opinion of this years "a cross? Not in my park/cemetery/median!" issue

[dead0man]

link-local

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[FEMA Camp Administrator]

Definitely 2, maybe 1.

[7,052,770]

Grandfather some of the most historically significant in, but don't erect any new ones with public funds.

[MarkD]

It doesn't violate the separation of church and state because it does not establish an official religion and it does not give governmental power to any churches.

[RI]

We aren't a Christian nation (unfortunately), but the cross as a memorial of the dead has a well-established secular meaning and should not be taken down.

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

Goes to show why I consider the American Humanist Association to be a hate group. It's one thing to promote acceptance of irreligiosity, but quite another to be monomaniacally anti-religious to the point of being more intolerant than those they oppose.

[James Monroe]

Goes to show why I consider the American Humanist Association to be a hate group. It's one thing to promote acceptance of irreligiosity, but quite another to be monomaniacally anti-religious to the point of being more intolerant than those they oppose.

Promoting the separation of church and state is consider a hate crime? The organization shouldn't just bow down and let Christianity take over our public properties.

[Okay, maybe Mike Johnson is a competent parliamentarian.]

WI: It's fine, if it's a hundred-year-old war memorial then it has historical and artistic value of its own at this point and it would be philistine to remove it. Voted for the second option.

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

Goes to show why I consider the American Humanist Association to be a hate group. It's one thing to promote acceptance of irreligiosity, but quite another to be monomaniacally anti-religious to the point of being more intolerant than those they oppose.

Promoting the separation of church and state is consider a hate crime? The organization shouldn't just bow down and let Christianity take over our public properties.

They aren't merely promoting the separation of church and state but the eradication of religion from the public sphere.

[James Monroe]

Goes to show why I consider the American Humanist Association to be a hate group. It's one thing to promote acceptance of irreligiosity, but quite another to be monomaniacally anti-religious to the point of being more intolerant than those they oppose.

Promoting the separation of church and state is consider a hate crime? The organization shouldn't just bow down and let Christianity take over our public properties.

They aren't merely promoting the separation of church and state but the eradication of religion from the public sphere.

They are trying to promote a vision of secularism that benefits all people whatever the belief system they hold. Removing a cross from public sphere isn't trying to outlawed religious symbols but following the law of the land, which is state and religion shouldn't intersect.

Think of other instants to support your hypothetic "AHA are a hate group?"

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

The AHA routinely files lawsuits when religion-based programs are included among the options people can choose from for various publicly funded or organized programs or services.

As I said, they show by their actions that want not merely to give atheism a place in the public sphere, they want religion barred from the public sphere.

[Karpatsky]

The AHA routinely files lawsuits when religion-based programs are included among the options people can choose from for various publicly funded or organized programs or services.

As I said, they show by their actions that want not merely to give atheism a place in the public sphere, they want religion barred from the public sphere.

Religion should be barred from the public sphere. There is no reason public funds should be used to fund religious programs.

[FEMA Camp Administrator]

The AHA routinely files lawsuits when religion-based programs are included among the options people can choose from for various publicly funded or organized programs or services.

As I said, they show by their actions that want not merely to give atheism a place in the public sphere, they want religion barred from the public sphere.

Religion should be barred from the public sphere. There is no reason public funds should be used to fund religious programs.

You may have different definitions of the public sphere, but that’s me being optimistic.

[🦀🎂🦀🎂]

Laicite is not a great route to rush down.

[Sestak]

Somewhere between 2 and 3.

For instance, I am fine with marking graves on publicly owned cemeteries with crosses, so long as the person whose grave it is would have wanted that.


And I agree with Crabcake, full on laïcité is not something we want or that is even compatible with constitutional free exercise rights.

[Former President tack50]

Even as a laicite fan, 2.

I could make an argument that further such memorials should not receive any public money

[100% pro-life no matter what]

America is in serious need of a Christian revival.  It should obviously stay and religion should have significantly more influence over society.

[PSOL]

One should always buffer oneself by aiming high.