Written by Don Byrd
The City of Santa Monica, California has tried to accommodate requests for holiday display space in Palisades Park. The park has been the site of nativity scenes traditionally erected by local church groups. The overrun of requests is due to efforts by atheists groups – who object to the use of the park for religious Christmas displays – to place their own displays in the park. After the city decided to implement a lottery system to determine who gets space in the park, tensions only increased after an effort to pack the lottery with nonreligious groups was successful. Many atheist displays were vandalized.
The city has responded in perhaps the only reasonable way: they ended the practice of using the park for public display of any kind – religious or nonreligious. But that didn’t sit well with church groups, who filed suit in an effort to force the city to reopen the forum. Last week, however, the judge in the case declined to issue such an order allowing displays pending the outcome of the case.
That is probably the right outcome. Surely a city can close a forum if it does so for neutral reasons, and not to discriminate against a particular viewpoint. And surely a city must allow all groups equal access to a seasonal public forum.
But consider too the perspective of Charles Haynes, writing on this issue in his weekly column.
[N]ow that we all understand that a right for one is a right for all, maybe it’s time for atheist groups to declare victory and stay home for the holidays….
Yes, I understand why atheists want to make sure that religion isn’t privileged by government in the public square (as it has been for much of our history). But at some point (and Santa Monica has surely reached that point) in-your-face tactics become counter-productive and needlessly divisive.
After all, whether we celebrate Christmas, Hanukkah, the Winter Solstice or none of the above, we can all benefit from a more civil and peaceful public square.
