For the first time since I started this journal, someone left a comment with a differing point of view. I welcome differing viewpoints and was excited to see my first one. So, in keeping with my journal's purpose, I am re-posting their comment and a response. First I would like to thank the commenter who is THATBOYAINTRIGHT for stopping by and posting. Here's his post from my previous entry, The War on Christmas Is Not Over:
"You don't know the whole story. The nativity was purchased with taxpayer money and decorated the area around the Mayor's church. That is simply wrong."
I researched this a little further and found out a couple of things. First, the nativity was purchased by the city of Dallas, Georgia, but is located on public land according to the ALLIANCE DEFENSE FUND in a letter that was sent to the AMERICANS UNITED FOR THE SEPARATION OF CHURCH AND STATE (AU) in response to their lawsuit threat to the city. You can view the letter from AU by clicking HERE. The letter from ADF in response to it can be viewed by clicking on this LINK. According to the Alliance Defense Fund, the display met the U. S. Supreme Court's requirements for "public acknowledgement of the Christmas season." The Nativity was not the only Christmas display along one of Dallas, Georgia's main corridors. There were snowflakes, reindeer, Christmas trees, and other non-religious symbols of Christmas. It would be physically impossible to see just the Nativity scene without seeing the other decorations. Therefore, it was not an endorsement of any particular religion (Lynch vs. Donnelly, 465 U.S. 668 673 ). There are two other cases that sum this up very well: ACLU of Kentucky vs. Mercer County, 432 F.3d at 638: "The First Amendment does not demand a wall of separation between church and state." In Everson vs. Board of Education, 330 U.S. 1, 18 (1947), the Court held that the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment requiresthe state to be neutral in its relations between believers and non-believers. It does not require the state to oppose religion or religious expression. The letter from the Alliance Defense Fund to the City of Dallas explains it in much greater detail. Please click the referenced link above and take the time to read it. It's important to have this information as it is not publicized by the mainstream media for obvious reasons. I still maintain that this was another attempt to promote an agenda. That agenda is to remove all Christian symbols from the public eye. I think attempts such as this are just a first step towards outlawing such displays on private property. Don't think so? If such legal actions are allowed and removal of such displays is forced upon the public against the will of the people, the next stop is your yard. The liberal left does things in increments, never all at once. It seems it's OK to deny Christians First Amendment protection just as long as we are careful not to offend non-Christians. It amazes me that in less than one lifetime, our society has gone down the slippery slope of moral decay to the point where we even have such a conversation, the beliefs of the majority of Americans have ended up in the courts, and we're having to fight to even maintain minimal rights to express those beliefs freely. By the way, if you happen to question whether or not keeping the Nativity display in Dallas is the will of the majority, as of today there are 6,409 signatures on the petition on TAKING IT GLOBAL in favor of leaving the display. You can still sign the petition if you wish, just click HERE.