stop making me rant!

[obfuscate]

On a whim, I happened to be looking at the editorial section of the Trib today at work. I was on break, I was bored, it was there. It was serindipitous. For some reason, there were only about four pages of the paper actually present, so my options were limited. I glanced at the reader letters. Most were mundane, some were trite, some were outraged

Comments

[laughingimp]

Right here:

• Other groups wishing to participate must reach threshold numbers of people by submitting signed petitions as a candidate must for an election.
• Set the number of signatures high enough to prevent nuisance displays.

Here are my problems with this:

1) While I think the Census' counts of Pagan are low because many Pagans fear discrimination if they out themselves, there really aren't very many of us. It is unlikely that many municipalities will get enough out Pagans together to collect enough signatures on a petition.

2) On the other hand, some municipalities are likely to get enough signatures every year to support a Festivus pole--sarcastic atheist Seinfeld fans almost certainly outnumber Pagans. Since this is certainly a "nuisance display," Norman would push the number of signatures required high enough to remove the Festivus display, but Pagans will get excluded long before the Festivus people do.

3) As obfuscate and llamachameleon have said, by making Christmas exempt from the signature process, Norman's proposal prioritizes Christmas over all other religions, even large, mainstream religions like Judaism or Hinduism. If there is a synagogue in the community in question, you can probably get enough signatures for a Hanukkah display, but that isn't the point. The point is, by allowing a Christian display but potentially denying others, Norman's proposal gives Christians the power to say, "You aren't as important as us, and you don't deserve a display." That's not okay on state property, because doing so gives government support (whether real or implied) to this sort of double-standard.