Posted on 12/11/2006 8:14:08 AM PST by beaversmom
There’s an outrageous story out of Seattle (my home base) that shows the way that good intentions can occasionally produce disgusting results. Because of the prevailing climate of political correctness, a decent guy and honorable clergyman looks like a horse’s rear end and has provoked appropriate indignation from millions of people.
According to misleading news stories featured prominently in newspapers and on TV (including KING 5 TV News): “All 15 Christmas trees inside the main terminal at Sea Tac Airport (Seattle-Tacoma International) have been removed in response to a complaint by a rabbi. A rabbi wanted to install an eight-foot menorah and have a public lighting ceremony. He threatened to sue if the menorah wasn’t put up and gave a two day deadline to remove the trees.”
Who is this wretched rabbi who, apparently, wanted to spoil the holiday joy of his Christian neighbors out of pique and selfishness simply because he didn’t get the right to erect his own Hanukah display?
As a matter of fact, I know and like Rabbi Elazar Bogomilsky, the now notorious clergyman at the center of this swirling controversy. He’s a good guy, a young father of five (including new-born twins), and the son-in-law of the wonderful Rabbi at the synagogue I attend each week. I know that Rabbi Bogomilsky harbors no animus whatever toward Christians or Christmas. In fact he told the Seattle Times that he felt “appalled” by the airport’s decision to remove all its Christmas trees without warning on Saturday night. According to Rabbi Bogomilsky, “Everyone should have their spirit of the holiday. For many people the trees are the spirit of the holidays, and adding a menorah adds light to the season.” According to the rabbi’s lawyer, Harvey Grad, “They’ve darkened the hall rather than turning the lights up.”
I spoke to Rabbi Bogomilsky less than a hour ago and he may join me on my radio show tomorrow to apologize to the community at large for the totally unintended consequences of his desire to include a large menorah along with the airport’s holiday decorations (according to various stories there were either 22, or 15, or 9 different Christmas trees before the airport cleared them away in the dead of night). When I asked the rabbi directly whether he would want the trees removed if the airport refused to put up his menorah he insisted, “Absolutely not.” He has no problem with the Christmas trees, which have brought seasonal joy to the airport (and provoked no complaints) for more than a decade. He would greatly prefer that the airport restore the trees – even if they fail to include the requested menorah alongside the seasonal greenery. In fact, another local rabbi and close personal friend, Daniel Lapin, has begun soliciting Jewish signatures on a petition to demand the return of the trees – and we will gladly recruit Jewish volunteers to provide free labor if that would help get the job done.
Those of us who are comfortable and secure in our own religiosity (which would surely include the rigorously observant Rabbi Bogomilsky) don’t feel threatened by public displays of faith by our Christian neighbors. Generally, it’s secular fanatics (of both Jewish and Christian background), militant separationists, who have waged war on Christmas trees, ten commandments monuments, crosses, and other benign symbols of the nation’s religious heritage.
So what went wrong with this whole miserable affair?
After two months of indecision from the Port of Seattle (the quasi-governmental agency that runs the airport) concerning the request for a menorah, the rabbi’s lawyer made the mistake (yes, it was a mistake) of threatening a federal lawsuit and the airport people panicked and ordered the removal of the trees. “We’re not in the business of offending anyone and we’re not eager to get into a federal lawsuit with anyone,” said Craig Watson, chief lawyer for the Port of Seattle. Patricia Davis, head of the Port Commission said, “We didn’t have other cultures represented and rather than scramble around to find representations of other cultures at this late date, we decided to take them down and consider it later.”
This is ridiculous, of course. “Other cultures” do not observe popular holidays at precisely this time (the Islamic month of Ramadan is over) and in thousands of public and private locations across the country the abundant, prominent and very beautiful Christmas decorations are harmlessly complemented (if hardly balanced) by menorahs.
Of course, in the current climate of hyper-sensitivity regarding public expressions of religious commitment, Rabbi Bogomilsky and Harvey Grad should have avoided the chilling, unnecessary phrase “law suit” at all costs --- even if the Port of Seattle refused to give them a timely answer on their menorah request. As a result of the threatened litigation, the whole world is witnessing a horrible situation in which the religious enthusiasm (however well intended) of one individual has led to the removal of decorations enjoyed by literally hundreds of thousands.
In addition to apologizing to those masses, and working conscientiously to restore the Christmas trees, I hope that Rabbi Bogomilsky and his colleagues in the sincere and warm-hearted Chabad-Hasidic movement in Judaism will reconsider their menorah strategy next winter. They’ve already succeeded in magnificent terms in installing some 6,000 highly visible menorahs in public places across the country (including, by the way, the Washington State Capitol in Olympia) – and even at unlikely sites like Red Square in Moscow. This is a singular, even inspriring, achievement. If, however, local authorities prove unwilling to accommodate the menorahs, it’s a terrible idea to try to force their hands by comparing our candelabra to Christmas trees or wreaths or Santa Claus effigies already in place.
Though some of my fellow Jews may howl in protest when I say so, there are strong arguments to be made against public menorahs that can’t be made against Christmas trees. It’s not just that Christians outnumber us in this society by about 40 to 1; it’s that Christmas trees reasonably can be construed as a secular symbol but a menorah (despite some prior court decisions) emphatically cannot. The eight-branched “Hanukiah” or “Menorah” that we light every year for the holiday specifically recalls the seven-branched menorah that was a sacred element in the Holy Temple in Jerusalem up till 70 A.D. Though the big menorahs with bulbs that are prominently displayed in public places are not, strictly speaking, sacramental objects (because they don’t use candles or oil), they distinctly resemble the smaller menorahs we use at home and over which we recite blessings (citing the Almighty, of course) every night of the holiday. In fact, the chief mitzvah (holy commandment) of the Hanukah holiday requires the lighting of these candelabra and reciting the blessings, so it’s deeply misleading or, at best, a stretch, to call the menorah a secular symbol. Christians do not routinely pronounce blessings or recite prayers over Christmas trees.
This doesn’t mean that I think that menorahs should come down from public places: they belong in parks and plazas and airports, shedding the light of their message, but so do nativity scenes and other holiday symbols that bear unmistakably religious trappings. When the founders prohibited “an establishment of religion” they did not mean to banish all faith-based imagery from the public square.
Nor, for that matter, did Rabbi Bogomilsky mean to banish Christmas decorations from the Seattle airport.
Spokespeople for the Port of Seattle say they’re “not in the business of offending anyone,” but when did Rabbi Bogomilsky ever say, or even imply, that he was offended by Christmas trees? As a matter of fact, he welcomes the trees, as do I, as do all people of good will – Jewish and Christian alike.
What offended the rabbi and should offend all of us is the banning of religious symbols, not their presence. The airport may not be “in the business of offending anyone” but they’ve just offended just about everyone with their stubborn, wrong-headed, and utterly misguided decision.
I think you are right.
Good grief! People can be so self-absorbed and taken with their own importance.
Yes they would. And Sea-Tac would lose. For better or worse the case law on this has been settled for years. If a public agency wants exclusively Christian displays during the Christian season, to the exclusion of others, they're out of luck.
But because religious artifacts may not be displayed in public any more, and people are religious artifacts to me, it is time to ban all people.
Everywhere.
That is not a direct quote, and he claims he made no such demand.
Yeah, OK. This is the equivalent of BJ Bill Clinton saying he "mistakenly" inhaled. The lawyer had every intention of threatening a lawsuit.
If his intentions were so PURE, why did he hire a lawyer? That's suspect, to me!
If SeaTac takes down all displays of anything, they don't lose. If the menorahs go up, somebody will sue. Probably the ACLU. Even with the SCOTUS ruling, they'll sue. The lawsuit itself is the weapon, not the verdict.
not where I was going. denying the right to display the menorah while displaying trees is the problem. that is what the court addressed in regards to trees and menorahs.
Thank you for the email address. I just sent him a message.... "Merry Christmas, Grinch."
For anyone who missed it, his email is rabbi@chaiseattle.com
Good one.
**" Please allow *this* Jew to go on record that this rabbi AND his lawyer are idiots."**
And please allow this Jew to add that the title of Rabbi OUGHT to indicate wisdom, sanctity, and holiness, not this kind of shameful arrogance.
The Port Authority's decision to bar the Menorah was illegal. The Holiday Trees (Sea-Tacs description, not mine) are irrelevant. Other than if a public agency is going to display a Christmas Tree, they're stuck with including a Menorah, or other religious symbols, if requested. Even if they call it a Holiday Tree.
Merry Christmas to you too.
I object to the word "clergy" and "clergyman" in this article. Those words developed and have been used up until the last 30 years or so to denote Christian ministers or priests, not Jewish rabbis or Moslem imams, or any other group's leader.
Just as you wouldn't call a Presbyterian minister a "priest" or a Catholic priest, a "rabbi" we shouldn't use "clergyman" for rabbi or some other non-Christian group.
It's remarkable. A normal person reading the piece and then the comments can only come to one of three conclusions. One, many don't read but jump to comment. Two, many are illiterate. Or, three, some find any reason to bash Jews.
It is very likely that appealing to such as the airport authority requires the help of a lawyer. This dragged on for years. It is possible in the heat of an discussion the lawyer threatened a suit about the lack of Menorah (there is nothing on the record to indicate, and this comment states, that he ever threatened a suit about the trees)
Then the airport authority when bananas and removed the trees.
The Rabbi is apologetic for whatever part he played in the airport authority losing its mind. Which reasonable person would contemplate the authority acting this way?
There is an identical issue in my home town. It continues to be argued and the Menorah is still missing and the Christmas tree is still present year after year. Mayor is Jewish.
Whatever happened, in this article, Medved is writing of the Rabbi's contrition for any pain caused even inadvertently by his actions.
But yet, in many of the responses we somehow fail to see the Christian forgiveness and charity that is so pronounced and celebrated around such trees. Why is that? I'll be charitable in the spirit of the season, I'll blame illiteracy.
At least you didn't say you were offended by the term. If that had been the case, I would direct you to hire a lawyer.
Because this is long settled case law. The court would have ordered Sea-Tac to display a Menorah. Obviously Sea-Tac didn't want to do that.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.