Since when is it okay to have a creche on public property?
we all know the universe was created purely by happenstance. Kinda like s’mores.
mtierney said:Except for pointing out that after multiple personal slurs and derogatory comments against me, spread over multiple threads that, by now, you should know how to spell my name.
How do you figure? The only thing I have said about you that could be considered a serious personal slur is that you support Donald Trump and you freely admit to that charge.
mtierney said:
And, hearing the titilation — possibly the whole rational — in his repetitious use of certain words. Gross, that.
You know what is really REALLY gross? Grosser than gross, as my nephew might say?
Supporting a man who brags about sexually assaulting women. That is gross. Indeed, that is disgusting.
In this holiday season, I weep for your tarnished, defiled soul. How can you do what you do, say the things you say and then speak about Jesus Christ?
I think it has been OK to put a crèche on public property since the drafting of the constitution, if not before then.
personally, I think the Maplewood village creche violates the aesthetic standards to which we've become accustomed. Plywood cutout figures? We can do better. How about live actors? And live animals too while we're at it.
Like a hangover, a gained 10 lbs or a relative who’s overstayed his/her welcome, this thread is proof positive that it’s time to put away the toys and de-Christmas the house.
Bring on January!
Smedley said:
Like a hangover, a gained 10 lbs or a relative who’s overstayed his/her welcome, this thread is proof positive that it’s time to put away the toys and de-Christmas the house.
Bring on January!
And come Christmas 2019 your complaint will be the same as Christmas 2018. Stick to low fat.
Smedley said:
Like a hangover, a gained 10 lbs or a relative who’s overstayed his/her welcome, this thread is proof positive that it’s time to put away the toys and de-Christmas the house.
Bring on January!
The thing that's puzzled me is, over here, 'crèche' is a place for minding young children (like a nursery school, pre-school, infant-minding Centre etc). I've gathered what you're all referring to is what we'd call the 'cradle', 'crib' or especially in a nativity scene, the 'manger'.
Your discussion has been most enlightening. Thank you! Happy new year!
My wife claimed she was a virgin and then the night that our child was born, three guys showed up and gave her perfume and stuff ! WTF!
Meanwhile, despite my irreverence (or because of it) the creche doesn't feel like a threat to me. It's easy to walk past without feeling intruded upon.
My experience is that one can freely walk into Morrow, Prospect, St. George's and any number of churches and other religious institutions in the area, in New York City, virtually anywhere. No one checks an id, there's no admission fee, you can stay and sit for five minutes or five hours. In fact, someone may approach you and welcome you warmly. Most have a creche and any number of displays to view freely. Sure, the doors are locked during some hours, but I'm not sure why people need 24/7 access to a creche or other religious display.
Given that, I don't see the point of also having these displays in public spaces. By definition, someone is going to feel excluded by looking at it, it's not their belief. While it isn't technically proselytizing or promoting a religion, it seems like one step away from it.
mtierney said:
Except for pointing out that after multiple personal slurs and derogatory comments against me, spread over multiple threads that, by now, you should know how to spell my name.
And, hearing the titilation — possibly the whole rational — in his repetitious use of certain words. Gross, that.
Some advice:
You have heard that it was said, "An eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth." But I say to you, Do not resist the one who is evil. But if anyone slaps you on the right cheek, turn to him the other also. And if anyone would sue you and take your tunic, let him have your cloak as well. And if anyone forces you to go one mile, go with him two miles. Give to the one who begs from you, and do not refuse the one who would borrow from you.
— Jesus Christ, English Standard Version (Matthew 5:38-42)
Here is the problem.
Many citizens of Maplewood belong to a group with a collective memory of having been persecuted for refusing to accept the belief symbolized by the crèche.
Should we "get over it"? Maybe
apple44 said:
My experience is that one can freely walk into Morrow, Prospect, St. George's and any number of churches and other religious institutions in the area, in New York City, virtually anywhere. No one checks an id, there's no admission fee, you can stay and sit for five minutes or five hours. In fact, someone may approach you and welcome you warmly. Most have a creche and any number of displays to view freely. Sure, the doors are locked during some hours, but I'm not sure why people need 24/7 access to a creche or other religious display.
Given that, I don't see the point of also having these displays in public spaces. By definition, someone is going to feel excluded by looking at it, it's not their belief. While it isn't technically proselytizing or promoting a religion, it seems like one step away from it.
If it were just a feeling of exclusion, I might be OK with that. However, as Lost writes above, for some segments of our community seeing a creche in a public space brings back ancestral and more recent memories of discomfort, fear, intimidation, and even persecution. Is this a message that our community really wants to encourage?
Menorahs are lit in public places in SOMA. Should this ritual be retired along with the creche?
https://villagegreennj.com/holiday/photos-soma-begins-hanukkah-with-south-orange-menorah-lighting/
I dunno. Melchior has always scared the **** out of me. And Balthazar. Dude’s got shifty eyes.
Whether or not a particular symbol upsets you for personal or historical reasons is not the issue. It leads to nonconstructive tensions about particular religions. For me, the issue is that the placement of these objects in the public square - literally in this case - is at least as much a political act as a religious one. "I have a right to place my religious symbol on our shared ground." It's not like the absence of these things on the public square stifles religious expression. Creches and menorahs and whatever moves you can be and are put in countless places including private lawns (and on the internet and television etc.). That said, I don't think its the end of the world either. Most people don't care, and don't notice. It just becomes part of the passing background noise and schmaltz of the holiday and goes away quickly.
I remember when America was a melting pot, a blend of people seeking to live in harmony with their neighbors. When Maplewood applauded differences — race, religion, gender, nationality. The town actually celebrated the people potpourri.
Now the replica of a tiny infant puts fear into hearts? This is ignorance. It is called a “joyous season” for a reason — praying for peace on earth, good will toward all.
The trend of late is protecting one group by hiding the religion of “others”. We can only respect each other if we know one another.
Do we want this?
“Hitler wanted not only to conquer all of Europe, but Hitler also wanted to create a new religion and to replace Jesus Christ as a person to be worshipped. Hitler expected his followers to worship the Nazi ideology. Since Catholic priests and Christian pastors were often influential leaders in their community, they were sought out by the Nazis very early. Thousands of Catholic priests and Christian pastors were forced into concentration camps. A special barracks was set up at Dachau, the camp near Munich, Germany, for clergymen. A few survived; some were executed, but most were allowed to die slowly of starvation or disease.“
The church down the street from me has a creche in their front yard. It is in plain sight for all to see. Nobody is objecting to their right to do this. The question is whether placing a creche on public land is an appropriate use of that land. This is a completely separate issue from anyone advocating "hiding the religion" of any one group.
The melting pot was certainly an ideal, often paid lip service, but not close to a reality.
Religions are inherently divisive, even when different religions have overlapping ethics. If you are absolutely sure of your god and his dictates for all (including rituals and myths that have no comprehensible connection to ethics), than you can't help but have a dim view of the guy who has a different god or no god at all. By all means, put creches on your lawn, on the church lawn, on TV in pamphlets etc. I'm not offended. I can ignore it or enjoy it if artfully done. But I'd rather not see that kind of stuff on our common green, even if its my stuff too.
You have to be pretty ignorant of history to cast the Holocaust as a war on Christianity. I would think the well documented history of the Church's collaboration with Fascism would be enough to put that idea to rest.
If you don't stand up against the inoffensive violations of the wall between Church and State, who will take you seriously when you take a stand against that which truly offends you? I certainly am not clawing my eyes out over a Manger Scene in a park but, at the same time, I think it is pretty clear that these things don't belong on public land. Why can't they just set it up in front of one of the Churches on Ridgewood?
GoSlugs said:
You have to be pretty ignorant of history to cast the Holocaust as a war on Christianity. I would think the well documented history of the Church's collaboration with Fascism would be enough to put that idea to rest.
to say nothing of the ignorance required to think that anything related to the Holocaust is analogous to the desire to remove a creche display from public land.
We sometimes idealize our childhoods and young adulthoods to the point of blathering about a long ago melting pot that lived in harmony. When I hear that, my immediate thought is that there must have been blinders to what was actually going on in their town and country. If it is in fact true that differences were somehow more celebrated in the past, then prickly feelings of exclusion would not appear in an on line conversation in 2018.
this thread was started to poison conversation here — it worked.
It is easy to spread hate, and so very hard to understand others
and it is happening right here, in sophisticated, liberal, affluent Maplewood!
mtierney said:
this thread was started to poison conversation here — it worked.
It is easy to spread hate, and so very hard to understand others
and it is happening right here, in sophisticated, liberal, affluent Maplewood!
if I recall correctly, it's you that compared people against the creche on public property to Hitler.
wrong again, DB, read the thread again. I didnot link the Infant Jesus replica in the crèche to genocide. Others expressed those views.
But, you are wrong often,DB, especially in regard to me. I can cope, as I do not use anger, rage, hateful remarks, and insults against others.
mtierney said:
wrong again, DB, read the thread again. I didnot link the Infant Jesus replica in the crèche to genocide. Others expressed those views.
But, you are wrong often,DB, especially in regard to me. I can cope, as I do not use anger, rage, hateful remarks, and insults against others.
I'm sorry, but are you denying the rather clear implication of your post?
And I'm curious as to what other posts you think linked the creche to genocide? I don't see them.
LOST said:
Here is the problem.
Many citizens of Maplewood belong to a group with a collective memory of having been persecuted for refusing to accept the belief symbolized by the crèche.
Should we "get over it"? Maybe
Also, another person connected the crèche to a reminder of persecution.
What ever happened to our troll, Guy? Stirred the pot and ran?
I rest my case.
Except for pointing out that after multiple personal slurs and derogatory comments against me, spread over multiple threads that, by now, you should know how to spell my name.
And, hearing the titilation — possibly the whole rational — in his repetitious use of certain words. Gross, that.