Yes. Everyone has to have a sex. And everyone is influenced by sex. Dont be niave.

“Suppose for example, that I am a black defendant entering a courthouse where the Ku Klux Klan is on the grounds with a display of some sort…”
*
Unfortunately this sort of thing is the price we pay for our freedoms.  Hopefully, the black defendent would be strong enough to walk the gauntlet.  Its been done before and may (however unlikely) happen in the future.  Our freedom of speech is not offset, after all, with a freedom from feeling uncomfortable.

And David, the Board voted on that occurring on the Courthouse grounds too, right?

(sarcasm off)

Well, if it is a done deal to ban all free expression on the grounds of this one public space (and once another public space is designated, don’t anyone hold their breath expecting no protest from the misquoting “separation of church and state” folks), then the grounds committee will have fulfilled their mission of caring for the grounds.

The area will be under a bell jar, and will need NOTHING but the occasional mowing etc that can be provided by any competent maintenance contractor.

If the ban on all displays is enacted, I surely hope to see the grounds committee disbanded in the next budget cycle.  There’s some money we can all save which will no longer be needed to support their work, of which there will be little once there is no longer any threat to their charge.

There’s a bit of silver lining, I guess!

(p.s. to Ms AnThrope—thanks!  And here’s to untwisted knickers!)

@aet: Of course, when Muslim Congressman Keith Ellison was allegedly going to use the Quran for his swearing-in, so-called “Christian conservatives” had a meltdown. So much for personal preference and freedom of religion.

Too bad the county leaders do not have the same sense of personal honor.

“Interesting that a religious item is featured in the swearing in of the President, yet an extension of it outside a local courthouse is somehow considered offensive.”

They aren’t swearing on the Bible because of some government commitment, but because of personal honor.  They aren’t using the bible to evangelize. 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Presidential_inauguration

Presidential inauguration ceremonies have used different objects for the swearing-in ceremony.  The Bible is the common choice (not surprising, since they’re usually anglo-saxon protestants), but its not the only one.  Some presidents have preferred to swear on an open bible, typically some particular passage.  Others have selected a random page, and others on a closed book.  Some haven’t used anything. 

The president usually chooses what they want to swear on, as a matter of PERSONAL PREFERENCE. Obama, for example, chose the Lincoln Bible.

Interesting that a religious item is featured in the swearing in of the President, yet an extension of it outside a local courthouse is somehow considered offensive.

Oh David! Ha-ha! Location…location…location! You just had to go and ratchet it up a notch didn’t you? I had read this article and agree that the “location” is problematic:

“...the Courthouse is different from other public spaces because it represents the principle that everyone (in theory, at least) will be treated equally under the law. Anything that could be a barrier to someone seeking justice (and that could easily take the form of a display expressing hostility to that person’s identity or very existence) doesn’t belong at a courthouse.”

Suppose for example, that I am a black defendant entering a courthouse where the Ku Klux Klan is on the grounds with a display of some sort…

And Barbara? I enjoy reading your responses. Sadly wadded knickers vs. critical thinking and reasonable debate is just a way of life for some folks.

To clear up a misunderstanding about the interfaith display of two years ago: It was expressly *not* endorsed by Loudoun Interfaith BRIDGES or any other collective group, but rather was endorsed only by those specific congregations that participated. It’s important to note that there were congregations that were invited but adamantly opposed participation, precisely *because* it was taking place at the Courthouse.

I understand what you’re trying to say here, but disagree that the Courthouse is the symbolically perfect place for such a public forum because it is the nexus for competing Constitutional interests. See http://loudounprogress.us/diary/129/solving-the-holiday-display-impasse

Ms. Dixon, all the best to you and your son, and how fortunate that he returned safely.

Dissenter, two things:  if the issue for some is religious displays in a public space, will those other public spaces still be okay after the Courthouse is off the list?  The Courthouse, IMO, is the symbolically perfect place for anyone to express their freedoms, because that is the public site where those freedoms are most often challenged, and defended when necessary.  In addition, another point raised repeatedly by David has been the interfaith celebration;  That seemed to be a wonderful and successful venture, but again, we have INDIVIDUAL freedoms.  A homogenized group representing “faith” by putting everyone into the same pot (with government approval?) is not the same as any Sikh, Buddhist, Jew, Wiccan, Muslim, Agnostic, Atheist or even Christian to publicly apply to display their own beliefs.

This should be a non-issue, and was settled last year.

Yes, some groups or individuals will try to abuse it.  And you know what?  As long as they get the proper permits and do not break any laws, they have the same right as any other individual to express THEIR beliefs.

Perhaps if we spent a bit less time with our kinickers in a wad here in Loudoun, we’d get a little less of the kinds of behavior that is designed to shock or dismay.

Simple expression of personal freedom doesn’t really fall into that category (except perhaps for those who make a career of being personally offended by any and everything).

(ps to Pastafarian:  Is that you, Mr. Miller?  I see you’ve been referencing said FSM from the dais again on this—-and I don’t mean the Facilities Standards Manual!  lol)

Dissenter,

The Flying Spaghetti Monster and Pastafarianism is as real as any other god and religion. We even have our own heaven, hell and holidays.

May you be touched by His Noodly Appendage

Some one please alert Steven Rawlings to the fact that it is impossible to grow up in the U.S. without knowing what it is that Christians believe.  It is long established.  The establishment of Christian beliefs is a done deed.
  If all parties are permitted to display their pet projects there will easily be one for each day of the year.  Who is to say one is more worthy than another?  The Prophet Mohammed is said to have displaced 365 gods ( one for each day of the year,)substituting the One God who is the Creator of all.  That is a pretty good idea.
  Which groups will be allowed and which will not be is fraught with peril and will result in no end of bickering, of which we already have enough.
  In particular if the Constitution matters political alliances between church and state are prohibited.  A lesson apparently not yet learned by many.

As a Christian who cares deeply about everyone’s right to religious freedom, I think there are many private and religious venues for Christmas displays.  I would prefer to not have the courthouse property cluttered with various exhibits 365 days each year!

Barbara -I hope to chat with you some day as I was pleased that you would stand tall with me -& would not stand for such disgraceful behavior here in the press buy folks obviously making a living out of trashing good folks -as an Army mom when folks act strange we let the dogs bark as there is nothing to gain from them- no need to concern myself with folks like that -Barbara I award you the meddle of Outstanding Service of Squashing abuse of an Army Mom-Now I must go take care of my family and don’t have time to be sitting here giving my time to attacking negative folks

David brings up an interesting point and probably one that was pondered by the Courthouse Grounds and Facilities committee.  The point here is not just religious displays, but also (and perhaps more so) those that make a mockery of the process (a la the earlier mentioned Flying Spaghetti Monster).  The BOS current policy allows only 10 displays.  What happens when all 10 are spoken for by fictious monsters constructed of foodstuffs and there is no room for religious (including atheist) displays?

Just to clarify, my response below is not directed to you, MsAnnThrope. I think you are absolutely right.

Another question: Is there any reason that such a public forum *must* be at the Courthouse? What about other public spaces?

Then read Jonathan’s comment, David.

This isn’t really an answer to the question, is it? I’m not asking about a generic, theoretical response, but rather about the response of real people who are wondering “what the big deal is.” (Although in reality, it’s those engaging in protest who are making a big deal out of it.)

The reason for bringing up the Klan is that it was explicitly cited as the outcome of the current policy in other jurisdictions by the Facilities Committee. That’s all.

I don’t understand your other references, since I didn’t say anything about veterans or Communists.

If this space is a “traditional” public forum (Demmon v. Loudon County Public Schools, 342 F. Supp. 2d 474 (E.D. Va. 2004), then the debate should be about managing and maintaining the space - PERIOD.

That Delgaudio and the ACLU are on the same side for different reasons, isn’t quite enough to push an agnostic off the fence…but close! ;)

Long live Public Forums! Embracing THAT notion is key to keeping our hard-fought-for freedoms! As for the first amendment, I offer one of my favorite movie quotes (The American President):

—- America isn’t easy. America is advanced citizenship. You gotta want it bad, ‘cause it’s gonna put up a fight. It’s gonna say “You want free speech? Let’s see you acknowledge a man whose words make your blood boil, who’s standing center stage and advocating at the top of his lungs that which you would spend a lifetime opposing at the top of yours.”—-

David, what is the response when the Klan exercises its Constitutional right to assemble with proper permits anywhere?

Peaceful counter-assemblies have been effective.

Education is supposed to be the answer with anything, isn’t it?

We already do have Klan activity here intermittently, as there have been more than one leafleting incidents in the thirteen years I’ve been here.

They have seemed to take advantage of growth issue clashes in the few times they’ve occurred, and my conclusion has NOT been that no-growthers = Klan, but that the highly-charged atmosphere of the growth debate here has allowed the Klan office in West VA (look it up) to take advantage of the (passionate) crowds that collect to do some advertising for their own passions.

Perhaps if tolerance were actually practiced (by everyone—that Communist reference was a bit over the top in my book, but again, just my opinion, especially in light of Equality standing for diversity and tolerance, yes?) then the situation would not arise that allows true hate groups like the Klan to see an opportunity.

(and BTW, brilliant stroke to bring up the Klan.  It is germane to the debate, and pushes that artful implication that the mother of a veteran is a Communist (which was NOT germane, except in that it is illustrative of some of the over-the-top behavior on the issue) right off to the side.  Well done.)

I’m in no way suggesting that a public forum shouldn’t be open to all viewpoints - that is the ACLU position, the one required by the Constitution, and one I am personally passionate about - but I’m curious to know how the previous two commenters would react to seeing a display erected by the Ku Klux Klan. That is in fact what has happened in other jurisdictions studied by the Facilities Committee, so it’s not just theoretical. How would you react to that, and what, if anything, would you suggest to deal with the obvious animus it would engender?

I agree with The Sidhe.  Why does is bother you so much?  We have much more to worry about than a display.

Why is this such a big deal? I’m not a Christian, and yet I am not offended by holiday displays, even if they’re sitting on the court house lawn. I don’t have to believe in a religion to look at display, think to myself, “hey, pretty!” and go on my merry way. They’ve been doing it for years, yeah? Has it hurt anybody? No? Then what’s the big, frakking deal?

It’s interesting that there are a few folks living in this county, less then you could put in a telephone booth, that have a big reputation for insulting the Conservative Christians & that is all they do with their life - like screaming temper tantrum -so middle school like-starved for attention getters

Jonathan, is it possible for you to discuss anything without slam politics?

It looks pretty funny (ironic, if you prefer) to have someone who’s supposedly all about diversity, respect, etc comparing strangers in the paper to Communists.

A better title would have been

“Republican activists protest over ban on displays; vote delayed”

Good photo and quote.  I don’t think Ms Dixon understands the irony.  Wasn’t it the communists who promised “peace” out of the barrel of a gun.

It’s simple if you don’t agree with the display then don’t look at it. No one is forcing you to! Here’s another idea stop going to people’s house you are not invited to and preaching your beliefs. If they ban display’s such as Christmas, don’t forget Halloween. Next they’re not gonna allow Independence Day celebrations because the tree huggers are afriad everything will catch on fire and certain churches will say that it’s worshipping an idol. Everyone has excuses on allowing and not allowing these displays. Put it to a general vote at let the majority decide, you know the democratic process. And no matter which way it goes, shut up and deal with it.

“Help, help I’m being oppressed”. Christians aren’t being oppressed. Get over yourselves.

If they vote to keep the displays, I’m going to organize a display for the Flying Spaghetti Monster.

May you be touched by his noodlely appendage.

Ramen.

What does “county leaders” mean in the first sentence? Did the writer mean “the board of supervisors”? Talk about imprecision!

For the message of the cross is foolishness to those who are perishing, but to us who are being saved it is the power of God.
1 Corinthians 1:18

In a republic, we have representatives that do the work of the majority.  If they fail to do so, they do not have to return to that position. It is all up to us - the voters.

God, as an all powerful being, is neither male nor female in my book.  He is everything.  Those who wrote the books of the Bible lived in a time of male domination and only men were important (well, that is still going on today, unfortunately), so the obvious, “HE”.  However, back to the issue. . .if you want to see religious symbols at Christmas, then put them in your front yard.  It doesn’t need to be on taxpayer property as many taxpayers are not Christian.

Here is an idea. Since it costs money to maintain the courthouse grounds, charge rent for displays - real rent - $500 a day - and then see who wants to really display this that and the other thing.

Hmm, the Bible. It’s a good read, I commend those who wrote it. Really helps me in my times of need. But, ya know…

John 3:16 .....For God so loved HE gave his only son for who should ever believe in HIM should not die but have ever lasting life .....The Bible—I guess that is where Mr. Rawlings got the idea of God being a man.

HIM? Mr. Rawlings, what makes you think I’m a male? Have you met me? Do you have a picture of me? Does it matter what sex I am? And for that matter, do I have a sexual identity? Do I HAVE to have a sex? Am I heterosexual, and does it matter? What presumptions I’m hearing down there in Leesburg, what presumptions!