Tag Archives: First amendment

Ken Reid decides to invite lawsuits

Posted on by |

Posted on his Facebook page:

The Board of Supervisors last night unanimously adopted my amendment to temporarily ban those ugly atheist billboards on the Courthouse lawn (and other ‘unattended displays’ ) until the Supervisors issue a new policy on religious and other holiday displays. This is not a ban on the creche of Christmas tree, as the Board also issued a request that its Finance Committee (on which I serve) devise a new policy to allow government sponsored holiday displays, including the nativity scene and Christmas tree — but NO private displays, which would allow for things like the skeleton Santa nailed to a cross. It is my hope the full Board will adopt a new policy by spring.

Mr. Reid had previously stated his support (along with Scott York) for the constitutionally permissible policy of a single, county-sponsored Christmas tree. This is a solution that almost everyone could support, including the Atheist groups. The reason is that a Christmas tree has been found by courts to have a legitimate secular purpose related to the federal holiday, and is not a religious symbol. It could be a joyful community focus for the holiday season, and would eliminate both the antagonism associated with the limited public forum and the risk of lawsuits.

I gave Mr. Reid the benefit of the doubt. I didn’t express my suspicion that he would do exactly what he is now doing. I sincerely hoped that I was wrong. I defended him publicly for supporting a sensible solution, in spite of his sometimes inflammatory rhetoric in doing so. I can’t say I told you so this time, because I refrained from telling you.

What Mr. Reid is now telling us is that he doesn’t want a solution, he wants a lawsuit. It’s unfortunate and disappointing.

“A brave stand”

Posted on by |

While all agree that some traditions should be honored, others must be put to rest as our national values and notions of tolerance and diversity evolve. At any rate, no amount of history and tradition can cure a constitutional infraction.

Does this sound familiar? It’s from the January 11 ruling on Ahlquist v. City of Cranston, in which an explicitly sectarian prayer banner was ordered removed from the wall of a public high school. The Rhode Island school district argued that “the prayer, which dates back to the early 1960s, is an historical memento of the school’s founding days, with a predominantly secular purpose.” The plaintiff who took her school district to court is a 16 year old student, Jessica Ahlquist. Here is the full paragraph from the ruling (PDF): Continue reading →

Does this look like hate speech to you?

Posted on by |

Update: See more photos from the Leesburg courthouse on Saturday, when four new displays were added. Just added: the text of the “Letter from Jesus” that was vandalized the evening of December 5.

Another update: The Beltway Atheists’ take on all this is up at their blog. They are quite right about this: “The NOVA display, like all of our previous displays, failed to trash christianity or to attack christmas.” The frequently repeated sentiment summed up by the opening line of this recent misguided letter to the editor – “The anti-religious courthouse lawn displays crafted by Rick Wingrove and the others were erected for one purpose only: to insult and provoke those who believe in God” – is a ridiculous kneejerk reaction to the expression of ideas with which those who are offended disagree. Disagreement does not equal insult, people.

On the other hand, I do think the author is dismissive of the spontaneous interpretation of the Skeleton Santa by those who didn’t have prior knowledge of its intended meaning (“That the christian community was absolutely wrong about the display did not alter their narrative, that it was an atheist attack on christianity.”) While that statement is certainly true, what those people saw conveyed hate to them. A little more sensitivity to the feelings of such people, even if it’s not mutual, would go a long way, IMO. The Christian community is not a monolithic group, any more than the atheist community is. Unfortunately, some of them responded in kind (trigger warning for those offended by hateful language and profanity, the author quotes from one of the emails sent to the group, and I can only hope that person doesn’t claim to be a Christian).

Does this look like hate speech to you?

Yeah, me either.

How to ruin a ‘positive statement of belief’

Posted on by |

You know, I pretty much agree with a sentiment expressed by the many people who wish the perennial courthouse unpleasantness would just go away. That sentiment is commonly expressed something like this: I uphold the right of anyone to express any belief, no matter how offensive, because that’s what the Constitution guarantees – but it would be more effective and neighborly if the way people chose to express their beliefs was limited to inoffensive ‘positive statements’.

Consider the campaign, spearheaded every year by the American Family Association*, to get store clerks and others dealing with the public to say “Merry Christmas” instead of “Happy Holidays.” I personally don’t care what people say to me; if someone says “Happy Holidays” I don’t have any trouble understanding what they mean, and if they say “Merry Christmas” I don’t jump to the conclusion that they’ve intentionally dissed some other holiday. However, this detail is important to the supporters of this group, and they have every right to advocate via legal means for the changes they want. Their campaign involves (in part) distributing buttons and stickers that say “It’s okay to say Merry Christmas.” So far, so good; that sounds like a positive message expressing their belief.

Continue reading →

Ken Reid justifies mob rule

Posted on by |

Update: After consultation with the author, I’ve changed the headline to more accurately reflect what happened here. Is the meaning different in this context? No. By telling the public that it was the lawful display, and not the unlawful vandalism of it, that “crossed the line,” Ken Reid gave his tacit endorsement to anyone who is offended by a future display to take the law into their own hands. Knowing that other displays would be going up in the near future, and knowing that angry citizens have already made their feelings about those displays known, his statement ‘calls for’ mob rule in all but the most narrow, legalistic sense. However, the term justified makes the same point without being needlessly hyperbolic. -Epl

If Supervisor elect Ken Reid’s comments to Darcy Spencer of NBC 4 portend anything, it’s that the rule of law is dead:

 

View more videos at: http://nbcwashington.com.

Continue reading →

Once More, With Feeling

Posted on by |

Just a reminder that all those people who came out screaming and crying that their First Amendment rights would be trampled if the Courthouse Lawn were not available for them to display their creches and menorahs now need to suck it up when others use their First Amendment rights to put up other displays on the same lawn.

The First Amendment requires that the government can not play favorites. If the Courthouse lawn is open to any, it must be open to all.

All. Or Nothing at All.

Deal with it.

Yes, I do realize this is a snarky post.

Posted on by |

Dedicated to the defense of civil liberties and human rights

In light of recent comments here and here about the threat of “sharia law,” here’s a corrective from Barton Hinkle. Those who prey on the perpetually outraged are like “the woman in Kansas who recited a special chant to keep the Bengal tigers away. Informed that there were no Bengal tigers, she replied that the chant must be working.”

In fact, this is who is embarrassing Virginia and threatening everyone’s individual liberties. The story, as reported earlier this month: Laura George, formerly a Leesburg attorney, planned to build an interfaith retreat center near her home in the southwest Virginia town of Independence. The Grayson County Planning Commission unanimously approved her project, which included a public library, interfaith education center, and ten cabins. There was a public hearing.

Continue reading →

The Laramie Project at Broad Run HS

Posted on by |

Download this poster

Crossposted at Equality Loudoun.

Later update: There’s a Washington Post article.

Update to the press release below: We are fortunate to have living in our community two people who were present in Laramie at the time of Matthew Shepard’s murder, and who became intimately involved in the unfolding story. Stephen Johnson, a minister whose Unitarian Universalist church provided the only safe space for GLBT people in the Laramie area, was the basis for a character in the play. Penelope Thoms was Matthew’s chaplain at the Fort Collins hospital where he died. Penelope tells of their experience here. They will be present for the Saturday, June 4 performance and discussion.

Continue reading →

A better idea for a Homeland Security hearing

Posted on by |

Sadly, it appears we have attracted a commenter who would like to have a tiny (in so many respects) Loudoun version of Rep. Peter King’s execrable hearings, hearings that further target a minority community already in the crosshairs of a profoundly ignorant hate movement. The small-minded individual in question has been placed on moderation for using exactly the kind of slurs that are the premise of those hearings, scheduled to begin on Thursday.

Eugene Robinson calls this exactly what it is:

Rep. Peter King, chairman of the House Homeland Security Committee, is about to convene hearings whose premise offends our nation’s founding ideals and whose targets are law-abiding members of a religious minority. King has decided to investigate Islam.

Continue reading →