Merry Christmas in July-Board Determined To Abolish Christmas
Merry Christmas in July
Board Determined To Abolish Christmas
Yes, Merry Christmas Sterling, Loudoun and all the Sterling Americans who read this message.
The Loudoun County Board of Supervisors is considering a policy for the county that will eliminate the freedom of religious expression in Leesburg and Loudoun right now.
The board "voted" at their July 7 business meeting (there was no formal vote, but I asked if anyone would join me and reject the proposal to eliminate religious freedom) 8 yes, one no (Delgaudio) to re-consider the current policy of allowing Christmas to be celebrated in Loudoun County.
The board will consider adopting an old November 2009 policy at the Tuesday July 20th business meeting. This "old policy" was attacked in the national news media as abolishing Christmas in Loudoun County.
The proposal was made by a so-called Citizens Courts Committee to abolish Christmas in Loudoun, by banning religious displays of any kind at the Courthouse grounds, and will be on the Wednesday July 20th Business Agenda just days from now.
The policy specifically banned nativities, menorahs, stars of David or any relgious symbols on the grounds of the courthouse where they have been placed for 50 years.
The chairman of the committee emphatically said "we want a non-religious but traditional program" which eliminates all religious expression.
Yesterday, the "Court committee", appointed by the board (no Sterling Appointee) but that reports to Judges in the Leesburg Courthouse came to the board and expressed regret that the national news media had made a laughing stock of Loudoun.
So they proposed at the public meeting to go back to the old policy that brought the national news media into Leesburg in the first place.
I argued that allowing all expressions of religious beliefs in the form of religious displays at the Courthouse grounds was protected and had been the case for 50 years and that all supervisors had voted 9 to 0 to allow that after a long discussion.
I asked is there no one here that can simply and openly reject going back to the old policy as this Court committee is simply and bluntly asking for an abolition of religious symbols and for a return to the old policy?
A few supervisors said they would respectfully consider the request from the committee. Most stayed silent.
Supervisor Stevens Miller endorsed the old policy.
There was no open discussion just determination to do the minimum required by law or public process to make it appear to be all legal. Procedures allowed for a frank reaction or public sentiment on the record as we were in a "committee of the whole", a "COW" would allow supervisors to express their opinions.
Supervisors seemed by their silence and by their "consideration" to be solidly moving to adopt the old policy under which the Court Committee clearly stated will them to abolish all religious symbols as they stated on the record is their goal.