Religious Symbols

‘Tis the season for the annual controversy over the display of religious symbols on public property. A pending case brought by the ACLU against Downey for its traditional display of a Nativity scene and another against Los Angeles for displaying a menorah in City Hall (Metro, Dec. 22) are two of this year’s results from an improper reading of the Constitution’s First Amendment.

The amendment reads: “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof . . . .” Properly understood this amendment ensures that the state does not promote one religion over another, or prevent anyone from practicing a religion. The display of religious symbols on public property does neither. Display of a religion’s symbols is not support for the religion. It is simply an acknowledgement of the religion’s existence and importance. And acknowledgment of a religion’s existence is not acceptance of its beliefs.

The display of religious symbols on public property acknowledges that it is an important time for many Angelenos. When Santa Monica city employee Marci Simmons and others displayed a dreidel in a city building Simmons found that “it makes people curious. They (got) to find out about our (Jewish) holiday as well. It made everybody a lot closer.” What a nice thing to be on Christmas.

JAMES D. BREHOVE

Redondo Beach