Roadside cross memorials unconstitutional?

[LuvDuke]

As I said, I don't care for roadside memorials either, and wouldn't mind if they were banned, however, as long as it is allowed, it is perfectly constitutional for it to be a cross or other religious symbol, as was ruled in this case. The atheist organization wanted them down because they were crosses, not because they were memorials.

So you would have no problem with a group putting up something that said "There is no God" or "Jesus Christ was a lying false prophet" to memorialize their atheist relative?

 

[talulabelle]

So you would have no problem with a group putting up something that said "There is no God" or "Jesus Christ was a lying false prophet" to memorialize their atheist relative?

First of all, I don't know any atheist (and I know many atheists) that symolize their belief system with "There is no God" rather they are ambivilent toward a higher power and symolize themselves more with nature, the seasons, money, politics, science or something else. However for arguments sake, no I wouldn't have a problem with it. I might have a problem with the "Jesus Christ was a lying false prophet" part, because that is just an attack against my religion more than a symbol of atheism. My cross doesn't harm, hurt, attack or degrade any other religion. It symbolizes my religion, but does not say "there is no buddah" etc. So my answer is no, I would not have a problem with any symbol of atheism that did not go out of its way to hurt another religion (whether it be Christianity, Islam, Buddist, Judaism, etc) As I said before, in my town you can't go 50 feet without seeing a Star of David. I don't know if it is on public property or not, but I don't care. It is not about me. It is about the people in my community though, and it makes them happy. They have never had a problem with my Christianity either.

 

[LuvDuke]

First of all, I don't know any atheist (and I know many atheists) that symolize their belief system with "There is no God" rather they are ambivilent toward a higher power and symolize themselves more with nature, the seasons, money, politics, science or something else. However for arguments sake, no I wouldn't have a problem with it. I might have a problem with the "Jesus Christ was a lying false prophet" part, because that is just an attack against my religion more than a symbol of atheism. My cross doesn't harm, hurt, attack or degrade any other religion. It symbolizes my religion, but does not say "there is no buddah" etc. So my answer is no, I would not have a problem with any symbol of atheism that did not go out of its way to hurt another religion (whether it be Christianity, Islam, Buddist, Judaism, etc) As I said before, in my town you can't go 50 feet without seeing a Star of David. I don't know if it is on public property or not, but I don't care. It is not about me. It is about the people in my community though, and it makes them happy. They have never had a problem with my Christianity either.

So you're in favor of "freedom of religion" and 1st Amendment rights on PUBLIC LAND as long as it doesn't offend you. Geez, knock me over with a feather.

The discussion, for me, ends here as I now know everything I really needed to know.

 

[Texa]

So you're in favor of "freedom of religion" and 1st Amendment rights on PUBLIC LAND as long as it doesn't offend you. Geez, knock me over with a feather.

The discussion, for me, ends here as I now know everything I really needed to know.

I don't always agree with talulahbelle but I thought she had sense in her post.

There is nothing wrong with showing a symbol that's supports a particular belief, whether that belief is Christianity, Judaism, or even Paganism, but why use a symbol that does nothing but put down someone else's belief? (Down with Jesus, There is no God, etc. etc)

There is a difference. I don't think Atheistic symbolism necessarily equals Anti-Religion symbolism.

 

[sha_lyn]

IMHO a sentence isn't a symbol.I can think of a couple of symbols that are used to represent atheism.
One is among the approved symbols for veteran grave markers
http://www.cem.va.gov/cem/hm/hmemb.asp it is number 16

The other, which even as a non-Christian I find mildly offensive, is the Darwin fish. I don't like it because IMHO they are making fun of the Christian fish symbol.

 

[smartestnumber5]

First of all, I don't know any atheist (and I know many atheists) that symolize their belief system with "There is no God" rather they are ambivilent toward a higher power and symolize themselves more with nature, the seasons, money, politics, science or something else.

How could atheists be ambivalent toward a higher power when they don't believe one exists . If one is ambivalent, I would wonder if one is really an atheist (they believe there isn't a higher being) or is an agnostic (they aren't sure or don't care)?

I'm an atheist and in a field (philosophy) full of atheists and there is pretty much one and only one tenet of atheism--the belief that there is no higher being. That's all. Anything else--views on nature, the seasons, money, politics, science--has nothing inherently to do with atheism.

There is nothing wrong with showing a symbol that's supports a particular belief, whether that belief is Christianity, Judaism, or even Paganism, but why use a symbol that does nothing but put down someone else's belief? (Down with Jesus, There is no God, etc. etc)

There is a difference. I don't think Atheistic symbolism necessarily equals Anti-Religion symbolism.

I don't see how "there is no God/higher being" is putting other's beliefs. That is just what atheism is. It happens that atheism is in direct contradiction with the views of most religions. Same as "Jesus is Lord" is not necessarily putting down Jewish beliefs, though it is obviously directly in contradiction with Jewish beliefs.

Maybe LuvDuke's worry is that religious views inherently contradicting of other religious beliefs. What happens when the memorial one group wants is found offensive by another group? I see people on the DIS often say essentially that Jesus is the only way to get to heaven and hence imply that all non-Christians are going to hell. If someone wants to put up a scriptural verse on the cross saying as much, will that be allowed?

IMHO a sentence isn't a symbol.I can think of a couple of symbols that are used to represent atheism.
One is among the approved symbols for veteran grave markers
http://www.cem.va.gov/cem/hm/hmemb.asp it is number 16

The other, which even as a non-Christian I find mildly offensive, is the Darwin fish. I don't like it because IMHO they are making fun of the Christian fish symbol.

I see what you mean about a sentence being different than a symbol, but I think the trouble is that atheism really comes down to just one sentence--there is no higher being. Now how do you represent that in a symbol? I don't see the Darwin fish as doing so since it obviously represents evolution; but one doesn't have to believe evolution to be an atheist and belief in evolution is not unique to atheists. Similarly, the veteran grave marker seems to be an atom. Why is the symbol for atheism tied to science? They are not inherently related.

If I were trying to accurately represent my atheism in a symbol the only possible thing I can imagine is a some type of representation of a higher being and some representation indicating that the higher being doesn't exist. That's just all there is to being an atheist for me. (Of course, I personally can't really imagine wanting to bother representing my atheism in a memorial for my death anyway.)

 

[sha_lyn]

I don't see the Darwin fish as doing so since it obviously represents evolution; but one doesn't have to believe evolution to be an atheist and belief in evolution is not unique to atheists. Similarly, the veteran grave marker seems to be an atom. Why is the symbol for atheism tied to science? They are not inherently related.

If the evolution symbol is only meant to represent evolution, then why not have it be 1/2 man 1/2 ape or something? IMHO the fact that it is so similar to the very popular Christian fish symbol(including the lettering for the word Darwin is the same of similar font used in some of the Xtain fish), shows that it is meant more to make fun of the fish than it is to represent evolution.

I alos don't like the Xtians "answer" to the Darwin fish.... A small Darwin fish being eaten by a larger fishes that say Truth on it.

In general I don't like any symbol or statement that promotes one group/person's beliefs by belittling anothers.
However considering I live in the Bible Belt, I'm very tempted to get the bumper sticker that says.... Its your hell. You go burn in it.

As for the atomic symbol.... I believe it is the official symbol of one of the national (international?) atheist groups

 

[talulabelle]

If the evolution symbol is only meant to represent evolution, then why not have it be 1/2 man 1/2 ape or something? IMHO the fact that it is so similar to the very popular Christian fish symbol(including the lettering for the word Darwin is the same of similar font used in some of the Xtain fish), shows that it is meant more to make fun of the fish than it is to represent evolution.

I alos don't like the Xtians "answer" to the Darwin fish.... A small Darwin fish being eaten by a larger fishes that say Truth on it.

In general I don't like any symbol or statement that promotes one group/person's beliefs by belittling anothers.
However considering I live in the Bible Belt, I'm very tempted to get the bumper sticker that says.... Its your hell. You go burn in it.

As for the atomic symbol.... I believe it is the official symbol of one of the national (international?) atheist groups

I said I didn't have problem with the "there is no God" part. I had a problem with the "Jesus was a lying false prophet" part. I realize atheism means no belief in a higher power and is different from agnostic. My point when talking about ambivilence was that the atheists that I am friends with would never memorialize themselves that way. They are atheist, but their memorial would have something to do with THEIR life, not stating that "there is no God". That would not symbolize their lives. They really could care less if others believe in God, not believing in God is not what drives their lives. They are atheist, but that is not their religion. It is all ambivilent to them. They have no belief in a higher power, but that is not what is a symbol of the lives they've led. They would choose something that was about the good they have done on earth, not the fact that they disagreed with religion. Christians choose a cross, because that is a symbol of the Christian lives they've led, it is their religion. Atheism is not a religion. I doubt I know an atheist that feels so proud of their atheism that they would choose it on a memorial over some symbol of something else in their life.

It is like if someone put "American" on their gravestone so a Canadian wrote "not American" on their gravestone instead of "Canadian".Why would they bother stating they were not American when it has nothing to do with their lives, rather than write something that did have something to do with them?

 

[talulabelle]

So you're in favor of "freedom of religion" and 1st Amendment rights on PUBLIC LAND as long as it doesn't offend you. Geez, knock me over with a feather.

The discussion, for me, ends here as I now know everything I really needed to know.

Whatever, twist my words. I think you need to end the discussion because you have nothing else to say, not that you know everything you needed to know.