9/24/22. Amplified religious service on OG boards. Note proselytization booth on the right out in the open. Paul Goldfinger photo. Blogfinger.net
By Paul Goldfinger, MD. Editor Blogfinger.net
This is what Blogfinger had to say in September 2022:
“Can you name any other Jersey towns that impose outdoor religious services on its citizens?
“The boardwalk is a ‘public thoroughfare’ as designated by the CMA, FEMA, Neptune and everyone else, so where is the separation of church and state?
“Neptune supposedly governs the Grove, but what we have here is a theocracy by default. And this religious service is too much even though the CMA owns the pavilion and the boardwalk. They don’t own the air or the right to fill the air with deafening and religious sound.
“The ambition of the CMA to become a dominant ‘year-round OG Christian seaside community’ will come true unless the secular community rises up to request consideration for those who are not into the CMA’s “mission.”
Blogfinger has long criticized the CMA over issues having to do with their obvious goal to expand religious programming in this largely secular democratic town where the CMA has failed to recognize we-the-people: the secular residential community who need to push for identity and life-style freedoms.
We never criticized their Christian religion.
We have been sympathetic to the Neptune United concerns about separation of church and state in the Grove.
But now there is a new mode of attacking the CMA by people who are so thin-skinned that a tiny cross on a beach badge is reason to find fault. And yes, we also complained about those badges, but it is small potatoes. Mine is on my beach hat.
Some Jews who have come forward about this issue try to relate the CMA’s beach badges to the yellow Stars of David (not crosses) that Jews were forced to wear at various times in their history.
Jews have learned to adapt to various indignities they might be subjected to, and tiny crosses on beach badges bear no comparison. The CMA is not anti-semitic.
But now there are some new anti-CMA complaints, and they are coming from the the President of the Home Groaners. At their last meeting (4/27) Richard Williams the HOA President decided to add a new ingredient to the “bias” stew in town: oppression of the LGBTQ+ community by the Camp Meeting.
During the Yogagate flare-up, a tiny number of Grovers tried to double down on their CMA attacks by claiming that the CMA was somehow connected to “right wing Christian hate groups” known for their severe antipathy against gays. But they did not produce any evidence of hate in Ocean Grove. The same is true now where similar complaints against the CMA have re-surfaced.
At the meeting, Williams berated the CMA for “not being willing to change.” The Coaster covered this meeting and quoted Mr. Williams, “There is a very unhealthy feeling in Ocean Grove .”
He is reported to say, “Concerned voices are not heard, particularly the LGBTQ+ community.” He lectured the CMA that they “should have the ‘moral authority’ to get more involved in OG issues.”
Williams dug deep by once again bringing up the over-and-done-with 2007 civil union brouhaha. Williams did not stop there as he accused the CMA of having “an attitude that all are welcome to OG to accept the Christian point of view, and if they do not, why are they here?” And it is true that some in town do say that, but it is not official CMA policy.
However Williams had nothing to substantiate his accusation that the CMA is responsible for “an unhealthy feeling” in town. If the HOA is going after the CMA because of alleged bias, they had better put the proof on the table, or fair minded citizens here will turn their backs on the Groaners.
And, perhaps Mr. Williams has forgotten that his organization, the OGHOA, does not represent all the residents of OG. In fact, counting paid members, I suspect that their numbers may be only a small percent of the recent census count of about 3,000.
No one elected Mr. Williams and his acolytes to conduct public hearings about a group of other Grovarians or about anyone else. Such inquisitions with nasty accusations and open press coverage may be illegal if subjected to legal scrutiny. They are so busy wondering if the CMA should be sued that they forgot to be careful about what they are doing.
The Groaners should stick to topics such as whether the sand dunes are too high or if we need more public toilets in town.
NJ.com (affiliated with the Star Ledger) has once again jumped into the fray and has written an “opinion” piece which says that the LGBTQ+ community in Ocean Grove is oppressed, and that the CMA’s views are out of date and need to change. Her opening salvo is “OG religious leaders have too much power. It’s time to take it back.”
This attitude, right out of the starting gate, suggests a link to some in- town views which are similar. I have had a suspicion that NJ.com has some sort of collaboration with Grovers who oppose the CMA. This is based on the current essay following on the heels of their views about the pier.
This NJ.com. editorial is grossly unfair—–lousy journalism. The writer should be transferred to the pronoun department. She interviewed Michael Badger and readily dismissed his views. She also quotes quite a few members of the OG LGBTQ+ community, and they all are essentially on the same page—accusations and implications without proof.
Shane Martins, a gay man from town, was quoted…”He founded the community advocacy organization Neptune United and says ‘the influx of religious symbols in the area, including the new pier, makes him and many others feel wary and unwelcome.'”
Do you Grovers find that the LGBTQ+ community in town is made to feel “wary and unwelcome?” And since when is being made to feel “wary and unwelcome” a situation that requires public scrutiny?
And here is another questionable comment from a Grover:
“It just seems that over the last few years, the Camp Meeting Association has gotten more aggressive in their expression of their Christianity,” said Luisa Paster. “And I think that mirrors what’s been happening in the rest of the country.”
Another imprecise quote, lacking substance, is heard from Shane Martins: “He told me he’s extensively researched the Camp Meeting’s ties to Christian nationalism, a term used to describe efforts to put Christian symbols and practices into public spaces, and pointed to the organization’s past and current involvement with far-right personalities and groups who are known to be hateful of the LGBTQ+ community.”
Do any of you find this statement to be worthy enough to condemn the CMA? Does associating with someone or some group make the CMA guilty of anything?
Regarding religious symbols in town, “that’s how it’s always been,” Badger contends. “Since the time beach badges first started to have pictures on them in 1994, Badger tells me, they’ve featured both religious images and more fitting beach themes like waves and sandcastles.”
“So, the narrative that all this is new,” he said. “It is certainly not. It’s not new. It’s from the beginning.”
The NJ.com writer said, “Those words stayed with me: ‘It’s not new. It’s from the beginning.’ But the fact that something’s always been done, that it’s always been the way it is, is it really enough to make it right? And if the answer is yes, then maybe it’s time for a new beginning.”
She’s out of line in my opinion. Who is she to advocate “a new beginning?” A journalist should present the facts and even lean one way or another, but a strong activist position like this?
Publicly ganging up on the CMA is not a good strategy to deal with controversial and delicate issues.
We suggest that you all read the latest Coaster piece– HOA minutes on all this, and go to NJ.com by clicking the link below.
www.nj.com/opinion/2023/05/forced-to-carry-their-cross.html
BOARDWALK EMPIRE CAST: