about prayers at public school athletic banquets? I've seen this happen as well.

I don't mind nativity scenes being banished to private property. Some churches where I live have nativity scenes and live nativities. That seems to be the best place for them.

"'FFRF Brings End to Football Prayer in Alabama School District'

"FFRF received a complaint in September 2011, from a concerned resident of Lauderdale County, Ala., about Christian prayers over the loudspeaker at Brooks High School in Killen before home football games. In a Sept. 15 letter of complaint, FFRF Staff Attorney Stephanie Schmitt asked Superintendent William Valentine to “take immediate action to ensure that prayers are not scheduled at any school-sponsored events. After a follow-up letter sent Oct. 17, the district brought a halt to their illegal practice.

"In an Oct. 31 response, the district enclosed an Oct. 27 memo sent by Valentine to district administrators and employees saying, 'Effective immediately, football games are not to be opened with a prayer that is in anyway led, directed, organized or encouraged by Lauderdale County Board of Education employees.' Valentine added, 'Additionally, no student, parent, volunteer, or anyone else may use the public address system of the stadium to lead, direct, organize, or encourage prayer.”

("FFRF Brings End to Football Prayer in Alabama School District, 31 October 2011, at: http://ffrf.org/legal/challenges/ffrf-brings-end-to-football-prayer-in-alabama-school-district-oct-31-2011/)
_____


FFRF described the constitutionally-impermissable practice in a run-up article to the school district's eventual capitulation as a religion-pushing agenda that "sanction[s] . . . illegal prayer before athletic events."

Below is FFRF's assessement of the district's unconstitutional promotion of Xtian prayer at public school football games:

"Local complainants confirm sectarian prayers that invoke 'Christ' continue to be broadcast over the loudspeaker at Brooks High School football games and 'micro-midget' elementary school football games, despite FFRF's warnings that these acts are in direct violation of the First Amendment.

"'It is coercive and inappropriate to ask students to listen while a prayer is delivered at athletic events. This is especially disturbing given the young age of these students,' said FFRF Staff Attorney Stephanie Schmitt.

"Public school events must be secular in order to protect the freedom of conscience of all students. Prayer before football games establishes an unconstitutional government endorsement of religion, turns students who are non-Christian into outsiders and confers the school's seal of approval on adherents.

"'It is a tenet of the First Amendment that the State cannot require one of its citizens to forfeit his or her rights and benefits as the price of resisting conformance to state-sponsored religious practice," as stated by the Supreme Court in Lee v. Weisman. In Edwards v. Aguillard the Supreme Court noted, "[the] State exerts great authority and coercive power...because of the students' emulation of teachers as role models and the children's susceptibility to peer pressure.'

"'We ask that the school district commence an immediate investigation into the complaints alleged and take immediate action to stop any and all prayers occurring before any school-sponsored event," wrote Schmitt in a final appeal to Valentine.

"'What makes this situation particularly egregious is that violations are occurring in elementary schools. The District is imposing illegal prayer upon the youngest and most impressionable students, and this must stop,' said FFRF Co-President Annie Laurie Gaylor."

("Alabama Schools Continue in Unlawful Prayer: Football Fans Call Upon the Divine," 24 October 2011, at: http://ffrf.org/news/releases/alabama-schools-continue-in-unlawful-prayer/)
_____


Put that in your First Amendment pipe and don't smoke it; follow it, instead--and that is what the school district eventually agreed to do.



Edited 8 time(s). Last edit at 12/21/2011 08:40AM by steve benson.

My daughter has a Budest friend who was forced to listen to Christ Christmas doctrine in school. Not right.

While we're at it why not get rid of Christmas day as a federal and state holiday. Isn't giving employees a day off just a nod to Christianity and its holy days? Might as well make Joseph Smith's birthday a federal holiday too. And what's with closing government offices on Sundays? Just another acknowledgement of Christianity. Hell, I'm offended that today is named for the All-Father Odin. I'm not a Viking! We need a wholesale revision of the calender if we are ever going create our humanist utopia.

Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 12/21/2011 10:51AM by steve benson.

"Earlier this month, 500 or more protesters turned out after the Wisconsin-based Freedom From Religion Foundation threatened legal action if the crèche remained on public property.

“'I can tell you this--I [will not] back down,' Ellwood City Mayor Anthony Court said, determined not to budge."


Really? That's public property. I can't see any reason why it would be objectionable to move religious displays to religious property where they belong. Churches in this country have really become overbearing, not to mention insecure if they need the blessing of government to promote their systems of worship. Then they throw themselves down in a heap if they can't get it. Just wow.

(Sorry blackholesun -- I didn't mean this to be in reply to you.)



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 12/21/2011 10:28AM by Makurosu.