South Carolina Town Committee Battles With Mayor Over Nativity Scene
If you thought the War on Christmas was just a Fox News punchline or a seasonal eye-roll, allow us to introduce you to Mullins, South Carolina — population: small, backbone: apparently massive. This year’s holiday…

If you thought the War on Christmas was just a Fox News punchline or a seasonal eye-roll, allow us to introduce you to Mullins, South Carolina — population: small, backbone: apparently massive.
This year’s holiday controversy kicks off with Mayor Miko Pickett, a Democrat, allegedly deciding that a 3-by-4-foot Nativity scene — funded by private citizens and tucked alongside Santa, wreaths, and snowmen in a downtown parking lot — was just a step too far. That’s right. Santa? Fine. Twinkly lights and plastic snowmen? Totally acceptable. But baby Jesus in a manger? Now that’s where we draw the line, apparently.
Kimberly Byrd, head of the Mullins Beautification Committee, thought decorating the city’s new market area for its first Christmas would be a nice, non-controversial idea. You know, help out small businesses, spread some cheer — kind of like a Hallmark movie, but with fewer corporate talking points. She and her team bought the decorations with their own money. No taxpayer funds, no city ordinance violation, just good old-fashioned hometown charm.
And yet, just days later, Byrd says she got a text from the mayor herself, asking her to remove the Nativity scene because it might offend residents “of other faiths and beliefs.” Now, let’s pause there. Mullins is in the Bible Belt. The kind of town where there really is a church on every corner — and probably a potluck happening inside. Byrd, who’s lived there for 53 years, said she’s never seen anything like it. Because, quite frankly, it’s not normal.
But the mayor, in a Facebook statement (of course), defended her request by invoking the old “separation of church and state” argument — the favorite fallback of every official who wants to erase faith from the public square without actually saying that’s what they’re doing. It’s a tired, legally shaky line that ignores the very Supreme Court precedent set in Lynch v. Donnelly (1984), where the Court ruled that a Nativity scene is permissible as part of a broader holiday display. Which, for those keeping score, is exactly what’s happening in Mullins.



