While I am certainly disturbed by the mayors alleged sentiments, I must in rare form disagree with the atheist activist in question about any alleged violation of separation of church and state here. While the city may have organized the event, they state that it was funded by local church groups who are not part of the government body. Additionally the event was held at a public park which is open to all the public and no one was denied entry as far as we know. I think we need to pick our battles a bit better than this, because things of this nature give off the appearance of being petty and intentionally confrontational when no confrontation is necessary. But that's just my two cents.

Since my recent encounter with La Vista Mayor Douglas Kindig , a small part of the criticism I've received has come from other atheists. They've joined some Christians in not understanding how Separation of Church and State works and getting the details of what happened wrong.A post about it on Atheist Republic is a great example of atheists getting it wrong . They got numerous small details wrong, including when I approached the mayor. Their post claims I approached him "in the midst of" the event when I intentionally waited until the event was over. It's a small detail, but it shows the disregard for accuracy (or perhaps honesty) that permeates that post.But worse than the lazy writing in this hyperbolic work of click-bait, is the opinion offered by the author at the end of the post:He starts by acknowledging that the city organized the event. Nothing said after that is relevant. Who paid for the event is not relevant. It was exclusively and explicitly Christian, and it was part of the official La Vista event called La Vista Daze. No effort was made to even consider anything else. When we asked the city about it, they admitted that it had never occurred to them. Of course the city states they didn't do anything wrong. That's what they would be doing either way. But one thing is key and undeniable.The city organized the event.The fact that it was on public property is not at all relevant. The Constitutional issue would still be there if it had happened exactly as it did on private property. And there would be no issue if it had been the churches having the event on their own in the same location. The location isn't the issue. The issue is the fact that the city organized the event.Regarding picking our battles, the author reveals even more of his ignorance of the situation. Ignorance that would have been avoided if he'd done 2 cents worth of research before posting.He clearly never found my initial post on the matter , where he could have learned that I wasn't looking for a battle at all. I attempted a civil discussion. It only blew up because of the mayor's reaction.He may also have learned that the response from Omaha Atheists was to use the attention educate and to reach out to believers in the community to open dialogue between our groups.I've since had the meeting with the mayor that I was seeking that day, where he apologized in person for his outburst. The city appears like they will be taking my concerns seriously, which at this point is all I was asking for.I also spoke to the city council and have offered to participate in the planning of future events to help ensure inclusiveness by representing a group not currently considered. After I spoke, the preacher who organized the event in question spoke, praising Omaha Atheists for our civility and willingness to work together.He did get one thing right though. No confrontation was necessary. Other than the outburst that made news, that we've since moved beyond, no confrontation has been necessary. So far, all parties are working together civilly.So, who has "the appearance of being petty and intentionally confrontational when no confrontation is necessary"? The group who is working toward a litigation free resolution to a legitimate issue or the blogger who picked a fight with a fellow atheist by writing an ill-informed, hyperbolic, and dishonest piece to get some extra hits?If this writer at Atheist Republic gives a shit about honesty, I suggest he pick his battles better than this.