< link rel="DCTERMS.isreplacedby" href="http://davejustus.com/" >

Thursday, March 10, 2005

Religious Symbols on Public Land

Citizen Smash posts about the decision of the San Diego City Council to remove the Mt. Soledad cross. I really have no patience for this sort of thing. Having a religious symbol, like a cross, on public land is not an establishment of religion.


Blogger Mystic Knight said...

For all intents and purposes I'm an Atheist, but even I disagree with running around and demolishing historical sites and memorials for the sake of trying to make a statement. I do agree, however, that new religious monuments and symbols should not be erected on government property. I have no problem with religious institutions placing their symbols on their own land, and even large enough to be seen from long distances, but these things should not be allowed on government owned facilities or land unless we can start placing a likeness of Buddha in these locations as well.

3/10/2005 02:11:00 PM  
Blogger Mystic Knight said...

This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

3/10/2005 02:15:00 PM  
Blogger Mystic Knight said...

This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

3/10/2005 02:15:00 PM  
Blogger Dave Justus said...

I could probably be convinced to live with your compromise, with perhaps an exception for a cross, or other religious icons, in a memorial setting.

I believe that we should build memorials to honor those who have contributed and have passed on. These memorials should reflect the person(s) they are memorializing and therefore acknowledging that person's religion seems to be appropriate.

I believe this should be true for all religions, not just Christianity.

3/10/2005 02:25:00 PM  
Blogger Mystic Knight said...

We agree to agree on that point.

I too agree that symbols and services are there to honor the receiver, and as such, should be in the realm of their personal belief system.

This was covered by me in an article I wrote about Michael Newdow and his recent sillyness.

3/10/2005 02:48:00 PM  
Blogger The probligo said...

To the both of you, I think I can agree tho the reasons might be a little different.

As I see it, whether you are on the side of religion or otherwise, the legal cases the anti-religion and pro-religion debates and ill feeling all show a very deep insecurity.

what the H3!! does it really matter?

3/11/2005 09:32:00 PM  
Blogger Mystic Knight said...

History has shown us that religion needs to stay clear of government. In fact, most of the great founders of the United States and religious leaders of the day, whether they were themselves religious or not, agreed with this separation.

History aside, almost every major conflict in this world has been caused by the disagreements of religious belief. Sure, some religions were masked as things like Fascism, Communism, etc… but the end result is all the same, conform or die.

This is exactly why it is a very big deal to keep groups with a narrow agenda out of the political arena. You can be religious, you just can’t control my government based solely on your beliefs.

3/12/2005 08:06:00 PM  

Post a Comment

<< Home