Lutheran School’s ode to fish and Jesus.
While stating you are ‘Christ the King’ school is not an issue, the Cross to the far left may be.
You sometimes wonder what part of the US Constitution government officials don’t understand when it comes to the 1st Amendment? Thomas Jefferson made it clear;
Jefferson’s metaphor of a wall of separation has been cited repeatedly by the U.S. Supreme Court. In Reynolds v. United States (1879) the Court wrote that Jefferson’s comments “may be accepted almost as an authoritative declaration of the scope and effect of the [First] Amendment.” In Everson v. Board of Education (1947), Justice Hugo Black wrote: “In the words of Thomas Jefferson, the clause against establishment of religion by law was intended to erect a wall of separation between church and state.”
Many have argued against it, like our city attorney and mayor, but they are hardly our founding fathers who formed our democracy and wrote our bill of rights and constitution. The separation of government and religion is there to protect all of us, not just Christians.
The sad part of this is that after already being warned that this was not a good practice, the city relies on a disclaimer that is too small to read as a snow plow comes flying by with Jesus painted on the front. It just doesn’t pass the smell test. Why not just implement a policy that is simple;
Schools are discouraged of painting words or symbols on government owned property that promote a certain religion or sect. For example; Star of David, Muslim moon or the the Christian cross. If a school is not willing to abide by those rules, their ‘artwork’ will be painted over.
Wow! How simple is that?
For the record, I don’t have an issue with the Christian schools painting ‘God’ on the snowplows, that is a general term that doesn’t refer to a particular religion and well within 1st Amendment rights. Other words such as ‘faith’ or ‘spirituality’ are also acceptable.
Government property should not be used to promote a certain religion. Period. Many great societies immigrated to our country to rid themselves of religious persecution. They were tired of government telling them how to worship, or to worship at all. With freedom of religion, comes freedom from religion. Government has no place in it, and our Mayor, City Attorney and Public Works department should not allow it on government property.
The real reason, I think, that this is all going on is because our City leaders want to be sued on this, or they are daring others to do it. Because they want to be seen as being on the side of God for the sake of their own political ambitions with total reckless disregard for the doctrine of the separation of church and state.
In the early 1980s, Janklow pulled this same political stunt when he proactively allowed the nativity scene to be placed in the rotunda of the State capitol building. Because to oppose the nativity scene made one look unchristian, instead of making the instigators of the display look disrespectfully indifferent to the separation of church and state doctrine.
This is nothing but a stunt or bait to advance the political ambitions of some at the cost of the value or maintenance of a precious constitutional doctrine.
Winston, the mayor pulling a stunt? C’mon. Would love to report this to my pals at the ACLU and the NCAC, but they have more important fish to fry.
The thing that cracks me up the most is the disrespect shown towards the teachings of Jesus to thumb your nose at people you know nothing about.
Christ the King is the name of a school.
Jesus is still a modern name used by many, in many cultures.
A cross is a symbol not exclusive religion.
As always: the Constitution says nothing about
seperation of church from and state.
Fantastic job Kids.
I here you Lewis, as a Christian myself, I believe the teachings of Jesus go beyond salvation and also to the embracing of the full understanding of tolerance itself in one’s life time, in order to be a true and forgiving Christian.
And there is no better way to express this tolerance and confidence in ones faith then to know that you do not have to use a government means or entity, in order to promote ones faith, when the faith itself should be adequate to promote it… Well, that is, if it and your own understanding of it is of true and authentic value and that is where some of faith fail the test of true Christian understanding as you mentioned.
Agree with Winston, it’s a political stunt meant to get free publicity. If there’s a lawsuit, the media should focus on the legal expense to taxpayers.
Isn’t this discrimination oriented against our new Somali citizens? They’ve had to endure starvation and acclamation into our culture. They came here for religious freedom and are being forced to accept the Jesus of Huether.
When a Muslim is assigned to drive this plow, he can drive it through city hall. I’ll post his bond.
The paint, labor, and litigation cost could buy more snowgates Huether fought against.
In a similar vein, I’m listening to the rebroadcast of last Tuesday’s Council meeting.
Obviously, those in charge of Carnegie and city council meetings do not understand separation of church and state.
I could not believe what I was hearing from:
Dorothy TerHorst, Prayer Partner for the Direct Line Prayer Center
Are there guidelines regarding content and time allowed for those who do the opening ? prayer/meditation.
This woman was really OVER-THE-TOP!!
Despite Bob Kolbe’s comment regarding the Lord’s Prayer, it has no place on the council’s agenda.
This is the people’s town hall.
They should be very afraid of the Disney attorneys who search the internet for copyright infringement.
i’m surprised triple m hasn’t tried to sell snow plow sponsorships, considering how well that’s worked for the indoor pool.
True about Disney lawyers (fish copyright). Masonic lawyers for the brick wall. Plow manufacturer for religious connotation. God given snow for lead contamination.
File this under “Topics that are not even important enough to be discussing, but you’ll still find it here at DaCola.”