I get the distinct impression that desire for government advocacy of religion is proportional to whether or not the religion advocated is near and dear to the individual.
The city can’t just put one religion’s display up and reject all the others. So if the Muslims, Jews, Hindus, etc. want the city to put up a big holiday symbol that makes them happy, I am not going to wet my pants about it. If the witches want to put up Halloween decorations to celebrate demons...wait, that happens without moaning at city all every October!
Diversity runs deeper than a man’s hide. The founders knew that and did not want the state to suppress religion. Putting up a nativity scene is not oppressing this tight assed suer. He’s stupid and mean. He would be happier in the Soviet Union. Everything was grey and dead.
It would show the city respects the FACT of religious celebration in this Nation that has come about because of the first amendment. Most days are atheists’ display. Nothing in the yard of city hall. The Scrooge commie wannabe has his celebration on most days.
I don't believe the State should 'suppress' any groups, but refusing to turn the State into an organ of religious expression isn't 'suppression'.
If the State said you couldn't put a Nativity on your property, that would be 'suppression'.
He would be happier in the Soviet Union. Everything was grey and dead.
I don't associate the State with 'everything' in the U.S. I also do not conflate religious displays on private property with religious displays on private property.