Coleman: Nothing wrong with town hall at church
by Jon Gillooly
jgillooly@mdjonline.com
April 27, 2010 12:00 AM | 1441 views | 9 9 comments | 8 8 recommendations | email to a friend | print
Marietta’s electronic billboard placed at Fairground Street and Seminole Drive reminds motorists of Councilman Anthony Coleman’s town hall meeting at Marietta Chapel AME Church.
Marietta’s electronic billboard placed at Fairground Street and Seminole Drive reminds motorists of Councilman Anthony Coleman’s town hall meeting at Marietta Chapel AME Church.
slideshow
MARIETTA - Councilman Anthony Coleman says he sees nothing wrong with conducting a town hall meeting in a church.

Coleman will conduct a town hall meeting at 6:30 p.m. tonight at Marietta Chapel African Methodist Episcopal Church on Rigby Street. He has invited Marietta City Schools Superintendent Dr. Emily Lembeck to speak at the meeting to give an update on her plan for balancing the school system's budget for the coming fiscal year.

A resident called the Journal on Monday to complain that the meeting was being conducted in a church, rather than City Hall, and that the Marietta Police Department's mobile electronic sign advertising the meeting, which was parked at the corner of Fairground and Seminole streets, described Coleman as "Reverend" Coleman rather than "Councilman" Coleman.

"Whatever happened to the separation of church and state?" questioned the Marietta resident, who asked to remain nameless for fear of retaliation.

By conducting the meeting in a church, rather than City Hall, Coleman was giving news to only a select group of people, the resident said.

Coleman said he doesn't see what all the fuss is about.

"I am a reverend. I wear a bunch of hats," he said.

As for the location, Coleman said, "meetings don't always have to be at City Hall. They can be in the community."

The church leaders opened their doors to allow him to use the space, he said.

"What better place to have a meeting at?" Coleman asked.
Comments
(9)
Comments-icon Post a Comment
Rev LGantt Cobb SCLC
|
October 03, 2011
As history recalls in the forming of the United States, the founding Fathers meant to set up clear boundaries for the Church and the Government, this was meant for the Government to stay out of the churches business and not for the Church to say out of Government business; as it was members of the church who formed the United States Government. In the Black community in the past, the Church was our only place of meeting, for most of our schools started from the black church, community meetings were held in Church and the Church was the center of our community/ the only safe place where we could meet, or have you forgotten about that dark side of American history, with the burning of churches/ a 100 years of separate but equal laws/ state laws of no blacks allowed and whites only signs. The Church plays a very great part in our community. In our Constitution and Declaration they make mention of God, so the founding Fathers were very clear on their belief that they believed in God. The facts are clear they were Christian and used words like "one Nation under God" i...e... On the dollar bill the words "In God We Trust" This Nation was formed under Godly principle by Godly men.
Numbers
|
April 30, 2010
How many of you are aware that "Seperation of Church and State" is not found anywhere in the U.S. Constitution.

You people get all up in the air about a part of the Constitution that doesn't even exist.

If you are wrong about this, it is also very likely that you are wrong about Christian people meeting to discuss government activity.

I had much rather have a Christian government that an athiest government.
Mike in Kennesaw
|
April 28, 2010
I'm tired of the present assault on God and Religion in our country by the few. This country was created around religious values. It's about time we stand up to this assault. The decision to have the Town Hall in the church should be strictly up to his constituents, and not the few minority, that have nothing in it but an agenda to rid our country of the values it was grown on. The church is a house of God, so what really does the opposistion fear? There's an agenda here, bigger than seperation of church and state, and I for one am tired of keeping my God in the closet for fear of being politiclly incorrect. Religion is still the majority in this country. Folks don't be afraid to speak up for your God. Time to take our country back to the way it was intended to be. God Bless us all!
yeah right
|
April 28, 2010
anonymous!!

Maybe you should have come to the Cobb county teacher of the year celebration, held in a church in Marietta [back in november/december 2009] and you would have seen that the preacher of that Church prayed with all the people in attendance before starting the day. Now, if this does not violate the separation state and church?? what does?? There is an agenda to promote a specific religion....
Seperation
|
April 28, 2010
I disagree, the seperation of Church and State was written into our laws to protect citizens. if you doubt this, history shows how the Jews were

treated in Germany.
anonymous
|
April 27, 2010
Seriously, we have graduation ceremonies in churches, we vote in churches. Its not like there's a sermon or a collection plate being passed. It does nothing to violate separation of church and state.
Indian Joe
|
April 27, 2010
But you don't understand, if Rev. Coleman does this it is OK - but if Phillip Goldstein, Van Pearlberg, or Mayor Tumlin were to do so, the outrage would be immediate and vocal. I believe that Rev. Coleman represents only part of his constitutency - and this proves it beyond a doubt. Does he or the city pay the church for using the property for this meeting? I noticed he said "church leaders opened their doors" - at what price? Either there is or there isn't supposed to be a separation of church and state, but that never stopped Jesse Jackson or even Martin Luther King from using churches for political purposes. Guess it just depends on who you are
What is a Church?
|
April 27, 2010
A "Church" is a group of Believers. The word refers to people. This meeting is being held in a building where a "Church" happens to meet. This building was probably selected for the town hall meeting because it is convenient to many in the neighborhood and can accommodate a crowd. Councilman Coleman has had several such meetings in his ward over the years and has moved them around to different locations and types of buildings to make it convenient for constituents. There should be no problem as long as the practice continues. Maybe the story should focus on City Councilors who don't hold informational meetings.
Ron Bucksot
|
April 27, 2010
Mr Coleman should be aware his constituents elected him to be their representative City "Councilman"..not.. their Reverend. And..that his accessibility should be through the town hall, not at a church of his choosing.

Mr Coleman should read the very definition of "town hall" in the American Heritage Dictionary.

Definition of "town hall": A building that contains the offices of the public officials of a town and that houses the town council and courts."

Perhaps, while in the dictionary Mr Coleman should also read the definition of "constituent".

Although Mr Coleman may be a man of many hats, Mr Coleman needs to put his thinking cap on before he holds his next "town hall" meeting to discuss the people's business.

Knowing Councilman Coleman I'm sure he's fully capable of knowing..and..honoring the hat he is wearing.

Ron Bucksot

Ward 5

Constituent
*All comments are subject to moderator approval before being made visible on the website. The use of profanity, obscene and vulgar language, hate speech, and racial slurs is strictly prohibited. Advertisements, promotions, spam, and links to outside websites will be rejected.