Since when is it okay to have a creche on public property?

I noticed that Dickens Village includes a creche this year.  This seems inappropriate to me.  Are people really okay with use of public property to promote a particular religion (or any at all)?


There is also a menorah. The town is not promoting any specific religion, it's simply recognizing those religions which find this time of year to be important. I think it's lovely.


next they’ll be painting crosswalks red and green.  


blianderson said:
There is also a menorah. The town is not promoting any specific religion, it's simply recognizing those religions which find this time of year to be important. I think it's lovely.

oh sheesh. of course it's promoting specific religions.

The mere existence of Dickens Village is a promotion of a specific religion. (I assume DV is town funded.)

You can argue whether this is good or not, but don't deny what they're doing.


I'm a Christian, member and regular attendee of my church. I find it problematic that there are overtly religious displays on public property. I feel like it's disrespectful to people of other faiths (or no faith). And I'm not in the slightest threatened by the notion of any government body choosing to not allow such displays on their property.



This is not the first year. It has been there a few years. I think the whole display is lovely and thank all those who help to put it together.


This decade-old primer, from a group that you’d expect to be sympathetic to the OP’s questions, seemed helpful:

 https://ffrf.org/outreach/item/14019-religious-holiday-displays-on-public-property


There are also decorated lamposts and store windows that refer to a specific holiday. As far as the Dickens Village is concerned, I hope that it is also a reminder to all the SOMA privileged that our wealth gap is worse than during Dicken’s time. Happy Holidays. 


blianderson said:
There is also a menorah. The town is not promoting any specific religion, it's simply recognizing those religions which find this time of year to be important. I think it's lovely.

 I believe the S.C. position is that religious stuff is allowed as long as all religions are allowed equal space. So once in a while, we find Satanic displays on public property. This take place mostly in the south.  Or with public prayers to open public official meetings, there are presentations by atheists and such. Many of the towns gave up the public prayers in order not to have the "offensive" people say their stuff.


DaveSchmidt said:
This decade-old primer, from a group that you’d expect to be sympathetic to the OP’s questions, seemed helpful:
 https://ffrf.org/outreach/item/14019-religious-holiday-displays-on-public-property

 I dunno - that piece basically just outlines what is currently legal under the two operative SC decisions, and avoids expressing opinions outside of those parameters. My guess is that FFRF probably is against both decisions.



I thought DV was somehow already linked to Christmas, no?


For some, this is an issue of whether having a creche on public land is a violation of the separation of Church and State, signifying support for a single religion over others. To that point, I don't find Dickens Village (which recreates a village described in a Dickens novel), a lighted evergreen (which has origins predating the common era), or a lit candelabra (which commemorates a non-religious historical event) to be indicative of a specific religion.  A creche, which commemorates the birth of Christ is a different matter.  IMO it does not belong on public property, especially not on Maplewood's town square.


I am all for public nativity scenes as long as they include the Caganer that is traditional in Southern Europe.



when people forget/or have no idea that Christmas celebrates the birth of Jesus Christ, it might  raise a question of suitability.


DV is not celebrating a fictional  village in England — more the setting for  ‘Twas the Night Before  Christmas , etc and the story’s lesson of wishing all the meaning of generosity, kindness to all,  and peace.


Much needed even in Maplewood it appears—  Scrooge is still as mean-spirited as ever as he walks about Dickens Village — 



drummerboy said:

 I dunno - that piece basically just outlines what is currently legal under the two operative SC decisions ...

 YMMV, but that’s what I’d be looking for if I were asking, “Since when is it okay to have a creche on public property?”


mtierney said:

Much needed even in Maplewood it appears—  Scrooge is still as mean-spirited as ever as he walks about Dickens Village — 


really?  


mtierney said:

DV is not celebrating a fictional  village in England — more the setting for  ‘Twas the Night Before  Christmas , etc and the story’s lesson of wishing all the meaning of generosity, kindness to all,  and peace.

 You may be thinking of Moore Village.


DaveSchmidt said:
This decade-old primer, from a group that you’d expect to be sympathetic to the OP’s questions, seemed helpful:
 https://ffrf.org/outreach/item/14019-religious-holiday-displays-on-public-property

according to those qualifiers, the Maplewood display is about as compliant as it can be.  The main displays are the tree and the village, and the creche and the menorah are off to the side, and nearly equal in size.

The Maplewood "old timers" among us remember a not too distant past when there was no creche in the Dickens Village.  I'd estimate its inclusion at about 10 years ago.  There were a group of Catholics in town who seemed a bit put out that there was a menorah but not a nativity scene in Ricalton Square (fwiw, that was my personal interpretation).  

Who's with me in petitioning the town to add a Fesitvus Pole next year?  It will be the easiest installation ever.  And we can bring over the Facebook SOMA Lounge crew to recite the airing of grievances -- if we start the day after Thanksgiving and go 24/7 we might have enough time for everyone to get stuff off their chests before Festivus Day.


mtierney said:
 Christmas celebrates the birth of Jesus Christ

 You are aware that Jesus was probably not born in December, are you not?  Sure, some people use the holidays around the Winter Solstice to (incorrectly) celebrate Christ's birthday but, as Hanukah, Kwanza, Festivus and a dozen other holidays so clearly demonstrate, Christianity does not have the title on the the astronomical event that occurs on 12/21.


Klinker said:

the astronomical event that occurs on 12/21.

 Usually.


annielou said:
There are also decorated lamposts and store windows that refer to a specific holiday. As far as the Dickens Village is concerned, I hope that it is also a reminder to all the SOMA privileged that our wealth gap is worse than during Dicken’s time. Happy Holidays. 

 " To comfort the afflicted and afflict the comfortable.  Well said.


Like the song says at this time of year Christmas is all around. The two towns are awash in Christmas decorations on private homes, in and on church property and in almost every store you walk into. Newark airport has lighted decorations.  Radio stations shift their programming to include Christmas music in November, some almost exclusively. WQXR plays 100% Christmas music on the 25th. I can attend any number of concerts, plays, pageants and Christmas services starting at about December 1st. It is a Federal Holiday! I don't have to take vacation time yo observe Christmas! That's an amazing privilege afforded to no other religion. There is no serious effort being made by anyone anywhere in this country to change this situation.

What some people have asked for is the exclusion of religious themes hosted or funded by government bodies. I think those of us who celebrate Christmas are so used to it being interwoven into society can lose sight of how it makes people of different faiths feel marginalized. Nobody is trying to get rid of Christmas but they're asking not to have it a de facto official government observation.

People who comprise the majority in the US should remember our responsibility to the rest of the population. We don't force people to observe any religion. And we should remember it may not always be the way it is now. Demographics change. Would you want to live somewhere where Diwali or Eid were a mandated part of school activities, or given official holiday status while Christmas is just another day that you have to go to work or school?

I've said enough I think. I get worked up about this because I think some of my fellow Christians can be very short-sighted and insensitive. 


DaveSchmidt said:


mtierney said:

DV is not celebrating a fictional  village in England — more the setting for  ‘Twas the Night Before  Christmas , etc and the story’s lesson of wishing all the meaning of generosity, kindness to all,  and peace.
 You may be thinking of Moore Village.

 No, more a blend. (Love the wordplay)


Thinking about donating my own caganer.  They appear to be for sale on Amazon.  Do you have to get some sort of permit to add to the display or can you just slip something in?


DaveSchmidt said:


drummerboy said:

 I dunno - that piece basically just outlines what is currently legal under the two operative SC decisions ...
 YMMV, but that’s what I’d be looking for if I were asking, “Since when is it okay to have a creche on public property?”

 You're confusing whether something is acceptable/appropriate with whether it's constitutional.


If your life is so great you have the the energy to worry about that, be grateful.  So many people suffering actual abuses/being murdered due to religion, race, gender, disability, orientation, etc it seems silly to worry about a harmless decoration.  As long as it is not promoting harm or hatred, it shouldn't be an issue.


jmitw said:
If your life is so great you have the the energy to worry about that, be grateful.  So many people suffering actual abuses/being murdered due to religion, race, gender, disability, orientation, etc it seems silly to worry about a harmless decoration.  As long as it is not promoting harm or hatred, it shouldn't be an issue.

I don't think that's fair. Sure there are more important things to be concerned about - but that doesn't mean we should ignore the smaller things that are wrong.

And it can be argued that religious favoritism shown by governments contributes in small ways to greater religious based intolerances. Anti-Muslim feelings, for example, can be amplified when local governments show preference to Christianity and ignore Islam. Many Christians feel a certain empowerment when they see their holidays granted support by their governments.

Don't forget that there are large swaths of America that actually feel that their Christianity is being imperiled because some people choose to say Happy Holidays rather than Merry Christmas. They don't need further encouragement.

Why do local governments feel the need to spend their energy on Christmas anyway? Can't that be left to the local churches?


I don't think its fair that people are whining about things like a creche but don't give a d about people who are suffering and dying..sure many people talk the talk, but when it comes time for actual action, they can't be bothered...unless its a fake GFM about a fake do gooder giving his last 20 to a woman in distress.  I am not Christian, but I don't have a problem with christian, jewish, muslim, hindu, etc symbols.


as long as the government gives equal opportunity to all, it should be encouraged to share our cultures and beliefs with others, rather than oppress them.

too bad people insist on being stupid and try claim spaghetti strainer worship and ruin celebrating diversity.


In order to add a comment – you must Join this community – Click here to do so.