Brittany M. Hughes has an article on cnsnews.com (“the right news, right now) titled, “Atheist Group’s Complaint Backfires, Lands Nativity In Full Public View.” Oh dear! I’d better read this. The piece is about how the city of Jay, Florida had a nativity scene on government property, prompting the Freedom From Religion Foundation to send them a warning letter:

In a letter sent to the city’s mayor, FFRF attorney Andrew Seidel alleged, “It is unlawful for the town to maintain, erect, or host a holiday display that consists solely of a nativity scene, thus singling out, showing preference for, and endorsing one religion.” He added there are “ample private and church grounds where religious displays may be freely placed.”

The above quote is right out of her article and it’s important. Because in her article Brittany describes the FFRF, literally in the previous paragraph, thusly:

The FFRF, known for protesting any and all religious displays in public places, sent a complaint letter recently to local officials in the 526-person city of Jay, arguing against the life-sized nativity that had been set up on the site every Christmas for nearly 40 years, the group said in a press release.

If the FFRF protests religious displays in public places, why would they suggest, in their letter, that it be moved to a public space away from government property? Why have they only ever written letters or filed lawsuits when nativity scenes were on government property while ignoring the masses of nativity’s people erect on their own property? That’s a mystery (not really). One can only assume that “the right news, right now” means “right wing” and not “news that is factually correct” as the word “news” is meant to imply.

Anyway, the city sold off the nativity. It’s now on private property where it belongs. However, Brittany seems to think this flies in the face of what the FFRF wanted:

But the town has not been deprived of the nativity, reports the American Pastors Network. In fact, after the ministerial association purchased the nativity, they then placed the huge Christian display on private property near one of the busiest parts of the small town, reports the American Pastors Network. “It now stands at a busy corner at the town’s main stop light—ironic, say nativity supporters, because many more people will see it there,” the APN said in a news release, adding that the more prominent display shows the citizens of Jay “have no intention of removing the real meaning of Christmas from public display.”

Nobody, and I mean literally nobody, cares how many people see it. Put it on a church lawn, put it in a resident’s lawn. Hell, every citizen of Jay could put a nativity in their lawn and the FFRF wouldn’t bat an eyelash – nor would anybody else. The issue is that it was on government property suggesting a government endorsement of Christianity, which is a a big legal no-no. That’s probably why Andrew Seidel suggested moving the nativity, well, to where it now resides.

So the city did what the FFRF asked, and somehow this has backfired on the FFRF?

When the Freedom From Religion Foundation (FFRF) went after a city council in Jay, Fla., for displaying a nativity set on public property, the atheist group might have won a battle, but seems to have lost the war.

Um, the war was about getting religious endorsements off government land. This is a 100% win for the FFRF. Brittany is crowing about victory in a fight nobody was waging (indeed, the FFRF nudged that outcome). This is like a parent saying “You can’t play in the dirt, but you can play in your room instead,” and then the child claiming victory by saying proudly, to themselves, “Ha! They’ll never stop me from playing in my room! Looks like you lost the war, mom and dad!”

Way to fight the persecution, Brittany.

I contacted Mr. Seidel for a comment and he said, “We don’t care if every house in Jay puts up a nativity, so long as the government remains neutral. That’s what we sought, that’s what we achieved. “