This is a concept that many on the Left have never actually understood. It's really simple: government cannot require you to subscribe to any particular religious belief. Our country was founded upon Judeao-Christian principles, but you are not required to be a religious person in order to live here. Unlike the far Left, we believe in tolerance.
This is a concept to which Leftists pay the barest of lip-service. They speak glowingly of tolerance when it suits them to do so, but in practice they are rabidly intolerant.
A nativity scene set up at the southern end of the Bridge of the Gods has been challenged by the Freedom from Religion Foundation.
The Wisconsin-based organization filed a protest in early December with the Port of Cascade Locks “on behalf of a concerned taxpayer and frequent tollbooth patron.” The crèche is facing vehicles as they stop at the toll booth to pay for passage.
“It is unlawful for the Port of Cascade Locks to maintain, erect or host a holiday display that consists solely of a nativity scene, thus singling out, showing preference for and endorsing one religion,” wrote Rebecca Kratz, staff attorney for FRF in a Dec. 8 letter.
“We request that you immediately inform us in writing of the steps that you are taking to remedy this violation of the First Amendment.”
No, Rebecca, you have it backwards.
The First Amendment guarantees freedom of speech - not freedom from speech. Obviously, you have freedom of religion - not freedom from exposure to religion.
The nativity scene does not constitute endorsement of one religion as specified in our founding documents; the important words that you apparently missed are these: Congress shall make no law - and as they have not made any law that specifies Christianity as a national religion, your complaint serves only to demonstrate your own general vacuousness.
That someone of low intellect and mean in spirit makes a decision to become all offended by a holiday display does not mean that any violation of any of the Amendments, nor any other tenets of our founding documents, has occurred. It just means that the "offended" individual is a dork, as are those who would support a dorkish claim.
Many devout Christians view the character of Santa as an abomination; some note that it is simply a rearrangement of the letters that spell the name of Satan, who of course is the epitome of evil incarnate in their view. Yet they don't waste public dollars by filing legal action against public entities that may have a Santa or two among their Christmas decorations.
Rebecca, you and your ilk would do well to adopt the more tolerant attitudes of Christians in this regard. A very acceptable alternative would involve you voting with your feet. You don't have to live in our country; this is hardly a place like East Germany.
Feel free to leave at any time.
And by the way,
Merry Christmas!
