Should Religious Symbols be Displayed on Public Property?
Eighty-five percent of Americans claim some form of religious affiliation. The public display of religious symbols, though, is always controversial, whether we’re talking about the Ten Commandments in a courthouse or nativity scenes in a park. In the ongoing debate about religious imagery’s proper place, where do we draw the line between private faith and public religious expression?








Keeping religion out of the government is not censorship
Right but...
"Allowing the government to place a religious symbol on public property means either all religious and nonreligious symbols must be allowed to be placed..."
So what wrong with a little diversity in terms of belief systems? Does a stone with writing or a cross or image of the FSM harm anyone?
- F2XL
December 19, 2008 9:37PM
Reply to this Recommend
(0)
Side: Yes
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
?
No, nothing is wrong with diversity, and I'm not sure what you're asking.
I'm saying if you put up a cross, you have to put everything else up, or else it's endorsement. That includes FSM if someone wants it.
- Blue Linchpin
December 20, 2008 9:28PM
Reply to this Recommend
(0)
Side: No
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
Agreed
"I'm saying if you put up a cross, you have to put everything else up, or else it's endorsement. That includes FSM if someone wants it."
I too feel all views irrespective of the belief have a right to be represented, which would mean everyone that wants a symbol in public should have that representation if they find it important to them.
- F2XL
December 20, 2008 11:36PM
Reply to this Recommend
(0)
Side: Yes
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
But life isn't so ideal
Just look at the outrage over the atheists signs. We'd be foolish to think such a policy would actually be in place: it's better to keep religion away from government and let people display their signs on their own land.
- Blue Linchpin
December 20, 2008 11:55PM
Reply to this Recommend
(0)
Side: No
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
I live in the region where that occurred
And I can tell you such events would be less common if everyone had a right to their public expression and thus LEARNED to accept the fact that we are all different.
- F2XL
December 21, 2008 4:57PM
Reply to this Recommend
(1)
Side: Yes
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
I agree, but
You're missing the point. They are not going to let everyone have a right to free expression in government buildings. There WILL be a line drawn, and that lesson would not be learned. Would they allow a Church of Hitler? Church of Scientology? Church of the Flying Spaghetti Monster? Atheists? etc, etc? There will always be a line drawn.
- Blue Linchpin
December 21, 2008 6:53PM
Reply to this Recommend
(0)
Side: No
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
If they did have THAT many competing views...
...then I would agree, we should just not promote any at all. Though I have doubts a "Church of Hitler" would ever persist.
- F2XL
December 21, 2008 10:59PM
Reply to this Recommend
(0)
Side: Yes
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.