| 
|
Page: Profile: Wren's Nest News Local
| Total Views: 4,943,103
|
Article: 18067
[Civil]
Date Posted:
6/27/2007
6:14:43 pm EDT
Wvox Stats
Views: 7,043
RSS: 21,604
Comments: 21
|
Protesters Defend Portrait Of Jesus
Author: Jenny Hurwitz Source: Nola.com
Title: PROTESTERS DEFEND PORTRAIT OF JESUS
Standing in the shadow of the Slidell City Court, a swarm of protesters gathered Tuesday night for a rousing and at times revival-like demonstration denouncing the American Civil Liberties Union and offering a show of unconditional support for a portrait of Jesus hanging on the wall just inside the courthouse.
More than 250 residents packed the intersection of Bouscaren and Fourth streets in Slidell -- which had been blocked off by authorities -- and spilled onto the courthouse lawn to pray, cheer and hear speeches from several lpastors and state Rep. A.G. Crowe, R-Slidell, who organized the event.
Crowe berated the ACLU, which has challenged the portrait as a violation of the Constitution's First Amendment, saying it advances a religious message using a public building.
"The people of Slidell are not going to sit back and take the stuff that got dished out," he said, eliciting a roar of applause from the crowd.
| Options: [Read Full Story] [Comments Locked]
[Email to a Friend]
|
|
Community Thoughts: There are 21 comments posted | Reverse Sort |
| What Can I Say?... | Jun 29th. at 4:32:24 pm EDT
|
Kiki Circen (Escondido, California) - Email Me
I'd prefer a courthouse to have a portrait everybody can live with. Like the court's first judge. I'm sure everybody would be okay with that.
|
| Plastic Snowflakes | Jun 28th. at 6:29:44 pm EDT
|
Terry (Irvington, Virginia) - Email Me
How many plastic snowflakes does it take to convert discriminatory public pandering via government of sectarian religion to something neutral and secular?
In a case like this, or many others, I say it cannot be done. When the original intent and actions are ones clearly intended to be illegal government speech, diluting that while also tampering with the intended illegal message never takes away that intent and underlying message. Therefore, even if in other cases where legitimate historic presentations which include churches in some regions do have a valid secular purpose and effect, the only valid solution for this kind of case is to eliminate the offending speech (note, "offending" means in violation of law in this usage, not whether anyone likes it or not) . In the case of a court, whose use is mandatory for not just locals but people from all over the country who might chance on needing to do business there, it's also the officials who by their illegal actions in posting such illegal religious pandering who should be removed to clean up the reality, and not just the superficial symbols, of intent to violate nondiscrimination law.
We live in a Democratic Republic. That's a tricky structure, because government operates legitimately or not depending on whether it constrains itself based on distribution of powers and jurisdictions. It makes democratic rule a foundation, but also defines when a democratic vote shifts to being an unruly mob with pitchforks and torches, expressing criminal or otherwise illegal intent, as in this case.
That protection of rights of minorities exists, because for all practical purposes, we are a nation of minorities, including those of us not legally classified as such. Just yesterday an 84 year old uncle was telling me how much less my grandfather told him about his own heritage in Ireland as a child, than I was told in childhood stories decades ago, a generation later, because of social intimidation and lack of civil rights protections early last century. A Swedish grandfather faced issues of being denied lodging for being Jewish, based on erroneous presumptions based on spelling and translation of names with letter sequences and pronunciations not present in English (and so many immigrants changed them at Ellis Island) .
It can be healthy and natural to learn one's family genealogy and consider that as part of one's own identity.
What these bible thumpers are doing protesting obedience to the rule of law designed to ensure equal protections over limited issues is so severely at odds with the functional needs of our society, and promotes such a psychotic view of law to their own kids, that membership in the churches or parents participating in these "be a crook" rallies might well constitute grounds for child abuse investigations. (not because of the religions, but the related patterns of actions....)
As to the ACLU, it's difficult to put a precise finger on what it is or isn't based on the ideology of a few historic leaders. The single biggest current influence is the owner of Progressive Insurance, because his $30 million in donations (less than from other members overall though) has visibly changed the presence of staffed offices for every state in the country, plus DC lobbying specialists, and NYC HQ expansion. It's not just an ACLU issue for him, as his corporation supports a range of progressive arts and speech issues of far wider scope, while his son being romantically connected to the ACLU's Executive Director doesn't help much to shape an ideological filter, so much as having an active communications channel which also exists in other forms for many ACLU members.
The ACLU is also a bit fuzzy because it's not a single organization with uniform leadership, but an affiliation of around a hundred corporations with educational, lobbying, and public interest law to shape precedent moreso than help individual litigants over certain types of civil rights issues, as its core foci. Most work is done by volunteers at the state or county level, as to legal policy and practice decisions, and in the trenches activities, and as such, what comes out of two large floors of staff in NYC is effectively a minority of what defines the overall ACLU. Some issues such as nationally formally adopted policy about 2nd Amendment interpretation I'd label a well reasoned but misguided endorsement of historic government frauds, while at the local level I'd depict most leaders I've known as good people struggling with more good cases than resources, and wrestling with larger issues where legal system practice often butts heads with theoretical obligations of Constitutional law.
Plastic snowflakes won't accomplish reform of those aspects of our legal process which is problematic either, where we need some major changes to default to strong civil rights protections, rather than narrow lawyering games to preserve patterns of discrimination absent litigants stepping forward to be personally tortured over each narrow round of enhanced protections in real world practical remedies.
The Roberts court this week has taken some big steps backwards, which leaves another question for the ACLU and similarly well intended groups. Is it better to tackle the tough cases and issues which really need help, or focus on slam dunks, like Jeezus junk in courts, important symbolism but not major life changing substance? Unless we clean up the political influence on our courts, that question often is answered one way in theory, and very differently in practice.
|
| You Know What | Jun 28th. at 5:25:35 pm EDT
|
William (Pictou Landing, Nova Scotia) - Email Me
I have no objection to these people wanting a photo of Jesus displayed.... in their home or church or private building.... but those who are supporting the picture are obviously those who want it in a public arena for promotional purposes. Are they actually going to run out to the local courthouse, or school and stare at this picture when they need a reminder of Christ's role in their lives?
I think not..... it simply is wanted there to promote their own religious deity.
What they need to be told is the first ammendment was put in place to protect the rights of those who DO NOT want it and are having it forced upon them.
It is to protect the little guy, not the big bullies.
Would having this picture there really hurt anyone?
Maybe... if because of this picture they felt they were in an obviously Christian place as a non-Christian, they may feel not as equal.... and isn't equality for all what the first ammendment is all about?
|
| I Called The Court House | Jun 28th. at 4:37:43 pm EDT
|
Red Cedar Owl (Deville, Louisiana) - Email Me
I called the Slidell Court House and asked about the history of "this" picture. Yes, it has only been up for ten years. The City Court had once been over the police station. In that location "this" picture was NOT there.
However, the young woman I spoke with was very cordial and polite when I suggested that "WE" put up other pictures. By the way the picture in question is about 8 by 11 inches-- that's right it is the size of a sheet of paper.
Folks, where was the ACLU when WE were fighting with the VA???? Why does the ACLU just pick on Christians?
Yes, the religious right is a problem, but do YOU not know a Christian that does not have a problem with YOUR faith? Remember this-- many Christians were on OUR side during the VA/Pentacle fight.
Blessed Be
Red Cedar Owl
|
| Hmm | Jun 28th. at 3:18:27 pm EDT
|
Ezri (Centennial, Colorado) - Email Me
I agree with the offering to put the rest of the religious pictures up, simply because it MIGHT make them stop protesting.
The truth is though, no religious references belong in any courthouse. I don't care how much of the population it represents, it's innapropriate.
|
| They Just Dont Get It. | Jun 28th. at 3:00:11 pm EDT
|
Wytchone (LaPlace, Louisiana) - Email Me
Public property, Public funds, no Portrait of (insert Deity of choice) needed.
It really is that simple.
|
| Hm... | Jun 28th. at 1:35:16 pm EDT
|
Vema (Riverside, Missouri) - Email Me
I agree that they should be offered the option of either taking down the portrait or adding any religious artwork that another religion might want. I don't actually think that's a good idea, but I *DO* think that they would balk so much at the idea of their Savior being represented equally with Krishna, White Buffalo Woman, Kali, or (possible worst of all) Baphomet that they would take it down with less of a fuss.
That being said, I think they are OVER-REACTING really badly. I almost wanted to contact someone about the statue of Ceres on top of a court house nearby because it's also inappropriate. These people obviously just want to be able to rub their religion in everyone's face whereever they want - it's not enough to have cross necklaces or bumperstickers that say, "I brake for Jesus!" on them. They have to force everyone that enters a government building to see their God as well.
Put the portrait in the biggest church in town and call it a day, people.
|
| A Little Off Topic... | Jun 28th. at 8:59:30 am EDT
|
Nascent One (Oviedo, Florida) - Email Me
...But I always find it amusing that Christians get so bent out of shape over a portrait, or picture of Christ...as if anyone knows what he looked like. I must have missed the passage in the bible that says:
"Jesus swept his shoulder length brown hair out of his eyes. He bent down to tighten the stap on his sandal before standing and straightening his white, flowing robe."
And it makes total sense for a man who was born in the middle east to be white with blue eyes. *rolls eyes*
Also, I love how some fanatics swear that they can see Christ or Mary's face in oil slicks, tortillias, grime on the side of the building, etc. Now that's top rate dilusion, right there.
- Peace
|
| All Or Nothing | Jun 28th. at 6:57:55 am EDT
|
Moonlight Wolf (Bradford, England) - Email Me
There is a way around this problem, it's not the only way for I am sure that someone with a good mind will find another.
My suggestion is that you put in images from all religions or don't put religious imagery at all.
If there are no second class religions then all have equal access to representation in a public building or none have any access to a public building.
|
| ... | Jun 28th. at 5:17:02 am EDT
|
Sailordada (Wheeling, Illinois) - Email Me
I see witches aren't the only ones to be called "self-described" now. I do find it somewhat amusing that Christians now are called this term, but wouldn't it make more sense to just use the word "practising." Maybe, there was a word or a letter count on the article and the author needed to stretch it out a little more.
|
| LMAO!!! | Jun 28th. at 2:42:30 am EDT
|
The Rev. Sparrowhawk (Yakima, Washington) - Email Me
Those people protesting are idol worshipers!
|
| Majority Does Not Rule Civil Rights | Jun 28th. at 1:03:19 am EDT
|
Stormsinger (Milwaukee, Wisconsin) - Email Me
Civil rights are those things which the government acknowledges should belong to all people, regardless of popularity, majority or minority status, or political correctness. We are slowly and painfully dragging ourselves to a point where we acknowledge that maybe everybody should be treated like we want to be treated; that everyone should have the same rights and privileges as "the majority."
Interestingly enough, the guy in the picture was pushing these same ideas two thousand years ago. Too bad the people who claim to be his followers don't seem to have gotten the lesson.
|
| Well... | Jun 28th. at 12:27:31 am EDT
|
Eric Wolfborn (Jenkintown, Pennsylvania) - Email Me
...we don't live in a democracy. We live in a representative republic. Majority DOES rule.
|
| ...with Liberty And Justice For All. | Jun 28th. at 12:02:36 am EDT
|
Seer (Hudson, New Hampshire) - Email Me
The article says
"But protesters claimed that the portrait, which has been on display since the building opened in 1997, has never posed a problem and fairly represents the majority of residents in their largely Christian community. "
It's important to note that it doesn not represent ALL the residents.
Peace
Seer
|
| OK, Then Let's See How They React To This! | Jun 27th. at 9:06:35 pm EDT
|
Aidan Odinson (Collingdale, Pennsylvania) - Email Me - Web
On the cover of Freyja Aswynn's book "Leaves of Ygdrassl", there's a great portrait of Allfather Odin.
Suppose someone (with the artist's permission) gets a copy the same size as the portrait of Jesus, in a similar frame, and offers it to hang there, too.
I'm sure that the Jewish folks and the Buddhists might like to make similar offerings, too!
If they really want "freedom of religion," the same folks who cuss at the ACLU should instead cheer the added portraits which could be there with their Jesus, showing that Freedom of Religion is alive and well in this country.
Serously - such an offer should be made. Let them show if they want other religions to have as much freedom as their own.
|
Disclaimer: The Witches' Voice inc does not verify the accuracy of the details stated in this listing, nor do we vouch for the value of the goods or services presented here... As with all contacts and financial dealings in cyberspace, we encourage you to use caution and wisdom in your dealings with strangers.
Political Statements: Any and all personal political opinions expressed in the public listing sections (including, but not restricted to, personals, events, groups, shops, Wren's Nest, etc.) are solely those of the author(s) and do not reflect the opinion of The Witches' Voice, Inc. TWV is a non-profit, non-partisan educational organization.
|
State/Country flags created by 3dflags.com and are used with permission
Web Site Content (including: text - graphics - html - look & feel)
Copyright 1997-2009 The Witches' Voice Inc. All rights reserved
Note: Authors & Artists retain the copyright for their work(s) on this website.
Unauthorized reproduction without prior permission is a violation of copyright laws.
Website structure, evolution and php coding by Fritz Jung on a Macintosh G5.
Any and all personal political opinions expressed in the public listing sections (including, but not restricted to, personals, events, groups, shops, Wren’s Nest, etc.) are solely those of the author(s) and do not reflect the opinion of The Witches’ Voice, Inc. TWV is a nonprofit, nonpartisan educational organization.
Sponsorship: Visit the Witches' Voice Sponsor Page for info on how you
can help support this Community Resource. Donations ARE Tax Deductible.
The Witches' Voice carries a 501(c)(3) certificate and a Federal Tax ID.
Mail Us: The Witches' Voice Inc., P.O. Box 341018, Tampa, Florida 33694-1018 U.S.A.
| |
