Christmas Controversy in my Town...what side is the law on?

[tfurrh]

http://www.myfoxdfw.com/dpp/news/national-group-wants-courthouse-nativity-scene-removed-120711

Nativity scene: legal on courthouse? illegal on courthouse? What does the law say? I've looked online, and can't find too much regarding TX law or even federal law, and was wanting to get some input on what the legality of the situation is.


ATHENS, Texas - A nativity scene in Athens, Texas is the talk of the town because a national group is trying to get it removed, claiming it is offensive.

The holiday decoration sits on the Henderson County courthouse lawn, aptly located on the corner of Palestine and Corsicana streets.

“I love when I go by a nativity scene. It’s a constant reminder during a season where we get so busy what we’re really celebrating,” said Joan King, a local resident.

But if a nonprofit group in Wisconsin called the Freedom from Religion Foundation gets its way the nativity scene could soon be on the way out. A resident who wished to remain anonymous apparently called the group to complain.

“That Christianity was being promoted, endorsed by local government and this made them feel unwelcomed. It sends a message of intimidation and exclusion to non-Christians and non believers this time of year,” said Annie Laurie Gaylor, co-founder of the Freedom from Religion Foundation.

The group sent County Judge Richard Sanders a letter on Monday asking him to take the nativity scene down. But he doesn’t plan to do so because he said there are other decorations like a Santa Claus, Frosty the Snowman, a tree and gnomes on the courthouse lawn as well.

“We feel like we’re in our legal right to have it because we do have other decorations,” Judge Sanders said.

The Freedom from Religion Foundation disagrees.

“It’s not integrated into an overall holiday display. Anybody walking by that is going to say, ‘Hmmm. This is a Christian government building. I’m not welcome here if I’m not Christian,’” Gaylor said.

The group’s founders said they are simply trying to educate the public. They have filed lawsuits against government agencies in other states in similar situations.

Gaylor said she’s not planning to do that just yet in this situation, but will not hesitate to do so if Henderson County does not comply with her request.

The issue has drawn so much attention that several local pastors plan to meet. They are determined to keep Jesus a part of Christmas.

And Athens resident Tracie Lynda is collecting signatures for a petition to keep the nativity scene right where it is.

“So now they’re trying to take Baby Jesus? What is so offensive about a baby in a manger? If it does not mean anything to you why does it offend you?” Lynda asked.

Edit: I found what I was looking for:


http://crooksandliars.com/karoli/did...dment-christia

KING: Congressman Paul, does faith have a role in these public issues, the public square, or is it a personal issue in your home and in your church?

PAUL: I think faith has something to do with the character of the people who represent us and law should have a moral fiber too and our leaders should. We shouldn't expect, uh, us to try to change morality. You can't teach people how to be moral. But the Constitution addresses this by saying literally it says no theocracy but it doesn't talk about church and state. The most important thing is the First Amendment -- that Congress shall write no laws -- which means Congress should never prohibit the expression of your Christian faith in a public place.

http://www.lc.org/resources/nativity.htm

In the 1970's the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) was initially successful in removing nativity scenes from public property. However, the United States Supreme Court has now dealt with the issue of nativity scenes.(1) The Supreme Court has never ruled that all nativity scenes on public property are unconstitutional. To the contrary, nativity scenes are constitutional if properly displayed. Unfortunately, the ACLU has used smoke and mirrors to intimidate public officials into removing nativity scenes and Christmas carols from the public square. More unfortunate is the fact that many public leaders cower to these threats without ever considering whether the ACLU is right.

Privately-Sponsored Nativity Scenes

A privately-sponsored nativity scene can also be displayed on public property,with the main difference being that the display is erected and maintained by private citizens instead of public officials. Privately-sponsored nativity scenes are more common in public parks where citizens are allowed to engage in expressive activity.(3) In most public parks, citizens are allowed to hold gatherings and erect displays. To prohibit religious expression in a public park where other expressive activity is permitted violates the Constitution. Public officials cannot show hostility toward religion by allowing secular expression but prohibiting religious expression.

In a privately-sponsored nativity scene,there is no need for secular symbols of Christmas to be displayed within the same context of the religious symbols. A privately-sponsored nativity scene can stand alone, with no display of Santa Claus, a reindeer, a Christmas tree, or other secular symbols. However,in order to clearly designate that the display is privately-sponsored, a disclaimer should be erected, similar to the following example: "This display is privately-sponsored by ABC. The City of XYZ does not endorse nor oppose the display."(4)

(1) Lemon v. Kurtzman, 403 U.S. 602 (1971); County of Allegheny v. American Civil Liberties Union, 492 U.S. 573 (1989).

(2) Id.

(3) See Capitol Square Review and Advisory Board v. Pinette, 115 S. Ct. 2440 (1995); Doe v. Small, 964 F.2d 611 (7th Cir. 1992) (en banc).

(4) A disclaimer on a privately-sponsored nativity scene on public property is not necessary but may be helpful to alert the public that the display is in fact privately-sponsored.

[oyarde]

I dunno , I am still trying to figure out why someone in Wisconsin thinks they should have influence on a Texas courthouse ..... ??

[oyarde]

I see they have gnomes too , is there an anti gnome group that can speak of this :) ?

[tfurrh]

I dunno , I am still trying to figure out why someone in Wisconsin thinks they should have influence on a Texas courthouse ..... ??

That's what I'm confused about. It's weird.

[Deborah K]

Well, since Christmas IS a national holiday....... :rolleyes:

[oyarde]

Well, since Christmas IS a national holiday....... :rolleyes: U. S. Grant , I think ?

[oyarde]

U. S. Grant , I think ? I have slept since then :)

[jkr]

THEN DONT FUCKING LOOK AT IT


CAN anyone in this country MIND THEIR OWN DAMN BUSINESS?

[oyarde]

That's what I'm confused about. It's weird. The only thing I can surmise is , they have nobody left to pick on in Wisconsin and they have all rolled over ? :)

[oyarde]

Well , in the spirit of the day slected to celebrate the birth of Christ , I intend to offer Athens a gnome , tree and an extra baby Jesus .

[tfurrh]

More info:

(UPDATE 2: Adds quotes from Freedom From Religion Foundation Co-president. Rewrites for clarity.)

By Michael V. Hannigan

ATHENS – The Freedom From Religion Foundation, based in Wisconsin, sent a letter dated Dec. 1 to Henderson County commissioners saying the nativity scene located on the courthouse lawn is illegal.

“We request that, as the Henderson County Commissioners, you take immediate action to ensure that no religious displays are on city or county property. Please inform us in writing of the steps you are taking to remedy this First Amendment violation so that we may notify our complainant,” reads the letter.

According to the letter, the complainant is “a concerned area resident and taxpayer” of Henderson County. The resident is not named. The FFRF claims to represent 800 Texans.

Commissioners did not address this issue in open session today, but afterward a majority of the court told The Malakoff News they had no intention of moving the nativity scene based on the letter. Not all commissioners had the opportunity to comment.

For now, County Judge Richard Sanders laid down the county line when he said, “They are going to have to make us move it.”

One commissioner did point out, however, that this could be a no-win situation for the county. Depending on how far the FFRF wants to push this, he said, the county could be forced to chose between taking down the nativity scene and provoking a vast majority of the residents to anger, or spending tens of thousands of dollars the county doesn’t have to fight a lawsuit.

The letter outlines the FFRF’s legal reasoning for wanting the nativity scene removed: “The Supreme Court has ruled it is impermissible to place a nativity scene as the sole focus of a display on government property.”

According to FFRF, the fact that the nativity scene is not actually owned by the county is not relevant. The nativity scene and all the secular decorations on the square are displayed by the Light Up Athens Committee.

“When the county allows this manger scene to be created, which depicts the legendary birth of Jesus Christ, it places the imprimatur of the county government behind the Christian religious doctrine,” reads the letter.

After being told the county does not own the nativity scene Tuesday, FFRF Co-president Annie Laurie Gaylor told The Malakoff News that allowing an outside agency to use public property to display the nativity scene “opens up a public forum.”

Gaylor said that everyone has to have access to the public forum, which would require the county to have a permitting process in place. That way, someone with a different religious belief would have equal access to the Courthouse Square.

Gaylor said the FFRF would be sending open records requests to the county regarding permitting for the Christmas display.

Carol Morton of the Light Up Athens Committee Tuesday confirmed there is no permitting process. “We always have permission, but have never had a permit,” she said.

According to Gaylor, the Henderson County nativity scene is one of 12 the FFRF is currently working to eliminate. Last year, the foundation targeted more than 35 locations, she said.

She said the FFRF doesn’t normally go to court over nativity displays “because the law is clear.” She said the relevant Supreme Court decisions came in 1983 and 1989.

“This (the Henderson County nativity scene) is clearly in violation and they need to change it,” Gaylor said.

—

Text of letter from Freedom From Religion Foundation:

PO Box 750
Madison, WI, 53701
608-256-8900
www.ffrf.org
December 1, 2011
Dear Commissioners,I am writing on behalf of a concerned area resident and taxpayer, as well as other Texas members of the Freedom From Religious (sic) Foundation (FFRF), who object to the erection of a nativity scene on Henderson County property. Freedom From Religion Foundation is a national nonprofit organization based in Madison, Wisconsin, with over 17,000 members across the country, including over 800 in Texas. Our purpose is to protect the fundamental constitutional principle of separation of state and church.
It is our information and understanding that a large nativity scene is on display at the Henderson County Courthouse and that it is the only seasonal display on the grounds (see photo enclosed). It is unlawful for the County to maintain, erect, or host this nativity scene, thus singling out, showing preference for, and endorsing one religion. The Supreme Court has ruled it is impermissible to place a nativity scene as the sole focus of a display on government property. See Allegheny v. ACLU of Pittsburgh, 492 U.S. 573 (1989); Lynch v. Donnelly, 465 U.S. 668 (1983).

In County of Allegheny v. ACLU of Pittsburgh, 492 U.S. 573 (1989), the Supreme Court held that a county government’s creche displayed in the county courthouse was an unconstitutional endorsement of religion. The Court stated,

“Lynch v. Donelly, confirms, and in now way repudiates, the longstanding constitutional principle that government may not engage in a practice that has the effect of promoting or endorsing religious beliefs. The display of the creche in the county courthouse has this unconstitutional effect.” Id. at 621.

The court further determined that the placement of the creche on the Grand Staircase of the county courthouse contributed to its illegality because “no viewer could reasonably think it occupies this location without support and approval of the government.” Id. at 599-600. Moreover, the Court found that the nativity scene “sen[t] an unmistakable message that [the county] supports and promotes the Christian praise to God that is the creche’s religious message.” Id. at 600.

It is irrefutable that the creche is a religious, Christian symbol. See Lynch v. Donnelly, 465 U.S. at 711 (Brennan, J. dissenting)(stating that the creche is a “re-creation of an event that lies at the heart of the Christian faith”). Allowing the display of an inherently Christian message on government property unmistakably sends the message that Henderson County and the City of Athens endorse the religious beliefs embodied in the display.

When the County allows this manager scene to be created, which depicts the legendary birth of Jesus Christ, it places the imprimatur of the County government behind the Christian religious doctrine. This excludes citizens who are not Christian – Jews, Native American religion practitioners, animists, etc., as well as the significant and growing portion of the U.S. population that is not religious at all (15% of adults), including complainants and taxpayers in Henderson County. As the Court said in Amancio v. Town of Somerset, “[To] insist that government respect the separation of church and state is not to discriminate against religion, indeed it promotes a respect for religion by refusing to single out one or two creeds for official favor at the expense of all others.” Amancio v. Town of Somerset, 28 F.Supp.2d 677, 681 (D. Mass. 1998).

There are ample private and church grounds where religious displays may be freely placed. Once the government enters into the religion business, conferring endorsement and preference for some religions over others, it strikes a blow at religious liberty, forcing taxpayers of all faiths and of no religion to support a particular expression of worship.

We request that, as Henderson County Commissioners, you take immediate action to ensure that no religious displays are on city or county property. Please inform us in writing of the steps you are taking to remedy this First Amendment violation so that we may notify our complainant.

Sincerely,
Stephanie A. Schmitt
Staff Attorney

[Kodaddy]

I find snowmen offensive. With their corncob pipes, who do they think they are? Gen. MacArthur? Is this some kind of pro-war message? Don't they know smoking causes cancer? What kind of message is that for kids? And why are they always wearing scarves? They're made of snow. Are they cold or something? And is that carrot organic? I wish they would just melt already. Fucking snowmen...

[amy31416]

“So now they’re trying to take Baby Jesus? What is so offensive about a baby in a manger? If it does not mean anything to you why does it offend you?” Lynda asked.

I've always wondered that.

These are atheists with an agenda that goes beyond being "offended" or any semblance of concern that someone may not feel welcome.

[oyarde]

I find snowmen offensive. With their corncob pipes, who do they think they are? Gen. MacArthur? Is this some kind of pro-war message? Don't they know smoking causes cancer? What kind of message is that for kids? And why are they always wearing scarves? They're made of snow. Are they cold or something? And is that carrot organic? I wish they would just melt already. Fucking snowmen... In , to represent the Snowmen , pm me for mailing address to submit Snowmen representation funds :)

[oyarde]

I've always wondered that.

These are atheists with an agenda that goes beyond being "offended" or any semblance of concern that someone may not feel welcome. Her statement does make perfect sense to me ...

[FreeTraveler]

I want to know what a government agency is doing spending any of my tax money on decorations for anything. I certainly didn't elect them to spend my money on cutesy trinkets of any sort, celebrating anything. Anybody else think this is a proper way for an agency that takes money at gunpoint to spend those funds?

Sorry for derailing the "us vs them" "christian vs atheist" battle that the 1% would prefer you have.

[Deborah K]

I guess "tolerance" is only required of certain people.

[Deborah K]

I want to know what a government agency is doing spending any of my tax money on decorations for anything. I certainly didn't elect them to spend my money on cutesy trinkets of any sort, celebrating anything. Anybody else think this is a proper way for an agency that takes money at gunpoint to spend those funds?

Sorry for derailing the "us vs them" "christian vs atheist" battle that the 1% would prefer you have.

Christians pay taxes too. Moot point.

[eduardo89]

But if a nonprofit group in Wisconsin called the Freedom from Religion Foundation gets its way the nativity scene could soon be on the way out. A resident who wished to remain anonymous apparently called the group to complain.
Fucking coward.

[oyarde]

I want to know what a government agency is doing spending any of my tax money on decorations for anything. I certainly didn't elect them to spend my money on cutesy trinkets of any sort, celebrating anything. Anybody else think this is a proper way for an agency that takes money at gunpoint to spend those funds?

Sorry for derailing the "us vs them" "christian vs atheist" battle that the 1% would prefer you have. I dunno , but I bet they did not buy it , likely donated and put up by a local Pastor ... I agree , lets have a tax holiday while we sort this out . I am in ! :)

[FreeTraveler]

Christians pay taxes too. Moot point.
Ah, so since they rip off Christians too, there should be a nativity.

How about they don't rip anybody off, and don't blow money they don't have on holiday displays that Wanda Waitress can't afford?

I'll ask again, how is this the proper role of government?

[amy31416]

I want to know what a government agency is doing spending any of my tax money on decorations for anything. I certainly didn't elect them to spend my money on cutesy trinkets of any sort, celebrating anything. Anybody else think this is a proper way for an agency that takes money at gunpoint to spend those funds?

Sorry for derailing the "us vs them" "christian vs atheist" battle that the 1% would prefer you have.

Thanks for injecting some common sense into this.

[Philhelm]

THEN DONT FUCKING LOOK AT IT


CAN anyone in this country MIND THEIR OWN DAMN BUSINESS?

See something, don't say something...? I don't understand.

[tfurrh]

I want to know what a government agency is doing spending any of my tax money on decorations for anything. I certainly didn't elect them to spend my money on cutesy trinkets of any sort, celebrating anything. Anybody else think this is a proper way for an agency that takes money at gunpoint to spend those funds?

Sorry for derailing the "us vs them" "christian vs atheist" battle that the 1% would prefer you have.

The county didn't pay for the decorations. They're owned & set up by a private group, 'Light up Athens.'

[Deborah K]

Ah, so since they rip off Christians too, there should be a nativity.

How about they don't rip anybody off, and don't blow money they don't have on holiday displays that Wanda Waitress can't afford?

I'll ask again, how is this the proper role of government?

I never said it was the proper role of gov't to decorate during the holidays, but if you're going to get uptight about it, just remember Christians are getting ripped off too - not just atheists. That was my point.

[oyarde]

The county didn't pay for the decorations. They're owned & set up by a private group. Thats what I figured , that would be the norm in my neck of the woods.

[FreeTraveler]

Thanks for injecting some common sense into this.
You're welcome. I get so mad when I see the schools swarm, and everybody taking the bait the 1% has dangled to get us biting at each other.

It's amazing how effective that technique is, even here, where many of us recognize the games they play to divide us.

And I'm sure long after I've given up on this thread, there will still be people battling over what sort of holiday decorations it's proper for our masters to rob us to pay for.

Here's a clue: NULL SET!

[oyarde]

Never fear , I will donate them a snowman :)

[oyarde]

My Snowman has lights & a Constitution .

[oyarde]

My dog is always trying to pee on him ...

[tfurrh]

battling over what sort of holiday decorations it's proper for our masters to rob us to pay for.

The decorations were bought, owned, & set up by a private committee.

[oyarde]

The decorations were bought, owned, & set up by a private committee.

Best Kind !!

[Southron]

I dunno , I am still trying to figure out why someone in Wisconsin thinks they should have influence on a Texas courthouse ..... ??

I guess nowadays all politics is national. :rolleyes:

[Miss Annie]

I've always wondered that.

These are atheists with an agenda that goes beyond being "offended" or any semblance of concern that someone may not feel welcome.

Amy, you hit the nail right on that head!
THIS IS the agenda! Note bolded items in the list.

The Communist Takeover Of
America - 45 Declared Goals
From Greg Swank
12-4-2

You are about to read a list of 45 goals that found their way down the halls of our great Capitol back in 1963. As you read this, 39 years later, you should be shocked by the events that have played themselves out. I first ran across this list 3 years ago but was unable to attain a copy and it has bothered me ever since. Recently, Jeff Rense posted it on his site and I would like to thank him for doing so. http://www.rense.com

Communist Goals (1963) Congressional Record--Appendix, pp. A34-A35 January 10, 1963

Current Communist Goals EXTENSION OF REMARKS OF HON. A. S. HERLONG, JR. OF FLORIDA IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Thursday, January 10, 1963 .

Mr. HERLONG. Mr. Speaker, Mrs. Patricia Nordman of De Land, Fla., is an ardent and articulate opponent of communism, and until recently published the De Land Courier, which she dedicated to the purpose of alerting the public to the dangers of communism in America.

At Mrs. Nordman's request, I include in the RECORD, under unanimous consent, the following "Current Communist Goals," which she identifies as an excerpt from "The Naked Communist," by Cleon Skousen:

[From "The Naked Communist," by Cleon Skousen]

1. U.S. acceptance of coexistence as the only alternative to atomic war.

2. U.S. willingness to capitulate in preference to engaging in atomic war.

3. Develop the illusion that total disarmament the United States would be a demonstration of moral strength.

4. Permit free trade between all nations regardless of Communist affiliation and regardless of whether or not items could be used for war.

5. Extension of long-term loans to Russia and Soviet satellites.

6. Provide American aid to all nations regardless of Communist domination.

7. Grant recognition of Red China. Admission of Red China to the U.N.

8. Set up East and West Germany as separate states in spite of Khrushchev's promise in 1955 to settle the German question by free elections under supervision of the U.N.

9. Prolong the conferences to ban atomic tests because the United States has agreed to suspend tests as long as negotiations are in progress.

10. Allow all Soviet satellites individual representation in the U.N.

11. Promote the U.N. as the only hope for mankind. If its charter is rewritten, demand that it be set up as a one-world government with its own independent armed forces. (Some Communist leaders believe the world can be taken over as easily by the U.N. as by Moscow. Sometimes these two centers compete with each other as they are now doing in the Congo.)

12. Resist any attempt to outlaw the Communist Party.

13. Do away with all loyalty oaths.

14. Continue giving Russia access to the U.S. Patent Office.

15. Capture one or both of the political parties in the United States.

16. Use technical decisions of the courts to weaken basic American institutions by claiming their activities violate civil rights.

17. Get control of the schools. Use them as transmission belts for socialism and current Communist propaganda. Soften the curriculum. Get control of teachers' associations. Put the party line in textbooks.

18. Gain control of all student newspapers.

19. Use student riots to foment public protests against programs or organizations which are under Communist attack.

20. Infiltrate the press. Get control of book-review assignments, editorial writing, policy-making positions.

21. Gain control of key positions in radio, TV, and motion pictures.

22. Continue discrediting American culture by degrading all forms of artistic expression. An American Communist cell was told to "eliminate all good sculpture from parks and buildings, substitute shapeless, awkward and meaningless forms."

23. Control art critics and directors of art museums. "Our plan is to promote ugliness, repulsive, meaningless art."

24. Eliminate all laws governing obscenity by calling them "censorship" and a violation of free speech and free press.

25. Break down cultural standards of morality by promoting pornography and obscenity in books, magazines, motion pictures, radio, and TV.

26. Present homosexuality, degeneracy and promiscuity as "normal, natural, healthy."

[B]27. Infiltrate the churches and replace revealed religion with "social" religion. Discredit the Bible and emphasize the need for intellectual maturity, which does not need a "religious crutch."

28. Eliminate prayer or any phase of religious expression in the schools on the ground that it violates the principle of "separation of church and state."

29. Discredit the American Constitution by calling it inadequate, old-fashioned, out of step with modern needs, a hindrance to cooperation between nations on a worldwide basis.

30. Discredit the American Founding Fathers. Present them as selfish aristocrats who had no concern for the "common man."

31. Belittle all forms of American culture and discourage the teaching of American history on the ground that it was only a minor part of the "big picture." Give more emphasis to Russian history since the Communists took over.

32. Support any socialist movement to give centralized control over any part of the culture--education, social agencies, welfare programs, mental health clinics, etc.

33. Eliminate all laws or procedures which interfere with the operation of the Communist apparatus.

34. Eliminate the House Committee on Un-American Activities.

35. Discredit and eventually dismantle the FBI.

36. Infiltrate and gain control of more unions.

37. Infiltrate and gain control of big business.

38. Transfer some of the powers of arrest from the police to social agencies. Treat all behavioral problems as psychiatric disorders which no one but psychiatrists can understand [or treat].

39. Dominate the psychiatric profession and use mental health laws as a means of gaining coercive control over those who oppose Communist goals.

40. Discredit the family as an institution. Encourage promiscuity and easy divorce.

41. Emphasize the need to raise children away from the negative influence of parents. Attribute prejudices, mental blocks and retarding of children to suppressive influence of parents.

42. Create the impression that violence and insurrection are legitimate aspects of the American tradition; that students and special-interest groups should rise up and use ["]united force["] to solve economic, political or social problems.

43. Overthrow all colonial governments before native populations are ready for self-government.

44. Internationalize the Panama Canal.

45. Repeal the Connally reservation so the United States cannot prevent the World Court from seizing jurisdiction [over domestic problems. Give the World Court jurisdiction] over nations and individuals alike.

Note by Webmaster: The Congressional Record back this far has not be digitized and posted on the Internet.

It will probably be available at your nearest library that is a federal repository. Call them and ask them. Your college library is probably a repository. This is an excellent source of government records. Another source are your Congress Critters. They should be more than happy to help you in this matter. You will find the Ten Planks of the Communist Manifesto interesting at this point.

Webmaster Forest Glen Durland found the document in the library.

Sources are listed below.

Microfilm: California State University at San Jose Clark Library, Government Floor Phone (408)924-2770 Microfilm Call Number: J 11.R5

Congressional Record, Vol. 109 88th Congress, 1st Session Appendix Pages A1-A2842 Jan. 9-May 7, 1963 Reel 12


1963- The Year That Changed America

By Greg Swank
12-4-2
Over the years, I have shared in debates and discussions regarding the current state of affairs in the U.S., and the changing social climate of this great nation. Since the "baby-boomer" generation, society and its culture have become noticeably different than the way it was 50 years ago. From the late 50's to the 70's a series of events took place contributing to the way we are currently living. However, like anything else, there has to be a starting point at which the wheels are put into motion. Sometimes it can be a single event, such as war, but more often, it is a series of events, some intentional, some planned, others unpredictable. There is always a pivotal point when things begin to change. I believe that time was 1963.

For my generation, some of the following will certainly stir old memories. If you born later, this may serve as a brief history lesson into the times your parents traveled through.

By 1963 television was the leading sources of entertainment. The public enjoyed a different type of programming back then. Lessons on life could be viewed weekly on "Leave it to Beaver" or "My Three Sons." There were hero's back then that never drew blood, "The Lone Ranger" and "The Adventures of Superman." Cartoon series evolved, such as, "The Flintstones" and "The Jetsons" without messages of empowering the children, using vulgarities or demeaning parental guidance. Family's could spend a weekend evening watching "Ed Sullivan," "Bonanza" or "Gunsmoke." For those who enjoyed thrill and suspense, we were blessed with "Alfred Hitchcock Presents" and the "Twilight Zone." 'My Favorite Martian," "Ozzie and Harriet," "Donna Reed" and "Sea Hunt" also kept viewers entertained weekly.

Movie theaters were not multiplex units with 15 screens, rather, one single, giant big screen with adequate sound and hard seats without springs. "Tom Jones" had won the Academy award for best picture. "How The West Was Won," "Cleopatra," "Lily of the Fields," "The Great Escape," "The Birds," and "It's a Mad, Mad, Mad, Mad World" were all box office hits.

By years end, "The Beatles" had played for the British Royal Family and were laying the groundwork to conquer the U.S. the following year. Eric Clapton began his journey to fame with Jeff Beck, Jimmy Page, Jim McCarty and their band, "The Yardbirds." Out on the west coast the surf was beginning to rock'n'roll with "The Beach Boys" and their first song to reach the top ten list, "Surfin' U.S.A."

"Joys of Jell-O" recipes for quivering florescent foodstuff hit the stores. U.S. Postal rates went up to five cents for the first ounce. AT&T introduced touch-tone telephones. The Yankees played in the World Series again; but lost to the Dodgers in four straight. The government and NASA began the Apollo program.

This is just a brief snapshot of some things that were going on back in 1963. Remember?

While some of these events played an important role in the direction of change that affect us today, many of them were lost to much greater, more political events, that I believe put everything into motion.

On January 10, 1963, the House of Representative and later the Senate began reviewing a document entitled "Communist Goals for Taking Over America." It contained an agenda of 45 separate issues that, in hindsight was quite shocking back then and equally shocking today. Here, in part, are some key points listed in that document.

4. Permit free trade between all nations regardless of Communist affiliation and regardless of whether or not items could be used for war.

5. Extension of long-term loans to Russia and Soviet satellites.

8. Set up East and West Germany as separate states.

11. Promote the U.N. as the only hope for mankind.

13. Do away with all loyalty oaths.

16. Use technical decisions of the courts to weaken basic American institutions by claiming their activities violate civil rights.

23. Control art critics and directors of art museums. "Our plan is to promote ugliness, repulsive, meaningless art."

24. Eliminate all laws governing obscenity by calling them "censorship" and a violation of free speech and free press.

25. Break down cultural standards of morality by promoting pornography and obscenity in books, magazines, motion pictures, radio, and TV.

26. Present homosexuality, degeneracy and promiscuity as "normal, natural, healthy."

27. Discredit the Bible and emphasize the need for intellectual maturity, which does not need a "religious crutch."

28. Eliminate prayer or any phase of religious expression in the schools on the ground that it violates the principle of "separation of church and state."

40. Discredit the family as an institution. Encourage promiscuity and easy divorce.

44. Internationalize the Panama Canal.

You can see the entire list on this web page - http://www.truthtrek.net/politics/takeover.htm

Now, I am not saying that the U.S. is under some kind of Communist control, but what I do find frightening, is of the 45 issues listed, nearly all of them have come to pass. Remember this was in January 1963.

In 1963 the news media showed women burning their bras as the women's liberation movement took off with the publishing of "The Feminine Mystique" by Betty Friedan. Martin Luther King was jailed in April and civil unrest was being brought to the forefront. On August 28th the media brought us live coverage of the march on Washington and Dr. Kings famous "I had a dream" speech. The Cuban missile crisis found its way in to our homes and our nation was gearing up for conflict.

By September of 1963 we had lost some very influential people, Pope John XXIII, Robert Frost, and country legend Patsy Cline, to name a few. In the early hours of November 22nd we learned of the quiet passing of C.S. Lewis and hours later we were brought to our knees when President John F. Kennedy was assassinated and our nation mourned.

So you see, while long since forgotten, 1963 could very well have been, one of the most important years since our founding fathers provided us with the Constitution of the United States. Which brings me to one final and extremely important decision that was made during this most provocative year.

On June 17, 1963 the U.S. Supreme Court concluded that any Bible reciting or prayer, in public schools, was deemed unconstitutional.

While American's have endured great prosperity over the past 40 years we have also lost our moral compass and direction. In reviewing the research, data supports 1963 as a focal point, demonstrating a downward slope in our moral and social decline through 2001.

Certainly, one would have to agree that all of these events have had a profound impact on the way our current social structure has been changed. Personally, if I had to choose one specific event that has demonstrated the demoralization of our country, it would have to be the decision of the U.S Supreme Court in June of 1963.

But there is always "hope." As always, I welcome your comments and can easily be reached. Thanks for the response to "Daddy, What's Fluoride?" My email is: greg@truthtrek.net


Comment

From Founders' America
foundersamerica@hotmail.com
12-7-2

Jeff...adding a couple of my own numbers:

__ 46. Import anti-white racists from the Third World, via an open-borders policy, then force their integration to divide and conquer white Western civilization in North America.


__ 47. Feminize and disarm both the citizenry and military; especially disarm white males.

Founders' America
P.O. Box 71024 Richmond, Va
23255

[tfurrh]

Ron Paul on Christmas

http://www.lewrockwell.com/paul/paul148.html

[Austrian Econ Disciple]

Nothing wrong as long as it wasn't payed for through taxpayer funds. I just imagine a different reaction from the Christian crowd though if say..something appeared on courthouse grounds during Ramadon.

[phill4paul]

As a non-Christian my personal belief is that if it is not paid for w/ taxpayers money then I am fine with it. I don't run in terror at the sight of a baby Jesus. I also don't flee in terror at the sight of a Star of David, a Crescent moon or a pentagram. Get over it America these are not your enemies.

[Brian4Liberty]

Come on, can't Christians just be happy with Santa Claus, Rudolph the Red Nosed Reindeer, a Holiday Pine Tree, Frosty the Snowman, Misfit Toys, Holiday lights, and lots of shopping and presents? Oh BTW, could you also change the name of that holiday and your religion? That "Christ" thing you guys keep trying to put in there has to go. Also, could you edit out that short speech by Linus in that otherwise wonderful Holiday cartoon? Happy Holidays, and Don't Shoot Your Eye Out! ;)

[Austrian Econ Disciple]

Come on, can't Christians just be happy with Santa Claus, Rudolph the Red Nosed Reindeer, a Holiday Pine Tree, Frosty the Snowman, Misfit Toys, Holiday lights, and lots of shopping and presents? Oh BTW, could you also change the name of that holiday and your religion? That "Christ" thing you guys keep trying to put in there has to go. Also, could you edit out that short speech by Linus in that otherwise wonderful Holiday cartoon? Happy Holidays, and Don't Shoot Your Eye Out! ;)

Off on a bit of a tangent, but Christmas is not even a Biblical holiday. It is a pagan infusion because of Constantine. Still surprised so many believe Christmas to be Christian.

[Deborah K]

Off on a bit of a tangent, but Christmas is not even a Biblical holiday. It is a pagan infusion because of Constantine. Still surprised so many believe Christmas to be Christian.

Constantine co-opted a lot of pagan rituals and special occasions as a way to convert people to Christianity. That Christ's birth is celebrated during the winter solstice is not the issue for most Christians, as much as celebrating his birth is.

[Austrian Econ Disciple]

Constantine co-opted a lot of pagan rituals and special occasions as a way to convert people to Christianity. That Christ's birth is celebrated during the winter solstice is not the issue for most Christians, as much as celebrating his birth is.

That may be true, but why then do so many Christians abide by pagan ritual? Wouldn't that be a sin? It is one thing to celebrate Jesus' birth (though it certainly is not December 25th), but honestly, most people only care about Christmas because of free-gifts, and other goodies. Not sure why Christians so revere a holiday which emphasis on subjects other than Jesus' birth. There is not even any reference in the Bible for such a holiday. At least Passover is Biblical and should be observed by Christians, but I hardly know of a single one that does. Why not?

[Revolution9]

Constantine co-opted a lot of pagan rituals and special occasions as a way to convert people to Christianity. That Christ's birth is celebrated during the winter solstice is not the issue for most Christians, as much as celebrating his birth is.

It is the time when life and light begins returning instead of ebbing. Before manufacturing people used to give each other things made from the earth and its bounty as presents. A tip o the hat to the Creator of this magnificent rhythm may be in order no matter which part of the spiritual spectrum you get your tuning from. A child in a manger, with agricultural animals, a harvest of hay and a humble cradle, with the adults admiring the new life is a fine symbol to evoke this pattern. What's with the unthoughtful knee jerks??

Rev9

[Deborah K]

That may be true, but why then do so many Christians abide by pagan ritual? Wouldn't that be a sin? It is one thing to celebrate Jesus' birth (though it certainly is not December 25th), but honestly, most people only care about Christmas because of free-gifts, and other goodies. Not sure why Christians so revere a holiday which emphasis on subjects other than Jesus' birth. There is not even any reference in the Bible for such a holiday. At least Passover is Biblical and should be observed by Christians, but I hardly know of a single one that does. Why not?

I don't think that because Constantine decided to co-opt the Winter Solstice celebration to celebrate Christ's birth that necessarily means Chistians are celebrating a pagan tradition. Easter isn't in the Bible either. I think fundamentalists like Jehova witnesses don't celebrate these holidays. But not all Christians are fundamentalists. And no where in the Bible that I can find does it claim it is a sin to celebrate special occasions - even if they are on the wrong dates.

But you are right, sadly, along with everything else, consumerism has co-opted Christmas (in much the same way that Constantine co-opted the Winter Solstice). As a Christian woman, who raised my children Christian, we always celebrated Christmas modestly and were very conscious of the reason we were celebrating. People (sheeple) who are the keep-up-with-the-jones's-mall-going-media-led-"Christian" types are the ones giving non-Christians a bad impression.

[devil21]

The decorations were bought, owned, & set up by a private committee.

Then in all fairness the decorations should be put up on that committee's private property, not a public location and certainly not a governmental location.

It's a pretty small battle in the big picture but there is supposed to be separation of church and state.

[Deborah K]

Then in all fairness the decorations should be put up on that committee's private property, not a public location and certainly not a governmental location.

It's a pretty small battle in the big picture but there is supposed to be separation of church and state.

Really? In all fairness to whom? Non-Christians? Where is the tolerance everyone is always screaming about?

There are two clauses in the first amendment pertaining to the practice of religion: the free exercise clause; and the non-establishment clause. The non-establishment clause pertains to prohibiting the federal gov't from choosing a religion for its citizens. Putting up a creche does not apply to that clause. The purpose of the clause was so that the United States would not end up like England, with a national religion. Each community should be able to practice their religion in public places as they see fit - ALL religions - ALL inclusive. That is the way it was in this country for over 150 years, up until the 60s. Now all of the sudden, it's un-Constitutional. All because of a misinterpretation by the SCOTUS of the establishment clause. Read this: http://www.lewrockwell.com/paul/paul148.html

[Austrian Econ Disciple]

Really? In all fairness to whom? Non-Christians? Where is the tolerance everyone is always screaming about?

There are two clauses in the first amendment pertaining to the practice of religion: the free exercise clause; and the non-establishment clause. The non-establishment clause pertains to prohibiting the federal gov't from choosing a religion for its citizens. Putting up a creche does not apply to that clause. The purpose of the clause was so that the United States would not end up like England, with a national religion. Each community should be able to practice their religion in public places as they see fit - ALL religions - ALL inclusive. That is the way it was in this country for over 150 years, up until the 60s. Now all of the sudden, it's un-Constitutional. All because of a misinterpretation by the SCOTUS of the establishment clause. Read this: http://www.lewrockwell.com/paul/paul148.html

You are right however, you are a very small minority among Christians. They (the majority) want a Theocratic State. Fine for them to put their objects in these areas, but if say lights of Ramadon were observed or some Hindu holiday, or the Flying Spaghetti monster, or Scientology (I live near Clearwater so its probably more applicable to my area), etc. they would be right there to condemn/ban it.

[Deborah K]

You are right however, you are a very small minority among Christians. They (the majority) want a Theocratic State. Fine for them to put their objects in these areas, but if say lights of Ramadon were observed or some Hindu holiday, or the Flying Spaghetti monster, or Scientology (I live near Clearwater so its probably more applicable to my area), etc. they would be right there to condemn/ban it.

And that is mostly due to the "divide and conquer" agenda being propagated by the gov't and the fifth column (media).

[Revolution9]

You are right however, you are a very small minority among Christians.

Bullshit. That is the only response this bodewash deserves. Next time yell gardyloo before tossing your crap out the window.

Rev9

[Austrian Econ Disciple]

Bullshit. That is the only response this bodewash deserves. Next time yell gardyloo before tossing your crap out the window.

Rev9

Well, last time I checked the majority of Christians wanted to ban the construction of not even a Mosque, but a Muslim Community Center on private property, but yet, they would be neutral, or supportive of the right of Muslims to put up Ramadon material on the steps or grounds of the Courthouse? GIVE ME A BREAK. Man, you are so far removed from reality.

[tfurrh]

http://crooksandliars.com/karoli/did-ron-paul-limit-first-amendment-christia

KING: Congressman Paul, does faith have a role in these public issues, the public square, or is it a personal issue in your home and in your church?

PAUL: I think faith has something to do with the character of the people who represent us and law should have a moral fiber too and our leaders should. We shouldn't expect, uh, us to try to change morality. You can't teach people how to be moral. But the Constitution addresses this by saying literally it says no theocracy but it doesn't talk about church and state. The most important thing is the First Amendment -- that Congress shall write no laws -- which means Congress should never prohibit the expression of your Christian faith in a public place.

http://www.lc.org/resources/nativity.htm

In the 1970's the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) was initially successful in removing nativity scenes from public property. However, the United States Supreme Court has now dealt with the issue of nativity scenes.(1) The Supreme Court has never ruled that all nativity scenes on public property are unconstitutional. To the contrary, nativity scenes are constitutional if properly displayed. Unfortunately, the ACLU has used smoke and mirrors to intimidate public officials into removing nativity scenes and Christmas carols from the public square. More unfortunate is the fact that many public leaders cower to these threats without ever considering whether the ACLU is right.

Privately-Sponsored Nativity Scenes

A privately-sponsored nativity scene can also be displayed on public property,with the main difference being that the display is erected and maintained by private citizens instead of public officials. Privately-sponsored nativity scenes are more common in public parks where citizens are allowed to engage in expressive activity.(3) In most public parks, citizens are allowed to hold gatherings and erect displays. To prohibit religious expression in a public park where other expressive activity is permitted violates the Constitution. Public officials cannot show hostility toward religion by allowing secular expression but prohibiting religious expression.

In a privately-sponsored nativity scene,there is no need for secular symbols of Christmas to be displayed within the same context of the religious symbols. A privately-sponsored nativity scene can stand alone, with no display of Santa Claus, a reindeer, a Christmas tree, or other secular symbols. However,in order to clearly designate that the display is privately-sponsored, a disclaimer should be erected, similar to the following example: "This display is privately-sponsored by ABC. The City of XYZ does not endorse nor oppose the display."(4)

(1) Lemon v. Kurtzman, 403 U.S. 602 (1971); County of Allegheny v. American Civil Liberties Union, 492 U.S. 573 (1989).

(2) Id.

(3) See Capitol Square Review and Advisory Board v. Pinette, 115 S. Ct. 2440 (1995); Doe v. Small, 964 F.2d 611 (7th Cir. 1992) (en banc).

(4) A disclaimer on a privately-sponsored nativity scene on public property is not necessary but may be helpful to alert the public that the display is in fact privately-sponsored.

[Revolution9]

Well, last time I checked the majority of Christians wanted to ban the construction of not even a Mosque, but a Muslim Community Center on private property, but yet, they would be neutral, or supportive of the right of Muslims to put up Ramadon material on the steps or grounds of the Courthouse? GIVE ME A BREAK. Man, you are so far removed from reality.

I am not that far removed from bunches of Christians of various denominations. My main client is a Muslim billionaire from Egypt. His engineer is from Iran. I have done a few Turkish festivals and been amongst Christian and Muslim alike at the same time enjoying their families. I hear none of this psychobabble that you place on them that emanates from the cabals minions over the one eyed dajal/priests of medea programming outlets. In fact what you are doing is perpetuating a plank of the communist manifesto with your agitpropping of such bunk. So don't pretend to stand all high and mighty when you play in the gutter with rats and fail to recognize the verminous state of them.

Rev9

[devil21]

Really? In all fairness to whom? Non-Christians? Where is the tolerance everyone is always screaming about?

If it's a private entity paying for, providing, and then setting up the decorations then they should be using their own resources (property) to display them. In all fairness, because if the origin of the decorations matter to anyone (which was brought up in this thread....nowhere did I mention specific religions) then where they are put up should matter equally. It can't be private and then suddenly public at the whims of whoever wants them put up. I don't care what religion it is. I don't subscribe to having shades of gray in this sort of stuff. It's either black or white. Private? Then stick with private all the way.



There are two clauses in the first amendment pertaining to the practice of religion: the free exercise clause; and the non-establishment clause. The non-establishment clause pertains to prohibiting the federal gov't from choosing a religion for its citizens. Putting up a creche does not apply to that clause. The purpose of the clause was so that the United States would not end up like England, with a national religion. Each community should be able to practice their religion in public places as they see fit - ALL religions - ALL inclusive. That is the way it was in this country for over 150 years, up until the 60s. Now all of the sudden, it's un-Constitutional. All because of a misinterpretation by the SCOTUS of the establishment clause. Read this: http://www.lewrockwell.com/paul/paul148.html

No offense but I don't genuflect at the altar of Mr. Newsletter-writer LRC so links to that website don't mean much to me.

[PierzStyx]

I want to know what a government agency is doing spending any of my tax money on decorations for anything. I certainly didn't elect them to spend my money on cutesy trinkets of any sort, celebrating anything. Anybody else think this is a proper way for an agency that takes money at gunpoint to spend those funds?

Sorry for derailing the "us vs them" "christian vs atheist" battle that the 1% would prefer you have.

Except that is the exact discussion the news article is having. Its not the Islamic Foundation of Jewish Americans Foundation, its the Freedom FROM Religion Foundation. This is the argument they want. That said, you make a point about gov't spending tax money on decorations.

[PierzStyx]

Well, last time I checked the majority of Christians wanted to ban the construction of not even a Mosque, but a Muslim Community Center on private property, but yet, they would be neutral, or supportive of the right of Muslims to put up Ramadon material on the steps or grounds of the Courthouse? GIVE ME A BREAK. Man, you are so far removed from reality.

The WTC Muslim Center wasn't a matter of Christianity as it was a matter of extreme emotions. I personally know two Jewish people and a Wiccan who were against it. Thought it was "bad taste". That was the issue. Plenty of mosques and/or Islamic religious centers are built through out the nation without much trouble.

[The Goat]

My Snowman has lights & a Constitution .

My dog is always trying to pee on him ...

you dog must have been a politician in a former life.

[Deborah K]

If it's a private entity paying for, providing, and then setting up the decorations then they should be using their own resources (property) to display them. In all fairness, because if the origin of the decorations matter to anyone (which was brought up in this thread....nowhere did I mention specific religions) then where they are put up should matter equally. It can't be private and then suddenly public at the whims of whoever wants them put up. I don't care what religion it is. I don't subscribe to having shades of gray in this sort of stuff. It's either black or white. Private? Then stick with private all the way.

What you ascribe to isn't the law. Nor should it be.


No offense but I don't genuflect at the altar of Mr. Newsletter-writer LRC so links to that website don't mean much to me

Nor do I. The link takes you to an article that Dr. Paul wrote on this very subject.

[devil21]

What you ascribe to isn't the law. Nor should it be.

That's fine. The law should be changed. How long would a satanic worship display last at that same site? I think most people would agree that such a display should also be on private property if it's a private sponsor.

[driller80545]

Stupid!

[oyarde]

I think for fun , next year , I will throw up a Menora too , nobody will know what it is , probably , except my siblings . :)

[oyarde]

you dog must have been a politician in a former life. My Smowman is much cooler than most pols , he does not talk , I bring him out from the garage once a year for a month :)

[bill1971]

I wonder if more people would object if they put a Muslim display on the court house for a Muslim holiday.

[oyarde]

I wonder if more people would object if they put a Muslim display on the court house for a Muslim holiday. Would not bother me , not sure what you would put out though that could not be construed as idolitry ...... ??

[oyarde]

That's fine. The law should be changed. How long would a satanic worship display last at that same site? I think most people would agree that such a display should also be on private property if it's a private sponsor. I thought the satanic worhip took place INSIDE the courthouse , maybe just where I am :0

[oyarde]

Looks like this same group from Wisconsin is working on 12 other Nativity scenes too . Why all the hate over a Nativity scene ?? I wish these guys would get after some fellow godless :) people , like the DEA , BATF etc

[oyarde]

Glancing through some things this morning , I see no legalese that would reqire these Texans to make any adjustments .....

[GunnyFreedom]

That's fine. The law should be changed. How long would a satanic worship display last at that same site? I think most people would agree that such a display should also be on private property if it's a private sponsor.

Oh, I don't know, as long as the tragedy of public property exists, we are able to put out Ron Paul signs before an election.