Separation of Church And State: Why Is There a National Menorah Lighting At the White House? (lawyer, Obama)
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Ok, I can understand the lighting of a National Christmas tree, because, a Christmas tree is not a religious symbol. On the other hand...isn't a Menorah clearly a religious symbol representing the Jewish faith? If so, why is it being lit and conveyed as a "National" symbol being recognized on government property.
Isn't this clearly a violation of the Separation of Church and State? And no, I'm not just singling out the Jewish faith, I would also question such a religious ceremony if it were of muslim, christian, buddist or any other faith.
The Christmas tree is religious- to the Northern european pagans.
And lighting a menorah is not a violation of church and state. Chruch and state is about religion influencing laws.
Acting out a religious tradition is not a violation of the constitution. If anything it reflects the diversity of the country to light a tree and a menorah.
This question has been addressed in several important separation cases. Allegheny County v. ACLU is probably the most notable. There, the display of a menorah and Christmas tree outstwerp courthouse were upheld, and the display of a crèche inside the courthouse was deemed unconstitutional, because the former were secular symbols of the holiday season, while the latter was overtly religious. It's all a matter of framing and context. A menorah by itself would probably raise red flags, but the fact there's also a national Christmas tree does a lot of work (legally speaking) in signifying that there isn't intent to bolster some religons at the expense of others. As far as lighting goes, it could probably be argued that lighting a menorah, from a secular standpoint, is no different than decorating a Christmas tree.
But you also have to consider the outcry that would occur if the menorah were deemed unconstitutional while the Christmas tree remained a-OK. IMO, the menorah itself is fine, given that it can (and for many non religious Jews such as myself) is a secularized symbol for the holiday season. The name isn't the issue, but rather the context and the intent. Saying a prayer make things iffy, but there's also a body of law that says certain "de minimis" violations like "In God We Trust" on our coinage and "One Nation Under God" in our pledge is an acceptable part of our "civic religion." We can even have things like a "National Day of Prayer." Needless to say, it's a complicated issue, though I understand where you're coming from.
I'm also currently studying for my Church and State exam if you couldn't tell.
The cold hard truth is that this really isn't a complex issue at all. This is indeed a very simple issue made complex by double talking ne'er-do-wells, and accepted as such by a very gullible and seemingly illiterate public, who's reading comprehension skills are as frightfully poor as is their ability or willingness to exercise critical thinking. What's equally disturbing is the insistence of so many to remain in error, dismissing any and all attempts to better inform them with simple facts. It has been my experience that no matter how clearly and concisely explained, most still refuse to rethink their erroneous beliefs, and steadfastly insist on remaining in a state of complete ignorance. But perhaps .... maybe this time will be different ..... at least for some ...
First of all, there is no such language in the constitution referring to a "Separation of Church and State". It simply doesn't exist. This is only the conceptual basis for creating constitutional measures to prevent a theocracy from being established in the future. And those specific measures were embodied by the 1st Amendment's prohibition placed only on congress insofar as restricting congress from making a law which might grant superior status to a specific religion. That's it ... nothing more and nothing less ... not the least bit complex or mysterious. And the reasoning behind this is not a mystery either. This prohibition, which applies only to congress making a law, was intended to preclude either the real or perceived establishment of a State Sponsored National Religion, by congressional endorsement and law. The framers wanted to preclude such a development, understanding that the best way to prevent authoritarianism such that they had escaped under the British Monarchy, was to ensure that the new government remained secular, guided ONLY by the laws established under the constitution, and not by authoritarian edict which is essentially the same under either a Monarchy or Theocracy, or in the case in which the founders had first hand experience, a collaborative tyranny imposed by both the British Monarchy and the Catholic Church working hand in hand.
The modern misinterpretation and misapplication of the 1st Amendment is quite simply a backward, 180 degree reversal of both the unambiguous language and clear intent of the law, as we now see the 1st Amendment being misused as the justification to infringe upon the very religious freedoms clearly protected by it. It's nothing short of literal, Orwellian madness.
Amendment I
"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".
Clearly, and in plain English, the portion of the amendment highlighted in red prohibits congress from "making a law" respecting an establishment of religion, and nothing else. The notion that the display of religious symbols or religious celebrations either in private OR public could remotely constitute an act of congress making a law is so asininely absurd as to defy basic common sense. No rational person could possibly confuse these demonstrations and displays of religious symbols by any citizen, including public officials, as an act of congress. Again, this is literal madness.
Furthermore, the second element highlighted in green, couldn't be more clear and concise, and directly protects such freedom of religious expression in so many words, for which any display of religious symbols and celebrations, public or private, would clearly fall under. I really cannot conceive of language which the founders could have used to communicate this more clearly. This is as plain as the nose on your face, and does not require scholarly debate by "constitutional law experts", but only a marginal grasp of grade school English and a modicum of common sense.
Now, I don't know if you were being facetious when claiming to be studying for this "Church and State" exam, but if you really are, you're barking up the wrong tree. Any constitutional law or history professor who promotes this nonsense about banning public displays of religious symbols under the authority of the 1st Amendment ought not to be teaching anyone anything, and should himself banned for life from filling the heads of students with such inane tripe.
Such so-called experts ought to be fired on the spot ... after they have been laughed out of the classroom.
Ok, I can understand the lighting of a National Christmas tree, because, a Christmas tree is not a religious symbol. On the other hand...isn't a Menorah clearly a religious symbol representing the Jewish faith? If so, why is it being lit and conveyed as a "National" symbol being recognized on government property.
Isn't this clearly a violation of the Separation of Church and State? And no, I'm not just singling out the Jewish faith, I would also question such a religious ceremony if it were of muslim, christian, buddist or any other faith.
NO!
Recognition of a religion is not the same as the creation of a national religion.
Ok, I can understand the lighting of a National Christmas tree, because, a Christmas tree is not a religious symbol.
A Christmas tree is not a religious symbol? Of course it is.
But if you want to read the legal cases on this topic:
Lynch v. Donnelly, 465 U.S. 668 (1984) (Annual Christmas display in a park owned by a nonprofit organization did not violate the Establishment Clause).
Alleghney County v. ACLU , 492 U.S. 573 (1989) (Respondents, the Greater Pittsburgh Chapter of the American Civil Liberties Union and seven local residents, filed suit seeking permanently to enjoin the county from displaying a nativity and the city from displaying a menorah on the ground that the displays violated the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment, made applicable to state governments by the Fourteenth Amendment).
A Christmas tree is not a religious symbol? Of course it is.
But if you want to read the legal cases on this topic:
Lynch v. Donnelly, 465 U.S. 668 (1984) (Annual Christmas display in a park owned by a nonprofit organization did not violate the Establishment Clause).
Alleghney County v. ACLU , 492 U.S. 573 (1989) (Respondents, the Greater Pittsburgh Chapter of the American Civil Liberties Union and seven local residents, filed suit seeking permanently to enjoin the county from displaying a nativity and the city from displaying a menorah on the ground that the displays violated the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment, made applicable to state governments by the Fourteenth Amendment).
Where in the bible is the Christmas tree?
By your logic a stocking hung is a religious symbol, as well as eggnog and mistletoe, ribbons, bells and twinkling lights.
Ok, I can understand the lighting of a National Christmas tree, because, a Christmas tree is not a religious symbol. On the other hand...isn't a Menorah clearly a religious symbol representing the Jewish faith? If so, why is it being lit and conveyed as a "National" symbol being recognized on government property.
Isn't this clearly a violation of the Separation of Church and State? And no, I'm not just singling out the Jewish faith, I would also question such a religious ceremony if it were of muslim, christian, buddist or any other faith.
So a CHRISTmas tree is not a religious symbol, but a Menorah is?
If anything, it's the opposite...
So basically, you're offended by Jews...good to know that you're an anti-semite.
I'm equally offended by the Christmas tree as I am by the Menorah being paid for and sponsored by the government. Religion has NO place in government.
The fact that you can actually say "the Christmas tree is not a religious symbol" just shows how out-of-whack your "outrage" is. Just admit that you think that Christmas is a more "American" holiday than Chanukah.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
