Quantcast

Comments about ‘Battle over Christmas display goes to court’

Return to article »

Published: Sunday, Nov. 18 2012 9:41 p.m. MST

Comments
  • Oldest first
  • Newest first
  • Most recommended
RanchHand
Huntsville, UT

This is what Utah can expect with their new license plate mottos. More divisiveness.

Tekakaromatagi
Dammam, Saudi Arabia

Atheists are setting up religious booths. Their religion is that they don't believe anything except that what everyone else believes is wrong.

Perhaps they can have a requirement that the messages be positive so that religions are promoting their viewpoint, rather than trying to point out that the other groups are wrong.

Richard Larson
Galt, CA

Tekakaromatagi:
I am in full support of that idea.
Perhaps we/they can borrow the idea
from the British.
Put up banners that read,
"There is probably no god. So stop worrying and enjoy your life"!

Jim
Mesa, Az

I like the Atheists epitah....All dressed up and no where to go. Everyone has the right to freedom of speech and everyone has the right to either accept or reject their message, in a non-violent way. People should also remember that Christmas is a time of Peace. Irrespective of one's belief. Now isn't that something we should all look forward to?

Edith Head
West Hollywood, CA

Having lived in West Hollywood for the past 35 years and worked in Santa Monica for the past 25, I will no miss those displays. They are the tackiest things imaginable. With all the resources and talent here they were the worst quality display work you would ever see.

county mom
Monroe, UT

The question is not how tacky the display was. I don't believe any religion should have public property displays. However, On their own property, they should be able to display according to their own beliefs (as long as it is not breaking laws of public decency), and have the right to worship without rude interfering behavior from others. I should be able to display a nativity scene on my own property without someone standing on the sidewalk in front of my home with signs saying there is no God! Your rights end when they are invading my rights. Freedom of worship and speach goes both ways!

Tolstoy
salt lake, UT

Tekakaromatagi
or perhaps we could respect their first amendment rights even if we find there words distasteful?

RanchHand
Huntsville, UT

@county mom

"Your rights end when they are invading my rights."

---

Oh the sweet irony.

Tolstoy
salt lake, UT

@country mom
"I should be able to display a nativity scene on my own property without someone standing on the sidewalk in front of my home with signs saying there is no God! Your rights end when they are invading my rights. Freedom of worship and speach goes both ways!"
you really do not see the problem with the logic of these three sentences?
you have the right to display your nativity scene
they have the right to hold sings on land you do not own (sidewal;ks are poublic not private) no matter how much you or I think it is in poor taste.
and do I really have to point out the failer in logic with your last sentence?

lost in DC
West Jordan, UT

the constitution bars congress from making laws concerning the establishment of religion. By banning either display, the court has made a law concerning the establishment of religion and has therefore acted contrary to the constitution.

county mom
Monroe, UT

I actually own both sides of the road and the land under it. It is just a right of way. Not public access. I put in my own sidewalk. Those who moved 1/2 mile away come to my house and stand on my sidewalk in front of my house are on my land. What they are doing is invading my privacy, my private property, and interfering with my freedom to worship, and my right to free speach. There is nothing but lights out by the public road, as it should be. Like temple square, the property is open to the public but, it is owned by the church. Both sides and the land under it. Private property owners have the right to allow what they want on their land as long as it doesn't harm the public, break laws of decency or invade onto others rights.

Tolstoy
salt lake, UT

@country mom
Well I am not sure what the laws are in Monroe but here in the city the sidewalks are public and no the LDS church does not own the pand under it or tyhe land between the sidewalk and the road. I am pretty sure since it is a stae law that it is the same in Monroe but you have fun trying to enforce your version of the law.

to comment

DeseretNews.com encourages a civil dialogue among its readers. We welcome your thoughtful comments.
About comments