According to Bill O'Reilly, these symbols represent nothing more special
than a philosophy - why then should not all philosophies be welcome?I find it ironic that the only way an argument can be made for affording
special rights to Christian symbols is by either claiming the symbols are not
special at all - or by admitting that you think you deserve special recognition
above everyone else and the failure to receive the special treatment equates to
discrimination. Poor picked on majority - having to share the public
square with dissenting voices. How dare those who disagree with you attempt to
exercise their First Amendment rights!
Why is it that some Christian's need to erect symbols in the public arena.
The Mormon Church doesn't need to erect a Moroni in the courthouse because
they have a temple, in the private arena, displayed for all to see. What is
wrong with just using the private arena, why do they have to be recognized by
I'm not going to buy into this annual fabricated argument that Christians
are the victims of vicious atheists. Not when they make up 80% of the
population, have proportional or higher representation at all levels of
government, and when the best example that folks like Mr. Sanders can come up
with are little tiny regional policy disputes in unusually liberal places like
Santa Monica.If Mr. Sanders wants to truly lament the loss of
traditional Christmas spirit and celebration in America, look no further than
the disgusting commercialization of the holiday brought to you buy a free market
capitalist economy. But doing so would involve Mr. Sanders and the folks at Fox
News criticizing free market economies and the wealthy conservatives who own the
retail companies responsible for it. And any Christian who shops on Black
Friday (or even Thanksgiving now!). Since Christians make up 80% of the
population, many of them are contributing to the demise of their own cherished
religious holiday. Not nearly as clean a narrative as "liberal boogeymen
steal Christmas" is it, Mr. Sanders?
I find it hard to give this story any credience when the author takes. Short
cuts through the acts about the Santa Montica case. The reason the city shut.
down ALL public displays is because the NON Christian displays kept being
vandalised and they feared an escalation in such behavior. If Christians wa t
their right to express themselves in the public square perhaps they should start
by respecting others right to do so.
So if I'm a non-Christian going to court against a Christian (for any
reason - as defendant or plaintiff), I should have no problem being in a
building emblazened with Christian symbols? It would be irrational for me to
believe that the Court might somehow be predisposed to support my adversary?
You really see no problem with this?
Would you like to see Satanist displays in the public square too? Or does
freedom of religion only mean freedom of Christian religion?
Re: "Instead of secularists shaming Christians for their aspirations, they
should support them in living their ideals."In the Santa Monica
case, Christians refused to live their ideals. Instead, when some non-Christian
displays went up, Christians defaced and damaged them. Plus, they whined about
the mere fact of allowing any non-Christian displays at all. Christians too
often behave like the child at the playground who, when he doesn't get his
way, picks up his toys and goes home.The secularists' so-called
war on religion is in reality a too-frequent manifestation of the sectarian
If only the 80% of Americans known as Christians would act like and follow the
teachings of their namesake, the non-believers might not be so offended by the
advertising of their story. If only Christians would show their
love for people rather than their efforts to punish and harm the little people
in favor of the rich and powerful. If only Christians would value
people as being more important than business profits.If Christians
were Christians, they wouldn’t need public displays, outdoor advertising,
crosses on the highway, and they might even be imitated by others.
Mr. Sanders:I'm in agreement with much of what you have written
here. Even if a world (and if the United States) without Christianity would not
necessarily be morally impoverished, I believe it certainly would be culturally
impoverished.-Ken K. Gourdin
As long as the nativity is cast with people who look time and ethnicity
appropriate for Israel roughly 2000 years ago.
IT doesn't matter why any would want to erect thier symbols in the public
sqaure,By freedom of religion, freedom of speech, freedom of
assembly, and the fact that all rights not delineated in the constitution belong
to people and the states, they have that right.Religious people and
roups have just as much right to express themselves in the public square as
anyone, even non-belivers.If you do not protect speech you do not
like then there will be no freedom.
w2the truth So the you agree that the people that vandalized the non
Christian displays in santa monica thereby causing everyones speech to be muted
where wrong to do so.
The public square should be regarded as the private property of the American
people. The owners, the American people, have the right to say what may be done
or placed on their private property. They have said they do not want any sort
of business operation, including churches, to use their private property for
their business purposes.
The only war on religion is from the right wing. The have defiled my religion
and seek to deny any room for other's religion.
From the Pew article:"The United States was among the 16
countries whose scores on both the Government Restrictions Index and the Social
Hostilities Index increased by one point or more in the year ending in
mid-2010.A key factor behind the increase in the U.S. score on the
Social Hostilities Index was a spike in religion-related terrorist attacks in
the United States in the year ending in mid-2010."If there is
war on religion in the U.S. it is largely generated by religion itself. The
Republican Party long ago decided they could use religion to rally their base.
The use of religion as a wedge issue in political campaigns is damaging
religion. Rather than looking like an institution of love, hope and peace it
appears divisive, judgemental and partisan. Additionally, scandals involving
religious leaders has caused significant damage. This "us
against them" mentality is creeping into local worship services. For me, it
destroys the atmosphere. The Gospel is one of hope and love, not fear and