With the Loudoun supervisors’ vote July 17, the county courthouse in Leesburg may yet again be the setting for abashing news reports during the holidays.
On a 6-2 vote, the board approved a government-sponsored winter display consisting of a crèche (a depiction of the birth of Jesus as described in the gospels of Matthew and Luke), a menorah and a Santa and reindeer scene.
Supervisors Shawn Williams (R-Broad Run) and Janet Clarke (R-Blue Ridge) opposed the recommendation, which came from both the board’s finance committee and the Loudoun County Courthouse Grounds and Facilities Committee. Geary Higgins (R-Catoctin) was absent from the meeting.
The approved display will also include wreaths and garlands of greenery hung on the fence of the courthouse lawn, and a tree to be placed in the traditional spot on the sidewalk in front of the courthouse. Placement of the other display items will be on the lawn beside the tree, the committee’s recommendation states.
Loudoun County’s holiday display at the courthouse has made unwanted national headlines in recent years. Last December, a “skeleton Santa” on a cross outside the courthouse was vandalized, leading Christian and atheist groups alike to hold peaceful demonstrations on the county property.
Local atheists continue to address supervisors, urging them not to allow religious displays on government property. Loudoun County, they say, is setting itself up for a lawsuit by sponsoring certain religions on government property.
Chairman Scott York (R-At Large) balked at those threats during the July 17 meeting, saying previous court cases and a recommendation from Virginia’s attorney general pave the way for both religious and secular displays on government grounds.
“This is following what our federal government is doing,” said York, referencing the holiday display at the White House ellipsis.
Williams, however, sees it as a matter of reputation. Why would the county want to continue to invite bad press and expose itself to potential litigation, Williams asked his colleagues.
“This is a policy matter. I’m motivated by two primary factors – one is the reputation of Loudoun County and the other is the established law,” Williams said. “In terms of reputation, this committee recommendation will continue to make Loudoun a national spectacle of a First Amendment debate on which the law has been well-established.”
redcow - You miss the point they are ONLY allowing Christians and Jews to display. That is a lawsuit that they will lose hard waiting to happen.
what a joke. loudoun gets thrown into the limelight again for a distracting issue that shouldn’t define us. the country grounds should not be a place of display for ANY religion. plain and simple. government is government and church is church.
@red cow. The booking analogy was last year’s situation. They didn’t like the displays that resulted from a first come first served plan. This year they are going to put up a government display and suspend any private displays.
Unleash the lawyers - here come the lawsuits!
Public spaces cannot favor two religions and exclude the rest. This will not stand up to a legal test.
At least add a Festivus pole….
Ed: I believe you missed my point. The Government is nothing more than a booking agent for any group who comes before it wishing to use that public land. Christians want to use it around Dec. 25th. I see no reason why anybody else should be denied its use for their purposes. If they want to submit a request to express themselves, more power to them.
What you and/or others want to believe is that somehow the Government is sanctioning Christianity by allowing Christians to express themselves, which is not the case.
County of Allegheny v. ACLU Greater Pittsburgh Chapter (1989)
The Supreme Court ruled that while a creche display on public property was unconstitutional.
Sechler v. State College Area School District (2000)
Jarrod Sechler, a “youth pastor” at a local Christian church, filed suit against the State College Area High School because their holiday program was insufficiently Christian for him. According to a U.S. District Court, the presence of non-Christian symbols did not advance either those religions or express hostility towards Christianity.
EdMyers is right about this one. Court case after court case backs him up.
@redcow. You correctly understand the free expression right. Yes, you (as a private citizen) can go down to the courthouse with a sign that has any religious message you want.
What you miss is the establishment prohibition. Government may not endorse religious pronouncement (like a creche) in a forum (the courthouse lawn) while simultaneously preventing others from also displaying in that same forum.
What you apparently want is both…the ability to display your religious message (the creche) and the ability to use government to prevent anyone else (e.g. the athiests) from displaying a different message that you disapprove.
Government can regulate time and place for religious messages on public property. Once they open a fourum for religious or political content, however, they cannot regulate the messages content that is ultimately displayed.
fedupdude — Separation between Church and State does not mean “Public” property used by the State can be denied to the Public. When the Environment folks want to hold a rally on the National Mall, should they be denied if the Government (or anti-environment folks in society) disapprove of their message? No. They get a permit and can express themselves like anybody else. This is no different than Christians expressing their religion on public land. You may disagree with the message, but to deny use of public land to factions of the public you dislike is nothing more than Fascism.
“government property” - Marshall. Correction my friend, that is “Public Property”. WE all own the courthouse property. It is a shared resource of the community and thus it allows whomever to use it. No different than churches using schools on Sundays or pagans renting out a public park to dance around hollowing at the moon.
If you can’t accept that public resources should be shared, then maybe you need to go live in a Communist Country where property is owned by the State and the State will decide how it is used.
The BOS should set aside one 6’x6’x6’ cube for any & all for their holiday display, the only restriction is that each display has to be no larger than 1’x1’x1’. They’ll be able to accommodate 216 religious & non-religious displays. All should be happy.
Your super majority is meaningless. This will end up in court and will lose like 500 other cases like it. You know this is the kind of stuff our founder fought against right? Church influence on politics was one of the big no nos on their list which is why they separated church and state.
Unfortunately the Constitution cannot be applied just to suit your argument when its convenient. Just because there may be a majority of Christians (dwindling too…), it does not mean that space between the public and the religious sphere gets to disappear.
The Constitution allows you to practice your religious beliefs, not to shove it down my throat on government property.
The Operative: Your concerns have already been addressed by me, and can be found within the comment string, below
Loudoun is a Super Majority Christian County. Get used to it. If you want something more secular, try Alexandria or Arlington.
Did the committee only include Christians and Jews??? That might be a clue.
@John Mileo:
Festival of Lights/Diwali is also celebrated by the Hinduism, Sikhism, and Jainism often referred to as the Festival of Lights. So this is not exclusively a Jewish holiday.
But I want to know why this Committee only opted for Christian and Jewish religions. Either be all inclusive or display nothing at all.
John Mileo
What about atheist who want a say or the flying spaghetti monster? How about a star wars display for the Jedis out there? Christmas after all is a big deal to them. Why not just open it up to all again?
Oh right you don’t want that.
@ redcow:
I think Christians have been doing a good job and making Satan happy themselves. Between all the hate some have been regularly spewing and turning off millions to their message.
Many Christians should take a look in the mirror and re-read the New Testament. Then they’d realize they have a lot more in common with an oppressive dark lord than they do with their Christ.
fedupdude: FYI-I do not celebrate Hanukah as your last comment suggests and by the way: “The Festival Lights” is another name for Hanukah as well as for the Diwali religious holiday celebrations.
I suggest you re-read my comment in which I recommend that those of other beliefs who may be desirous of similar recognition, petition the appropriate government entity at the time of the year when the celebration of those events actually occurs: e.g. 2012: Aug. 19th - Eid al-Fitr; Sept. 17th - Rosh Hashanah; and Oct. 20th - Birth of Bab, to name a few.
redcow
That is what happened last year. If you let one group display you have to let everyone even skeleton Santa. But the Christians didn’t like that did they?
The Courthouse is PUBLIC PROPERTY that is to be shared by the public. As a result, Christians wish to utilize this public property for a holy day in Christianity and there is no reason they should be denied.
No different than if some other group wanted to use the same public space for some day/event that they hold dear.
A completed ban on any use of this public space would be in violation of the 1st Amendment to the Constitution.
Nothing is stopping Jews from using the Courthouse lawn for their holy days. The same applies for Muslims, Hindus, etc… As for Atheists, they are just a band of haters out to remove all religion from society, much to Satan’s delight.
John Mileo
Do we put up other displays for other religions? Where is the festival of lights display, the pass over display, the Ramadan display?
Oh that’s right no one else’s religion counts other than yours right?
These cases always lose in court because it is such a clear violation of the separation of church and state. In the recent past several airports were sued and lost, several school. The only display the courts have let pass is a secular tree. The system last year was fair because everyone got a say; you cannot restrict it to just the big religions and expect to not get sued.
John Mileo,
Kwanzaa is celebrated from 12/26-1/1 and Pastafarians celebrate Holiday during the holiday season as well. We want our displays too.
Here it comes….tossing away money on upcoming lawsuits while the same BOS tells the museum they don’t have any money to spare for them. Put up the holiday tree and leave it at that….let the public use their imagination to determine what the tree means to them: atheists = presents/ jews = lights on the tree can relate to the menorah ’ etc…. No doubt that big church up the street with have an outdoor display that the Christians can all adore. And where, by the way, was Higgins again? He seems to be absent a lot these days——did they elect an absentee supervisor?
Those of you bashing Cuccinelli should probably take a moment to read his opinion (10-067), which even the ACLU agrees with. What he said was that local governments don’t have an obligation to ban religious displays. But that’s not all. He states in his opinion that if a county DOES opt to allow religious displays, they then cannot “…exclude a religious display of reasonable duration based solely upon content.” This means a decision to allow a crèche, Menorah and a Santa ONLY and not allow citizens to put up a Festivus Pole is, in the opinion of the Attorney General of Virginia, NOT LEGAL. I’m glad the Loudoun County Supervisors (with the exception of the two smart ones) believes they have enough extra tax money to win a lawsuit that even their own AG says is a loser.
State sponsored religion. Way to go Loudoun. The Flying Spaghetti Monster is not pleased. Enjoy the lawsuits.
Well hopefully an atheist will remove a Christian display from the Courthouse lawn. I mean we proved last year someone can remove and vandalize a display with impunity, right?
Also, I don’t make it a habit to praise Janet Clarke, but I am pleased and impressed with her vote.
Also, when is someone at this paper going to hold Geary Higgins’ feet to the fire for missing so many meetings? According to the LCRC, Geary was a leader… is he leading in absenteeism?
I’m so glad the BOS decided to allow the Christmas Tree and Santa so that Loudouners can truly celebrate and enjoy the true meaning of Christmas!
Fedupdude & Loudoun Insider: Correct me if I am wrong here, but the last time I checked the calendar for December it shows only two religious-based holidays (Hanukah and Christmas) that occur during the time frame for the courthouse Holiday Displays. I would suggest to those citizens of the county who feel so have strong religious on atheist beliefs that the wish to express in a similar manner do so by petitioning the responsible government agency to do so, at the appropriate time of the year designated for the celebration of their particular holiday or event.
At least Supervisor Williams has his head about him. This will certainly invite a lawsuit that will likely succeed. Just reading the information around the decision it’s clear that this is motivated simply by Christian hegemony, and not by anything even remotely close to “tolerance” or “acceptance”. While I certainly respect Chairman York, this will be a federal issue, and AG (and candidate for Governor) Cuccinelli has not shown himself to be particularly accurate with his opinions. Let the “fun and games” (and total embarrassment) for Loudoun County continue.
I think everyone can agree that Christians are the clear majority in Loudoun County. But why do Jews get special placement as a minority religion? What about Muslims, Hindus, Sikhs, Buddhists, etc.? What about Kwanzaa?
This is a ridiculous pandering decision sure to create more controversy and hundreds of thousands of dollars in more outside legal expenses for Loudoun County.
John Mileo
Good question, where is the “tolerance” or “acceptance” when only two or three religions get a say. This is clearly Christian dominance by the government and will rightly create lawsuits as this is a clear violation of the separation of Church and State.
Also where was the “tolerance” or “acceptance” of the non religious viewpoint last year, people kept ripping apart displays that question religion. They have a right to free expression too.
It was a really stupid decision.
The regulation of christmas has begun. So much for religious freedom for everyone to express their religion on the Courthouse lawn. Now only the Patrick Henry version is acceptable in Loudoun as the official and legal way to celebrate in December.
We see yet another example of the government stepping into the private sphere. Wonder why it is that the evangelical tea party types can’t see that?
Those who bring about a costly lawsuit will be solely responsible for creating that very expense to the taxpayers. Whatever happened to “tolerance” or “acceptance?”
And Trevor: thanks for enlightening your readers about Matthew and Luke’s depiction of the crèche. Now how about informing us about the origins of the Jewish Menorah?
This is a Wonderful Decision. God Bless The County. May we enjoy the wonderful CHRISTMAS displays on our courthouse lawn.
What a waste of time and money. Aren’t these the same conservatives who cry out about spending? This is going to turn into a legal battle surely. Meanwhile, prepare yourself for another spectacle.
Such a stupid decision, they should have approved a non-secular holiday tree.
I am half way expecting a African American, practicing Muslim will now protest their lack of religious beliefs not being represented on the Courthouse grounds. Get ready for the Atheist lawsuit, because I’m betting it’s already drafted and will be filed by tomorrow morning. How much is this going to cost the tax payers to defend (yet another) lawsuit against the County.
Of course Cuccinelli wants them to take this course of action - he’ll get his name in the paper defending Loudoun County while we the taxpayers foot the legal bills for yet another outside counsel that the county is sure to hire to defend this.
 |
The Loudoun Times-Mirror is an interactive, digital replica of the printed newspaper.Open the e-edition now. |
