Should Religious Symbols be Displayed on Public Property?

Recommend (1) Comments (5)

Let me conclude by asserting that this is not the most important question facing our culture. Groups and organizations on both sides of the debate use it stir up emotions, generate support, and raise money for their causes. A little common sense and courtesy can go a long way toward reducing the tension this issue creates.

First of all, we should acknowledge that the law is pretty clear on this matter. Governments are not supposed to offer financial support or official approval of religious displays on public property.

Secondly, religious groups have great freedom to do whatever they want to do on their own property.

If Christians, Jews, Muslims, Wiccans, Mormons, Buddhists, Hindus, Pagans, Navahos, or Secular Humanists wish to erect symbols of their convictions, let them do so on private property. Instead of clamoring to put a nativity scene in front of the courthouse, put dozens, even hundreds of them in front of churches. If a church or individual owns a hilltop and wants to erect a cross on it, even a really big one with neon lights, so be it. And so be it for all groups, religious or secular.

As a matter of courtesy and effective communication, it makes sense and shows respect for others—a tenet of nearly all religions—to avoid displays that will offend others. But given the great and growing diversity of our population, some offense is probably inevitable, even when unintentional. Fortunately, unlike the display of religious symbols on public property, it is permitted by the Constitution.