AA's "Fat Flier" Got Whole Row
Ashley Dupre On Tiger Woods' Babes: "At Least I Kept My Mouth Shut"
Same-Sex Marriage Blame Game Aims at Paterson, Addabbo
Wife Tries To Abort And Poison Husband's Lovechild
Rihanna's Random Airport Search
City Council will begin hearing the case today to allow nativity scenes to be displayed in New York City public schools. While menorahs, Christmas trees, stars and crescents are allowed along hallways and in front offices during the holiday season, the Department of Education views nativity scenes, or crèches, as purely religious. Council member Simcha Felder believes so strongly in the Department's policy that he not only opposes the resolution, but would rather all religious symbols be taken out of the schools. He told the Times, “If it’s offending anybody, let there be nothing." But Catholic League for Religious and Civil Rights President William Donohue is pushing the Council to include room for créches, the same way he says he would if Jewish or Islamic symbols were banned, arguing, “I can’t imagine any Jews and Muslims being offended by this. What are we left with? A few angry atheists?”
Council Debating Whether to Allow Baby Jesus into Schools
add to stumble upon
add to reddit
tweet this
post to facebookComments (13) [rss]
Post a comment (Comment Policy)
Tips
Newsmap
Contribute
I'd like to see Baby Jesus in his little ghost manger, watching Baby Einstein videos.
The fact is the constitution simply restricts Congress only from passing any laws from establishing a national religion. It does not prevent a public school, a post office or any other government entity from displaying a Nativity scene for example.
Unfortunately, the Left has conned a lot of people the last few decades into believing this absurd notion that the constitution is some sort of mandate to ruthlessly eliminate any acknowlegement of the country's and western civilization's Judeo-Christian heritage from public life.
The term "separation of church and state" does not even appear in the constitution. More people should read it for themselves instead of just passively accepting the big lie being peddled by the media and radical groups like the ACLU.
numerous Supreme Court cases have determined that there is such a thing as the separation of church and state (not in so many words, but largely synonymous with the common concept of that phrase).
in fact, the government display of a nativity scene is the specific fact pattern in at least one case where such display was found to be unconstitutional.
That's probably true but when activist judges start reading into the constitution things that aren't there, it becomes meaningless. The establishment clause restricts congress and only congress. That's simply what it says regardless what some petty tyrant in a black robe decides. Judges have been terribly wrong before.
It's already happened in other areas, where "eminent domain" reserved for PUBLIC infrastructure purposes, has now been interpreted as for PRIVATE purposes as well. So when the court can decide a word actually means the opposite of its definition, well, might as well shove the Bill of Rights into the shredder.
Cue Mr. Hanky, the Christmas Poo.
Seriously why can't Christians keep their religions to themselves?
cause they need money, duh!
religion is stupid
actually they said that religion is actually scientific. It seems that humanity has a gene that predisposes them to believe in some higher authority because humans are the only ones on the planet that need another human being present to deliver a baby. Scientist hypothesize that this "god gene" is responsible for humanity clumping itself together throughout the ages and not separating thereby insuring the greatest chance of survival for the species. So belief in religion isn't stupid, it's just belief in old dudes in pointy hats.
How come government employees are never offended by paid days off on account of Christian holidays? Isn't it a violation of "separation of church and state" when the government has an official holiday for Easter, Christmas etc? How is it that every president has taken the oath of office on a bible if there is such a restriction? Will people accuse Obama of pushing religion when he takes the oath of office on the bible?
it's january, christmas is OVER!
take the lights down already.
What would Jesus do?
Maybe that New Jersey couple should have named their child Baby Jesus just to roil these idiotic school boards.