49 Comments - zatoichi - Friday, Apr 6, 07 @ 8:23 am: I understand the city’s issue. There is no way to please everyone. Someone will find some very real or PC affront to their personal belief in whatever is put in Daley Plaza. The Picasso still bothers some people. Just wonder if the city will feel the same at a request for a cross burning, animal sacrifice, or that chocolate Jesus art that got booted from a showing. - vole - Friday, Apr 6, 07 @ 8:24 am: Can’t we find some way of taxing these displays? Some organization with deep pockets is shirking its moral responsibility here. But then, we don’t want them leaving and going to heaven or somewhere. - Goose/Gander - Friday, Apr 6, 07 @ 8:29 am: I sincerely do not understand the American Jewish Committee’s position here. There is a sukkot placed at the Daley Center for Yom Kippur, and a menorah during Hannukah. So how can they (the organization)take issue with an Easter recognition? Ms. Soloff might want to try a little consistency. - Milorad - Friday, Apr 6, 07 @ 8:31 am: I don’t think anybody is really offended. It’s just a reason to whine and complain. Get over it! - anon - Friday, Apr 6, 07 @ 8:32 am: There is no real separation of church and state in this country. Nice concept but doesn’t work. - the Other Anonymous - Friday, Apr 6, 07 @ 8:44 am: “The idea we want to get across is that Daley Plaza is a public forum where people can express ideas, and if they can do that for political ideas, they should be able to do it for religion, too,” Brejcha said. In fact, there is a huge difference between politics and religion. Religious beliefs cut deeper than political beliefs. Moreover, political speech is — at some level — about what is best for all of us; religion is much more personal. The displays during December manage to include the three major religious streams. This display doesn’t — and it specifically rejects Judaism. A cross at Easter symbolizes the essence of Christianity, that Jesus the Son of God rose from the dead. This same fundamental symbol explicitly rejects other religions — how can other religions be legitimate when our Savior died for our sins and then rose from the dead? Given the current tensions in the world — the rise of radical Islam, the increase in anti-semitism, and the heightened scrutiny and discrimination faced by Muslims in the US — I’d say a religious display of this nature is especially problematic. - grand old partisan - Friday, Apr 6, 07 @ 8:53 am: The “separation of church and state” is a phrase that does not exist anywhere in the Constitution. What the first amendment says is: “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof” First of all, since Congress isn’t the one erecting the cross in Daley Plaza, I don’t see how this language is even the least bit relevant (a point I’ll re-address below). Secondly, allowing a group to use the public square to celebrate their religion is NOT the same as making a law respecting an establishment of religion. Let’s remember folks, the founders were actually more concerned with protecting the independence of religion from power of government, not the other way around. Even if we supplant the generic term “government” for “Congress” in the first amendment, it’s important to remember two things: (1) again, the government is not making a law establishing a religion by allowing religious groups to use public property for worship and (2), unless an argument can be made that said public property is the ONLY available space for such worship, it is not “prohibiting the free exercise thereof” to not allow one religious group even while accommodating another. Of course, all of this assumes that you actually care what the Constitution actually says, and don’t believe that it’s a “living” document that can be re-written by our courts whenever it pleases them. - Leroy - Friday, Apr 6, 07 @ 8:53 am: I belong to the First Church of the Bureaucracy. Daley Center is one of our holy temples in Chicago. I hate to see it sullied by non believers…non-believers who won’t get to queue up in line in the great DMV in the sky for all eternity upon their deaths. - VanillaMan - Friday, Apr 6, 07 @ 8:54 am: The politically correct position should be that all religions are welcomed to use Daley Plaza for their celebrations. We live in diverse times. Different religions prove that God wishes to communicate with us and does so in different ways. It is our own narrow mindedness that discriminates between the different channel God uses. There is more than one way to get right with God. - We're a Big Family... - Friday, Apr 6, 07 @ 8:59 am: I say keep the cross up during the Easter holiday. Besides, it’s all in the eye of the beholder. I think the “Picasso” resembles the baboon god, Baba and it’s up 365 days a year! - pjs - Friday, Apr 6, 07 @ 9:00 am: Why can’t we all just get along? Seriousely. Why is it that someone else’s beliefs which are different from our own somehow negate ours? Becaue someone believes in Christianity, does it mean my belief in Judaism is somehow invalid? This strikes me as personal insecurity with little rational defense. - Patriot - Friday, Apr 6, 07 @ 9:04 am: Once again, VanillaMan has taken the “high road” with his post. I cannot improve upon his post. - Bill - Friday, Apr 6, 07 @ 9:04 am: Have a Happy and Holy Easter, everybody! - Skeeter - Friday, Apr 6, 07 @ 9:10 am: There seems to be something “in your face” about the display, which also seems to be the polar opposite of what the religion should stand for. I am trying to figure out why they want to celebrate in Daley Plaza as opposed to their homes or their church. It seems that the group of Christians is doing this to offend. The response of everyone should be to not take offense. Turn the other cheek. Ignore it like the ignore the guy who always stands there with his sign about the FBI. That being said, if you are going to open it, open it to all. - Squideshi - Friday, Apr 6, 07 @ 9:22 am: Will the city be equally as willing to grant a permit when the Church of Satan wants to display a similarly-sized pentacle in Daley Plaza? - Carl Nyberg - Friday, Apr 6, 07 @ 9:47 am: Why not let people gather for a religious ceremony in Daley Plaza? But it should be treated like a demonstration in all aspects. The people should be surrounded by a phalanx of cops in riot gear with clubs. You know the ones. They have gas masks and their identities obscured so they can beat people without being held accountable. - Carl Nyberg - Friday, Apr 6, 07 @ 9:50 am: gop, your first argument is so wrong I stopped reading. The courts have ruled that the First Amendment limitations on Congress’ power to restrict freedom also apply to state and municipal gov’t. If you don’t understand this there’s not much point in paying attention to anything else you write because you have demonstrated a combination of ignorance and dishonesty that reduces your credibility to nothing. - Team Sleep - Friday, Apr 6, 07 @ 9:57 am: Easter and its festivities exist for one reason and one reason only: the death of Jesus Christ. He is the reason for why we take time each Spring to think about issues like salvation, service and the church. To tell a majority of the population that a revered symbol of one of the world’s most important historical events is not allowed because of “separation between church and state” is offensive and uncalled for. I’m tired of people in the media and the left telling me that I shouldn’t have the right to squawk my Christian beliefs or tell people to have a blessed day because it might hurt someone’s feelings. If you don’t like it, tough noogies (hat tip to “Bobby’s World)! And while I am supportive of all religious beliefs, we certainly should not ignore the death of the most important person in mankind’s history. As with Christmas, Jesus is the reason for the season. - Rich Miller - Friday, Apr 6, 07 @ 10:07 am: “If you don’t like it, tough noogies.” I’m sure that’s somewhere in the New Testament because it sounds soooo Christlike. - Skeeter - Friday, Apr 6, 07 @ 10:10 am: Team Sleep, Why is it necessary to do what you want to do in Daley Center Plaza, as opposed to your home or church? What are you trying to accomplish by using Daley Center for that purpose? By the way, do you believe that “tough noogies” when it comes to the feelings of others represents true Christian beliefs? - Ghost - Friday, Apr 6, 07 @ 10:11 am: Seperation of church and state is a prohibition against the Government creating a religion. This was in response the the King of England creating his own religion (so he could get a divorce). We have applied this to also mean the government should not in a similiar fashion select a religion and effectively establish it over all others by favoritable treatmnet. It does not mean, however, that Government is to ban all religion from its confines. There is nothing wrong with providing a permit for the cross, which is temporary during a religious festival, if they grant the same permit for Purim symbols or festival, etc. - Right? - Friday, Apr 6, 07 @ 10:23 am: Unfortunately, When I look at the forces behind this and how this is parroted on Illinois Review, This truly looks like an attempt to make a point, rather than an attempt to spread the glory of god… Please, Lord, Protect me from those who profess to believe in you - Matt - Friday, Apr 6, 07 @ 10:29 am: I am a democrat who has spent his entire career working for democratic politians. However, i think that many folks on our side believe that “freedom OF religion” really means “freedom FROM relgion.” And this is wrong. you do not have a right to be protected from every encountering religion, you just have the choice to believe in whatever you want, including believing in nothing. Anyway, as long as the city allows other religions to celebrate their holidays, I think this is fine. - Philosophe Forum - Friday, Apr 6, 07 @ 10:29 am: The cross is no problem — as long as people allow a Star of David, Crescent, Buddha symbol, etc. Shalom & Happy Passover! - pickles!! - Friday, Apr 6, 07 @ 10:59 am: I believe the city should grant the permit. People have a right to expression their religion. People also have the right to ignore it if they don’t agree with it. Is the city paying anything or using tax money to purchase or maintan this display? Probably not. i don’t see a problem with it. - Snidely Whiplash - Friday, Apr 6, 07 @ 11:06 am: I have to agree with Goose/Gander on this–I see the sukkot and the menorah every year on my all-too-frequent trips to the Daley Center, so Ms. Soloff’s comment on the exclusion of Jewish symbols appears off-base. And I’m admittedly light on knowledge of the Seder, but I don’t think that any sort of Passover display was explicitly rejected by King Richie. If, in fact, it was the City Council who decided to put that cross (or any other religious symbol) up, then there would likely be a church/state problem. Allowing any private group a permit to erect a display that isn’t inherently dangerous doesn’t pose a problem for me at all. Either admire it as a symbol of your religion (like I might with the cross) or ignore it as a “heathen” symbol and move on. - The Age of Reason - Friday, Apr 6, 07 @ 11:06 am: Grand Old Partisan quotes the first amendment and says: “[S]ince Congress isn’t the one erecting the cross in Daley Plaza, I don’t see how this language is even the least bit relevant …” But our own Illinois Constitution reads: “The free exercise and enjoyment of religious profession and worship, without discrimination, shall forever be guaranteed, and no person shall be denied any civil or political right, privilege or capacity, on account of his religious opinions. … No person shall be required to attend or support any ministry or place of worship against his consent, nor shall any preference be given by law to any religious denomination or mode of worship. (Emphasis added.) Ill. Const. 1970, Art. 1, Sect. 3. Admittedly it’s debatable whether granting a permit for a religious service in a public place is “giving preference by law,” but what if adherents of the Flying Spaghetti Monster had gotten their Easter Sunday permit in before the Christians — first come, first served? - Underdog - Friday, Apr 6, 07 @ 11:08 am: So many good posts so far - Vanilla Man’s especially. I believe strongly that public displays of religion are (a) good for us and (b) constitutional. But let’s take a minute to realize that the press gives significant airtime to people like Dobson, Falwell, Robertson, etc. who are crusading to turn America into Christian state. They’ve developed significant political power and they simply do not believe that other religions are valid. While I disagree with attempts to exclude religion from public life, it’s not hard to see how someone in the religious minority might have difficulty differentiating between a reasonable religious expression in the public square and yet another attempt to force Christianity down everyone’s throats. - Will - Friday, Apr 6, 07 @ 11:13 am: I participated in a union picket at Daley Plaza once so I do want free speech rights protected there. I don’t think you can say an area is open to the free expression of ideas *except* religious ones. It should be open to all faiths and political groups equally. However, I would also suggest the group setting up the cross review Matthew Chapter 6: “When thou prayest, thou shalt not be as the hypocrites are: for they love to pray standing in the synagogues and in the corners of the streets, that they may be seen of men. Verily I say unto you, They have their reward. But thou, when thou prayest, enter into thy closet, and when thou hast shut thy door, pray to thy Father which is in secret; and thy Father which seeth in secret shall reward thee openly.” I don’t recall a verse in the Bible where Jesus tells people to pray for the purpose of getting in people’s faces and making a political point. Once again, people with a political agenda are distorting the gospel of Jesus. - grand old partisan - Friday, Apr 6, 07 @ 11:15 am: Carl, Actually, I do understand that the courts ruled thusly, and if you would have actually read my entire comment, you would have very clearly seen that. If you aren’t going to actually read what people write here in it’s entirety before responding to it, then – to paraphrase your own words - there’s not much point in paying attention to anything else you write because you have demonstrated an ignorance that reduces your credibility to nothing. - Squideshi - Friday, Apr 6, 07 @ 11:24 am: Team Sleep wrote, “Easter and its festivities exist for one reason and one reason only: the death of Jesus Christ.” Actually, Easter has pagan origins and was simply absorbed into the church in an attempt to convert pagans into the Christian faith. Team Sleep further wrote, “I’m tired of people in the media and the left telling me that I shouldn’t have the right to squawk my Christian beliefs or tell people to have a blessed day because it might hurt someone’s feelings.” Matthew 6:5-8 quotes Jesus as follows: “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 men. I tell you the truth, 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. And when you pray, do not keep on babbling like pagans, for they think they will be heard because of their many words. Do not be like them, for your Father knows what you need before you ask him.” - grand old partisan - Friday, Apr 6, 07 @ 11:25 am: Age of Reason, Well played, indeed. Personally, I’d agrue that allowing a public square to be used for religious display or workship does not constitute requiring people to attend or support any ministry or place of worship against their consent. Anyone (even those having business in the building, which is perfectly accessible from other entrances) is free choice for themselves if I want to enter the plaza or not). The bolded part of the citation is a but trickier, I’ll admit. I’d have to say that you are right: allowing the Cross means having to allow any other form of religious symbolism. But, I am fine with that. (Carl, take note….this is why the SCOTUS should NOT have ruled the way it did…because states are - or at least should, as intended by the founders - be perfectly within their own right to draft such laws on their own) - God's Country - Friday, Apr 6, 07 @ 11:27 am: To my Christian brothers and sisters: A Happy and Blessed Easter to you. To the Non-Christians: Here comes Peter Cottontail… To the PETA folks: No bunnies were harmed while hopping down the bunny trail. - So Blue Democrat - Friday, Apr 6, 07 @ 11:29 am: I have no problem with the display if other religions are provided equal time when requested. The true issue with religion in America is when the religious right promotes hatred which is targeted to specific groups in America (and they make a lot of money doing it). Additionally, they promote issues that favor big business and tax breaks for individuals with plenty of financial resources instead of focusing on the needs of the poor in America. This is not what Christ intented. I do not know whether he was the Son of God or not, but he certainly was a good role model. - A Citizen - Friday, Apr 6, 07 @ 11:31 am: Jesus, Mohammed, and Buddha appeared to me last night in a dream and they were standing arm in arm together in Daley Plaza holding a large sign that said “Say No to the GRT” . . . Amen. - Just a Citizen - Friday, Apr 6, 07 @ 11:54 am: VanillaMan said it all. Agree 100%. - to pjs - Friday, Apr 6, 07 @ 12:05 pm: Thanks to you. I’m 45 and Catholic. Looks like we can get along. What’s up with the whiners? Must be people who are only happy when they’re complaining about something. What a horrible life that must be! - So-Called "Austin Mayor" - Friday, Apr 6, 07 @ 12:13 pm: Instead of a symbol of Christianity, perhaps we should recognize the crucifix as a symbol of mankind’s willingness to go to any extreme to silence the voices of those with whom they disagree. That said, I can’t wait until the Satanists get their opportunity to “express their faith” at Daley Plaza. – SCAM - Jeanie Bird - Friday, Apr 6, 07 @ 12:43 pm: GPO, You make some good points worth pondering, but many aren’t willing to go there. Team Sleep, More than the death of Jesus, Easter is about the RESURRECTION of Jesus Christ. If he had just died, there would be no reason for the season and man-kind would be in a world of hurt with no salvation and no help. As an American Christian, I welcome all peoples of all backgrounds. I am interested in hearing their stories, their beliefs, and trying to understand their history and perspective. I do wish society as a whole showed as much tolerance and sensitivity toward Christianity as it does to other religious groups today. We used to be off balance in one direction, now the pendulum has swung to the oposite end. WHERE IS THE BALANCE? Government SHOULD NOT sanction any one religious group or belief. We live in strange times when people throw fits about displays, and are intolerant of ONE certain group. Hey, I’m okay with Jewish dislays. JESUS WAS JEWISH! We are all more intertwined than we care to admit. Everyone have a wonderful weekend, whether you your weekend is called Easter OR Passover OR another name. - leigh - Friday, Apr 6, 07 @ 1:19 pm: I really, really don’t like it when the faith of my family, my heritage and myself is involved in any kind of political debate. It offends me that the gov. would use it as an excuse and it offends me when someone complains about a public display in an area where free speech from all is allowed to be expressed. I would prefer the cross not be displayed to avoid the hateful debate it has prompted and that politicians be banned from using it to promote their personal agendas. Having said that, publicly behaving in the ways of your faith, helping others, caring for your fellow man is much more effective than displaying a cross and much more in line with what my faith demands of me. - Squideshi - Friday, Apr 6, 07 @ 1:26 pm: Jeanie Bird wrote, “Easter is about the RESURRECTION of Jesus Christ. If he had just died, there would be no reason for the season and man-kind would be in a world of hurt with no salvation and no help.” That statement is factually incorrect. As was previously indicated, Easter has pagan origins. The word itself comes from the the name of the Saxon goddess Eostre. Jeanie Bird wrote, “I do wish society as a whole showed as much tolerance and sensitivity toward Christianity as it does to other religious groups today.” Please. Christianity is shown FAR more tolerance than any other religion in the United States. Just look what big of a stink Republicans are raising over a Congressman wanting to take his oath of office on the Koran. Perhaps you haven’t noticed that the General Assembly opens with a prayer? Jeanie Bird wrote, “Government SHOULD NOT sanction any one religious group or belief. We live in strange times when people throw fits about displays, and are intolerant of ONE certain group. Hey, I’m okay with Jewish dislays. JESUS WAS JEWISH!” Therein lies the problem. You can’t just pick and choose which religious displays are okay. It’s an all or none proposition, and nothing that I have seen has indicated to me that most Christians are open to public displays of anything like the Wiccan Rede alongside the Ten Commandments. - Ken in Aurora - Friday, Apr 6, 07 @ 2:56 pm: I have no problem with allowing private religious displays to be erected in public spaces so long as all faiths are accommodated - meaning offered the opportunity to participate. I see no separation of church and state issues. However, Squideshi is right on target: “Therein lies the problem. You can’t just pick and choose which religious displays are okay. It’s an all or none proposition, and nothing that I have seen has indicated to me that most Christians are open to public displays of anything like the Wiccan Rede alongside the Ten Commandments.” Speaking as a practicing Wiccan, my experience is just that. There’s freedom for the major religions, but harassment for the rest of us. - Carl Nyberg - Friday, Apr 6, 07 @ 3:07 pm: GOP, so you think state and local government should be able to impose official religions within their jurisdictions? You think state and local gov’t should be able to criminalize certain political statements? When you say the courts erred in extending the Bill of Rights to include state and local gov’t have you really thought through what you’re saying or just parroting some ideology you heard that you think sounds cool? - Bubs - Friday, Apr 6, 07 @ 3:44 pm: I think any difficulties can easily be resolved by calling Pat Robertson. Since God talks directly to Pat, we should be able to obtain The Almighty’s take on this and any other issue. Also, Squideshi - I have always suspected that the Green Party was made up of Satan worshippers, since it is a well known fact that Jehovah votes Republican!! - grand old partisan - Friday, Apr 6, 07 @ 4:17 pm: Carl, No, I don’t think that state and local government should be able to impose official religions within their jurisdictions. I’m saying that – as written by the Founders – the US Constitution does not prohibit them from doing so. I’m certainly not against extending the Bill of Rights to cover state and local governments, as the Court already has. I just think that the Court doesn’t have the rightful authority to do so. The Constitution can be altered, but it should be done so with caution, and via the process proscribed by the Founders (who were a lot smarter than either of us, Carl.) And, btw, it’s not “some ideology” – it’s called strict constructionism. And it’s been a popular and respected judicial philosophy since the Bill of Rights was written. It basically says that we shouldn’t allow a group of nine un-elected officials to re-write our Constitution as they go – even if their actions reflect widespread popular sentiment. Why? Because you can’t give them the power to re-write the Constitution to reflect widespread popular sentiment without also giving them power to re-write it whenever they want. And, before you get into it – yes, there is a difference between legitimate judicial review and re-writing. The Court was right to use the Bill of Rights to strike down Jim Crow, for example, because their decisions were clearly supported by the text as written. And yes, the Court can interpret certain “vague” sections. For example, they can rule on what exactly constitutes “speech,” or “free exercise of religion.” But they cannot (or, at least, should not) be able to say, “even though the Constitution explicitly says, ‘Congress shall not,’ we are going to effectively re-write it to say ‘any government body shall not.’” There was a reason the Founders specifically mentioned “Congress.” It is because they believes individual states were sovereign enough to make such decisions on their own. And that sovereignty cannot be taken by the Court, only forfeited through the proscribed judicial process. - grand old partisan - Friday, Apr 6, 07 @ 4:20 pm: excuse me, that last line should be “amendment process.” - NoGiftsPlease - Friday, Apr 6, 07 @ 5:59 pm: Would they grant a permit for a demonstration that lasted 24 hours for 3 days? I don’t think erecting religious structures in a public plaza is the same as holding a demonstration. Will they give me a permit to erect a replica of Stonehenge on the summer solstice to be in place until the autumnal equinox? Me and my fellow d25ruids would really appreciate the opportunity to celebrate our religion! After that our wiccans or even satanic cults can erect some uh.. what would that be, some uh..altars for sacrifices or some chalk pentragrams? - Squideshi - Friday, Apr 6, 07 @ 9:10 pm: Bubs wrote, “Also, Squideshi - I have always suspected that the Green Party was made up of Satan worshippers, since it is a well known fact that Jehovah votes Republican!” I can’t speak for others in the Green Party; but I am a Unitarian Universalist myself, and that having been said, in my opinion, there do seem to be a lot of Green Unitarians. - NoGiftsPlease - Saturday, Apr 7, 07 @ 3:37 pm: Actually, the religious imagery is easy…mom, god,apple pie and all that. If the issue is about free expression, maybe I’ll apply for a permit to erect a 20 foot pile of replica limbs that have been blown off men, women, and children in Iraq? Or a life size diorama of one of our secret prisons in eastern europe. I think that the allowing the cross is just taking the path of least resistance or maybe even pandering. If the “display” were more thought provoking, I don’t think we’d see it in Daley Plaza for 3 days. Sorry, comments for this post are now closed.