Despite over 100 people present at the borough council meeting last night and some strong words by religious leaders and residents alike, the Borough of Ellwood City will still plan to move the traditional Nativity Scene off borough property come next Christmas.
“The vote is done and over with – let’s look toward to 2012,” said Councilwoman Judith Dici in a written statement to fellow council members and the public. She explained how council understood everyone’s view points and that they will strive for a solution to make everyone happy.
The vote, which took place last month, was to move the Nativity scene off borough property and put it on private property in order to avoid possible lawsuits. The vote was 4-2 in favor of moving the Nativity.
This vote came after the Freedom From Religion Foundation told the borough that keeping the Nativity on borough property would cause the Foundation to push for legal action against the borough.
Voting to move the Nativity and avoid possible costly lawsuits was Council President Anthony DeCarbo and council members Glenn Jones, Marilyn Mancini, Judith Dici. Council members George Celli and Ralph Chiappetta voted to keep it in place.
There was an attempt by Councilman Chiappetta last night to put the Nativity issue back on the agenda for next week’s voting meeting; however, because of legal issues, only those who voted in favor of moving the Nativity could make that motion.
Monday night’s meeting was packed full of visitors and about a dozen of those in attendance spoke on the Nativity concern.
“Be alert – this kind of stuff isn’t going to stop with this,” said resident Paul Dici.
“There are some things worth fighting for. This is where we want the Nativity,” said resident Mike Parisi.
“The very presence of everyone here speaks volumes,” said another borough resident.
Veteran and funeral director Samuel Teolis had much to say on the issue as well. In fact, he challenged Council and said he would donate the first $1,000 for a lawyer in memory of his wife who died a year ago.
In the end, though, it seems that legal precedence was at force here and, although very strong support by borough residents, council felt moving the Nativity will be in the best interest of the borough and its residents.
“…and some strong words by religious leaders”
You should provide the names of those religious leaders especially since you indicated they were “strong” words. After all, you said they were leaders just like council members are leaders.
Only two religious leaders spoke: Rev. John Schmidt, pastor of St. Elias Orthodox Church and Mother Magdalena of the Orthodox Monastery of the Transfiguration. Both took a very Orthodox stance and were basically arguing that Christianity is the state religion. Fortunately, a majority of the Council understands the US Constitution. This is not the Vatican. The government needs to remain neutral on religion.
Why can’t the issue be put on the ballot for the peole to decide. If the majority of the community want the nativity to be moved, move it; if the majority of the people want it to stay, keep it where it is.
“Why can’t the issue be put on the ballot for the peole to decide.”
Because the issue has already been decided by the US Supreme Court.
Persuing the issue is a waste of money feeding the emotions and egos of foolish people.
I don’t know the setup of where the Nativity was located, but would it be possible to sell a small section of the borough property, along with an included nativity, to a private citizen? The sales agreement could contain restrictions on what type of activity could occur on the property, access to the public, and any other legal mumbo jumbo needed. Then the nativity would be displayed on private property in the same location it was originally. The people that brought the lawsuit may be atheist, like myself, but they go beyond that point and I would consider them anti-religious. A nativity on public property does not bother me or make me feel unwelcome, why would it???
Contrary to the intentional misinformation repeatedly presented by “supporters” of the Nativity scene:
1. Moving (not outright removal and not placed elsewhere) does NOT alter, in either a positive or negative way, one’s beliefs, religious or otherwise.
2. Having ANY religious symbol or display at ANY time of the year on governmen property does not, in any magical way, make your beliefs any more meaningful.
3. A government body, at any level, that has a law, policy, and/or procedure that, upon request of representation of any community member, either is all inclusive or all exclusive, eliminates even the most basic appearance of bias on the part of the government body as ANY form of bias would imply the government body would be biased, ie corrupt, in ANY of its others activities.
4. According to reports, during at least the Christmas holiday, the religious Nativity display will be placed on private property, however, there is some confusion as to whether ONLY the Nativity is to be moved. Again, a logical solution is to have an all inclusive or all exclusive policy. Meaning that if one display is moved to private proerty, off government property, then ALL displays must be. To only move one or some but allow others on government property is not logical and, giving the benefit of the doubt, may have been an error on someone’s part.
5. The argument some put forth that “out of towners” should stay out of the business of various cities, counties, and states, is illogical in that it is not much different than the arguments made by many states over a half century ago when various individuals and organizations proceeded to insert themselves into various unjust situations, situations which not only inolved communities but governments as well. Some were merely verbally and mentally attacked for their attempts to get involved. Others however… The point being that violations of ANY sort of the US Constitution, its Amendments, and the Human and Civil Rights of others, regardless of how large or small, should be the concern of EVERYONE because allowing some violations to occur based on arguments of “majority” versus “minority” means YOU could just as easily become a victim of that same argument and “justification”.
6. According to some articles, the council has put the matter behind them and, though there needs to be the issue of clarification of the all inclusiona or all exclusion matter as mentioned above about what is and what is not to be moved, there is little point in appearing to the council as a mob to attempt either to intimidate the council into violating the law OR to intimidate the “minority” into silence through sheer mass of opponents to those “minorities”. There are a number of individuals who have organized and are suggesting another mass appearance for the purpose of same. Indeed, many have suggested approaching council members outside of council meetings so that only THEIR views on the issue be heard, since, apparently, their arguments are too weak to stand up to scrutiny or debate. Apparently, they don’t want any meeting between themselves and the council members to be public, which should raise some serious concerns for the council members.
Council and organizers of the council should set forth policy for such situations to prevent previous meetings from being overwhelmed. Issues to be put forth to the council in meeting should be limited to a maximum number of speakers, as representatives, and attendees on any side of the issue, to prevent the appearance that individuals on one side or the other intends to use mob intimidation OR to lock out any one side from expressing their views. Representatives should be able to offer written statements by others, but the appearance of a fair and equitable government body, the council, should be maintained.
Amendment I of the U.S Constitution states:
“Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.”
Putting up a religious display (any religious display) on public property does not establish a state religion and is not unconstitutional. The Freedom From Religion Foundation is actually trying to prohibit the free exercise of putting up a religious display, which is unconstitutional. It seems very clear to me. These atheist groups have never had a valid case and it’s only because of the twisting of the meaning of these words by liberal judges that they have been succeeding to take away our rights around the country.
I would say that the Boro Council can also declare that the so-called nativity scene is representative of what was the normal of the time 2000 plus years ago in a sense and proclaim it is non-religious. It does not say JESUS of the “scene” so by definition, it is not religious. If someone interprets it as religious, that is their interpretation. I’d just play games with them and give them a taste of their own medicine. Legally, it may be on the edge, test it out and see. You may need to alter the angels though.
How about treating all religious beliefs equally instead of trying to come up with ways to circumvent the Constitution?
Honestly, I just don’t get why Christians insist that they get special treatment under the law
Why do christian celebrate Christmas as birth of JESUS. JESUS was not born on Dec 25th. He was born in October “The feast of tabernacles”. If the father wanted us to celebrate JESUS birth he would of told us when to celebrate it and how to celebrate it. We are to remember his” death and resurrection”
Please GOOGLE
The truth about Christmas
The truth about Easter
The Truth about Halloween
learn the truth and be free
The roman Catholic and roman pagans incorporated Christmas as JESUS birth learn the truth behind these pagan holiday.
If Christmas is the chief holidays for Christians WHY, do so many non-believer observe, celebrate this holiday. Non-believer will not follow JESUS.
Someone told you to believe a holiday now your older research this holiday and learn the truth. Christmas doesn’t honor JESUS. The Roman Catholic incorporate Christmas as Jesus birth.
research Google
The truth about Christmas
The truth behind Christmas
God bless
Satan and his demon are to deceive Christians. For 56 years I was told and believed that Jesus Christ was born on Dec 25th. Then my eyes open to the truth and searched the truth and found it Jesus was not born at Christmas Satan deceived us Christian we didn’t honor Christ at all. Satan was honored. check it out for yourself.
Honor Jesus
God bless all of us
While some are concerned with their Nativity scene and where it is placed, and the supposed negative effect it will have on their individual beliefs (which really hasn’t been proven), perhaps they should look at the proposed legal teams that some who want to appeal the decision wish to hire. Whether the organization is, ultimately, THE legal team, it has been suggested that they hire the Alliance Defense Fund, which, upon research, you will discover has a reputation for being a Hate Group.
Regardless of whether you believe that the issue should legally be appealed, and whether you believe that the city OR private individuals should fund such a legal appeal, you REALLY should consider what potential harm it will do to the community’s reputation to hire such an organization to perform this appeal. I have no doubt that there may be far more reasonable organizations which may take on this case that will not cause you more reputation harm than the city or community wants.
While one can argue that certain legal cases may, contrary to supposedly what the city attornies claim, be a lost cause, if you chose to follow through with an appeal, at least make a logical choice that will not do more harm than good.
Why would you celebrate the Nativity scene in the month of December? Please read your bible look at Luke 2:1-20 the birth of Jesus. Yes, their was a virgin birth, but in the month of October the feast of Tabernacle. Please go and research Christmas story. The truth about Christmas. After reading this ,you will know the truth that no one ever told you.
This is his spirit speaking though me
God bless
The closing statement for this article was, “In the end, though, it seems that legal precedence was at force here and, although very strong support by borough residents, council felt moving the Nativity will be in the best interest of the borough and its residents.” My thoughts are the council are to represent the community and what we want and what is best for the community. There is an outpouring of support to fight against moving the nativity scene so how is it considered in our best interest to not reconsidered the previous motion & vote? Although retaining the nativity in it’s current location may be deemed as offensive to few, why would we not consider the majority as not being offended. It’s offensive to me to see that council believes it is in our best interest to move the nativity if we have people like Mr. Teolis offering to donate towards legal fees or actual law firms offering to take our case. The legal precedence we are setting is that it is okay to give in to outside parties for inside problems.
Well said!
The most ignored Bible verse, Matthew 6:5-6:
“And when you pray, do not be like the hypocrites, for they love to pray standing in the synagogues and on the street corners to be seen by others. Truly I tell you, they have received their reward in full. But when you pray, go into your room, close the door and pray to your Father, who is unseen. Then your Father, who sees what is done in secret, will reward you.”
I would, however, like to say “Thank You” to EllwoodCity.org for giving BOTH sides of the issue the opportunity to voice their views. A number of Facebook pages have, in effect, determined their arguments to be so weak that they not only choose to make their pages ONLY present the “support” side, without offering opposing views and then turning around and stating what THEY think the opposing view is, but even openly admitting creating hidden pages because they don’t even want others counterarguing their public arguments anywhere else.
If their arguments were truly so sound, then they would not be afraid to hold discussions that involved counterarguments to each side’s points.
I realize that the mods here have a difficult task, in the comments of these articles as well as the Sound Off sections, trying to show an unbiased approach while maintaining something resembling reasonable arguments. And I know there are some out there who want to manipulate your choices by threatening to boycott advertisers because they don’t believe in true Freedom of Speech. As I say, I know you have a difficult job ahead of you, just as you’ve had a difficult time of it since you became owners of this site.
Regardless of your individual opinions on ANY issue, I respect the work you’ve tried to accomplish here in keeping your neutral status in your functions as mods on this site.
Thanks again.
Do you LOVE Jesus?
Is Jesus your Lord and Savior?
I seen (Ellwood city) on the evening news. Talking about the Nativity scene for Christmas holiday. If you believe and honor Jesus Christ as our lord and savior STOP celebrating the Pagan holiday it doesn’t honor Jesus . But your honoring Tammuz a False Messiah. Roman Catholic incorporated Christmas as Jesus birth. We are to remember his death and resurrection . Search why you believe “the truth about Christmas. Be a doers of the word. read John 3:3-7 Thank you!!!!
God bless whoever reads
True Christian
I believe that most Christians know that December 25th is not the actual birthday of Jesus; however, we use this season to thank Him for coming here to saving us from ourselves and to thank him for the gifts he has given us while on earth. I feel that anything that gets us reflecting on Jesus Christ is a great thing and probably pleasing to God.