Posted by
Bert Chapman on Monday, December 07, 2009 8:12:13 PM
It used to be common to see nativity scenes in many courthouse grounds around the country. Unfortunately, this has declined in recent years as militant secularist groups have gone to court or threatened to go to court to prevent communities from erecting these structures on courthouse grounds or other publicly owned properties. The extremely lame "rationale" used by these groups, whose memberships include the American Civil Liberties Union, its state affiliates, and other pathologically deranged secularist groups and individuals, is that such displays constitute "government endorsement of religion." The ultimate objectives of these groups and individuals is, of course, not concern that governmental entities endorse Christianity or any other religion, but that all traces of religious belief, particularly Christianity, are removed from American public life.
The true legal test courts and legislatures should follow in ruling on public displays of religious belief on government property is not, whether such displays constitute an establishment of religion, but whether these displays physically restrict the ability of individuals not holding the religious beliefs expressed in the display, to practice or not practice any other form of religious expression. Of course, anyone with a modicum of intelligence will know that the presence of a nativity display or any other form of religious belief on governmental property, does not prevent them from holding or not holding particular religious views or practicing those views.
Governments desiring to place nativity displays on their properties should respond to extortionate attempts to remove religious expression from the public square in several ways. They should seriously consider filing SLAPP (Strategic Lawsuit Against Public Participation) suits against the ACLU or any of its allied organizations or individuals who threaten to engage in litigation against any governmental attempts to restrict the free expression of religious views. Congress and state legislatures should also consider legislation preventing these organizations and like-minded individuals from filing such suits on the grounds that such litigation blatantly violates the Constitution's "free exercise of religion" clause. State and local governments should also encourage individuals in these states who oppose the ACLU's extortionate tyranny to publicly demonstrate outside the offices of these organizations, disrupt their meetings, and these governments and the federal government should also explore the feasibility of revoking or drastically revising the tax exempt status of these groups. If the free expression of religious belief is to still occur on governmental properties throughout the U.S., it's up to concerned citizens and courageous governmental leaders to stand up to the militantly secularist mafioso in the ACLU and allied organizations opposed to the constitution's "free exercise" clause.