Authored by: mr.mike on Friday, December 25 2009 @ 09:08 PM GMT+5
Whatta funny post. For years we here Atheists complaining about Nativity scenes on and near public property. One is not put up this year,for whatever reason, and someone wants to know why.
This is Brattleboro. How a creche lasted as long as it did in this Socialist/Atheist ghetto is beyond me.
---
"Firearms stand next in importance to the Constitution itself. They are the American people’s liberty teeth and the keystone under independence." G. Washingt
Authored by: mr.mike on Friday, December 25 2009 @ 10:04 PM GMT+5
Funny how you slam me for my typo but not a mention of Chris' "Where'a". But hey, good to see the bias still exists here.
---
"Firearms stand next in importance to the Constitution itself. They are the American people’s liberty teeth and the keystone under independence." G. Washingt
Authored by: SpudHill on Saturday, December 26 2009 @ 02:50 AM GMT+5
Jeez everyone's always pickin' on poor Mikey
"How a creche lasted as long as it did in this Socialist/Atheist ghetto is beyond me."
Merry friggin Christmas to you too Mike!
Authored by: SK-B on Saturday, December 26 2009 @ 07:48 AM GMT+5
Quite a few comments, mostly quarreling or bantering about mr mike's comment. But so far no one seems to have any real information about why the creche is gone.
Authored by: SpudHill on Saturday, December 26 2009 @ 12:31 PM GMT+5
Well isn't it obvious.
Here's what happened
The creche was put out with loving care and prayerful hopes but a nasty dirty little Socialist/Atheist who voted for Barry Obama crept up in the middle of the night and heartwrenchingly stole the little Baby Jesus and his minions and parents, not to mention the donkey and sold them on Ebay....to a member of Acorn. I think it's perfectly obvious what happened. Mike knows......
Authored by: louc on Sunday, December 27 2009 @ 03:04 AM GMT+5
Apparently the Knights of Columbus, who own the creche, decided to buck tradition and placed it at St Mikes where only the Catholics could appreciate it. First Baptist would have gladly displayed it, but were not included in the decision making process.
Authored by: SpudHill on Sunday, December 27 2009 @ 12:50 PM GMT+5
Oh yes they are! Originally founded as a sort of "insurance charity" to provide assistance to Irish Catholic widows and families in need they've moved on to bigger and better things. While a major charitable fund raising organization, the charity in the hearts of the Knights only extends so far. Perhaps they decided the Socialists and Atheists of Brattleboro no longer deserve to see the creche.
The Knights were huge supporters of both Bush and Bush Jr, donated tons of money to Proposition 8 in CA and are vehemently opposed to same sex marriage. Further evidence of their enlightened attitudes are the fact that they still to this day exist as a men's only, oh, make that a white men's only, fraternal club. But this is just in the spirit of their original organizational charter where they had to take a pledge to work towards the eradication of Protestants and Freemasons. But they seem really really I mean REALLY focused on same-sex marriage lately, it really seems to get them all riled up. Nice bunch of guys. Oh yes, and we have them to thank for the "under God" in the Pledge of Allegiance.
Authored by: mr.mike on Sunday, December 27 2009 @ 04:01 PM GMT+5
Wow, very good research on your part. And I thought, that as Knights of Columbus, they were still in the practice of slaughtering Indians,er I mean, Native Americans and exploiting the resources of this land to take back to our homeland. To think they are now reduced to voicing an opinion on social issues.
Whew, glad you cleared that up.
---
"Firearms stand next in importance to the Constitution itself. They are the American people’s liberty teeth and the keystone under independence." G. Washingt
Authored by: SpudHill on Sunday, December 27 2009 @ 04:13 PM GMT+5
Jasper asks
"And how does all this pertain to the creche being at St. Michael's?"
As I said, they probably thought all the socialists and atheists here in Brattleboro didn't appreciate the creche enough....just keeping things in line with Mike's original thought here. That one that was inspired by his cheery Christmas greeting about it's amazing the creche has survived all these years with all these dasterdly socialist/atheists walking about.
And Mike considering that the Knights were founded in 1882 and were based in urban settings they probably didn't have all that much to do with subduing the natives. And, by the way, when you refer to "our homeland" what the devil are you talking about?
Authored by: pleasant on Sunday, December 27 2009 @ 05:31 PM GMT+5
I, too, missed it this year. I remember back before everything had to be politically correct and the creche was on the lawn of the Municipal Center. It is unfortunate that it was placed on a side road this year where very few could see it. I am sure Centre Church would have loaned its lawn if there was a reason the Baptists couldn't host it this year.
In a town with over 20 churches, I am going to guess the majority of our community is Christian. Since 75% of the United States' population identifies as Christian, I think "we here Christians" should be allowed to display symbols of our belief. No one (at my church anyway) is telling anyone they have to believe what we believe. Why should the minority get to rule?
Authored by: SpudHill on Sunday, December 27 2009 @ 05:38 PM GMT+5
I don't think this pertains to "Christian" or not, it's just a nice little scene. Personally I don't have a real problem with the Christmas images being about, it's kinda cheery...
Authored by: annikee on Sunday, December 27 2009 @ 07:19 PM GMT+5
Why was it moved from the Municipal Ctr's lawn? Can someone who actually knows the history answer this? What year was it moved, etc., not "Because of the PC/Socialist/Atheist/Pinkos" ranters.
---
Freedom and fear are natural enemies.
If you've a bed, closet & fridge, you're richer than 75% of the people alive.
Authored by: JavaGeek on Monday, December 28 2009 @ 12:51 AM GMT+5
"Since 75% of the United States' population identifies as Christian, I think "we here Christians" should be allowed to display symbols of our belief."
Not at taxpayer expense. We atheists don't want to pay for your sectarian propaganda with our tax dollars. Just like you don't want to pay for abortions with yours.
"Why should the minority get to rule?
It doesn't obviously. But If the (your, apparently) majority ruled, we'd still have blacks forced to the back of buses in the South. If majority ruled, we'd have scientists put to death for heresy (i.e. evolution, stem-cell research, ). If majority ruled, the Equal Protection clause of the 14th Amendment would not apply to gay and marriage .. uh ... err. um, well...
No, sorry (for you) to say, to a large extent the tyranny of the majority does not rule. For now.
Authored by: Maus Anon E on Monday, December 28 2009 @ 12:59 PM GMT+5
***Since 75% of the United States' population identifies as Christian, I think "we here Christians" should be allowed to display symbols of our belief. No one (at my church anyway) is telling anyone they have to believe what we believe.***
I don't think anyone would, or can, tell Christians, or followers of any other religion, what symbols they can or can't display on their own personal or church property.
The only time it's a problem is when Christians, believing as they do that they have special majority rights contrary to U.S. law and the spirit of our puralistic society, insist that they should be able to display their symbols on public property that also belongs to Jews, Muslims, Pagans, Hindus... and atheists.
Add me to the list of non-Christians who enjoys seeing the creche every year.
Authored by: DanAxtell on Monday, December 28 2009 @ 02:31 AM GMT+5
25 years ago, the ACLU challenged the Town of Brattleboro's creche on the Municipal Center lawn and the ACLU (and America) turned out to be right this time. The creche was something appropriate for a private organization--like a church--even though we in New England had a long tradition otherwise.
I found a reference to a Nov. 27, 1984 article using the UVM newspaper database search of the Rutland Herald, http://bfprhdindex.uvm.edu/ (only headlines are returned, unlike the amazing--but limited-- Google news archive). Sadly, there is no database of the Brattleboro Reformer. Some years of the Reformer have been painstakingly indexed on typewritten cards at Brooks Memorial Library, but it's easier to look for a big story in the online Rutland Herald index and then look up the Reformer article of that date at the library. The librarians will help you with the microfilm. They live for this stuff. The microfilm browsing is better than internet browsing because it's our community.
My recollection is that Brattleboro acted with utter grace and the relocation was uneventful with no loss of the optimism of the Christmas story. As an ACLU supporter, I know that the ACLU would fight for a church's right to display the creche (because elected officials speaking for me don't have the free speech that I am guaranteed, but a private organization--like a church--can speak for me with constitutional freedom of speech.)
I'm sure the iBratt community would appreciate it if one of us would look up the old Reformer article on 11/27/1984 or shortly before. I'm tempted, but there's there's other stuff I should do before I succumb to the temptation to feed that 1984 microfilm into the microfilm reader rollers at Brooks.
Nowadays, the efficiently-consolidated Brattleboro Reformer / North Adams Transcript / Berkshire Eagle / Bennington Banner is too 21st-century and under-staffed to do any serious journalism--even though the 20th century Reformer was remarkably well-edited. It has got to be an iBratt reporter for this reporting if we are to be a well-informed electorate. So, we've got clues, but what are the details of the wandering creche?
Authored by: mr.mike on Monday, December 28 2009 @ 02:57 PM GMT+5
I'd be interested to know who filed the complaint, in 1984, to have the creche removed. I wonder where that came from?
---
"Firearms stand next in importance to the Constitution itself. They are the American people’s liberty teeth and the keystone under independence." G. Washingt
Authored by: NorahCook on Monday, December 28 2009 @ 03:57 PM GMT+5
Perhaps it was you who objected to the crossing of the line between
church and state? You don't want the gov'mint to have any say in what
religion you can practice, right?
Authored by: mr.mike on Monday, December 28 2009 @ 08:27 PM GMT+5
Absolutely. And I would also like the traditions that the founders established left alone as well.
Were you living here in 1984?
---
"Firearms stand next in importance to the Constitution itself. They are the American people’s liberty teeth and the keystone under independence." G. Washingt
Authored by: SpudHill on Tuesday, December 29 2009 @ 03:42 PM GMT+5
WHAT you think he doesn't know what's going on down here as he sits up there on the right hand (or was it the left, or am I confusing this with left brain/right brain)...anyway where ever he is up there you think he doesn't know what's going on down here...you think he doesn't know that someone took the creche away from the heathen-ish residents of Brat and put it on a side street where the true believers could worship in peace. He knows everything...kind of like Obama....oh wait, that's right he IS Obama, the great messiah, right Mike, isn't that so SJD. I think I need a cup of coffee.....
Authored by: SJD on Tuesday, December 29 2009 @ 04:08 PM GMT+5
What ? uh? da? You said Bush did it, he's at fault for everything? or like your guy Obama, from somebody's elses moma pleaded, "let's not jump to any conclusions", "the system worked"
Authored by: SJD on Wednesday, December 30 2009 @ 08:39 AM GMT+5
Dem-o-nuts have been trying to change traditions as long as there has been dem-o-nuts, that's what they do. We once stood tall as the envy of the world until dem-o-nuts felt guilty for being the best, and have been working hard at marginalizing this achievement ever since.
Authored by: annikee on Wednesday, December 30 2009 @ 09:16 AM GMT+5
What ? uh? da? You said Obama did it, he's at fault for everything? or like your guy Bush, from somebody's elses moma pleaded, "the system worked", "MissionAccomplished" "Is our children educated?".
---
Freedom and fear are natural enemies.
If you've a bed, closet & fridge, you're richer than 75% of the people alive.
Authored by: annikee on Wednesday, December 30 2009 @ 10:14 AM GMT+5
Or my favorite, when a mom of a disabled kid said she was also working 2 jobs and not making ends meet, he responded, "2 jobs! Fantastic! Only in America!"
---
Freedom and fear are natural enemies.
If you've a bed, closet & fridge, you're richer than 75% of the people alive.
Authored by: SpudHill on Wednesday, December 30 2009 @ 01:41 PM GMT+5
OH yes, I forgot about that priceless line . . . it was so cruel and coming from someone who had never really worked a day in his life. Just plain cruel and stupid.
Authored by: Maus Anon E on Wednesday, December 30 2009 @ 02:18 PM GMT+5
You have to see it from his point of view - he never even got to have one job of his own... then here's this woman who gets to work THREE jobs! Only in American could anyone be that lucky!
Authored by: pjmelton on Wednesday, December 30 2009 @ 12:52 PM GMT+5
I know, SJD. The second they started letting little black children go to school with little white children, everything fell apart. And all because Democrats can't tolerate success. They just feel too much guilt about Being the Best, which can only happen through heartless exploitation. In fact, heartless exploitation is an end in itself, the very definition of success.
You have really hit the nail on the head this time. Give yourself a pat on the back! (NB: Put the hammer down first.)
---
"Economic laws are not made by nature. They are made by human beings." -- FDR
Authored by: Maus Anon E on Wednesday, December 30 2009 @ 01:47 PM GMT+5
Actually it used to be the Republicans that were the agents of change, innovation, and progress. They even deserved a capital "R" in their name. Ahhh... what a difference a century and a half makes, eh?
Now they're limited to being the party of hyperbole and avarice. Even the conservatives have forsaken them.
Authored by: NorahCook on Wednesday, December 30 2009 @ 12:11 PM GMT+5
The founders are my foremothers and forefathers, so let me take this
on: You would like to experience Puritan customs such as not dancing on
Sunday? You would like to persecute Quakers? You would like to wear a
narrow range of white, grays and blacks, because other colors are
pleasure-seeking fripparies? You would approve of slavery, because it is
so mercilessly embedded in the economy that there is no hope of
changing it for centuries? Shall I continue? Or, suffice it to say that every
generation has its own quirks and quibbles... but freedom of religion and
separation of church and state are still fine ideas, the best we know of.
Authored by: Maus Anon E on Wednesday, December 30 2009 @ 02:05 PM GMT+5
The Puritans weren't the founders of this nation, but it is interesting to note that American Puritans didn't celebrate Christmas, and banned celebrations generally.
Authored by: pjmelton on Thursday, December 31 2009 @ 07:54 AM GMT+5
"You would like to persecute Quakers?"
This tradition is still alive and well. There are government spies in Quaker meetings whenever the U.S. is at war (i.e., pretty much always). Got to keep tabs on the peaceful resistors, keep them from flying, etc.
---
"Economic laws are not made by nature. They are made by human beings." -- FDR
I was wondering the same thing. We have it in the Christmas Calendar
on virtual Main Street...