glintofpewter Posted January 27, 2012 Author Share Posted January 27, 2012 They tried this experiment once at the Washington state capital where they tried to allow all religious symbols at the capital just so they could keep the nativity scene up. I didn't follow this story the next year so I didn't know about Fred Phelps and his Santa Crusade. Longtime ago church asked my mom to help with the Christmas Pageant she said she would on one condition: no Santa. Washington state - when I read it 3? years ago I was hopeful that with a few obvious and not contrived rules these displays would continue. It is so obvious that Fred fails the color blind test and the "if you can't say something nice then don't say anything at all" test that - well - how can people with guts and smarts not keep something like this up. Subversive pluralism is part of my motivation. The atheists reveal our sense of Christian privilege in these actions. And outrage ensues. What governments should do, rather than clearing the public square is assert our rights and allow those who are able and willing to follow a few rules to participate. There will be issues about location (next to the queen) and size (no it doesn't really matter) but everyone could express themselves. And it could be beautiful. Pluralism in public display OMG! If we could live through this perilous time we could get to know each better. We would learn that one's privilege is isolating and prevents a view of a larger world. That maybe it is not important - or maybe it is - by a choice instead of a presumption - to have a nativity on the court house lawn. That there are many ways to shine a light in the darkest time of the year. And more people rather than being dead Christians could be good without god(s). Dutch Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GeorgeW Posted January 27, 2012 Share Posted January 27, 2012 Dutch, I think you are suggesting that public space be handled similar to this forum - everyone's views are welcomed, but they cannot denigrate or dominate. I think this is a positive proposal. George Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Neon Genesis Posted January 27, 2012 Share Posted January 27, 2012 The problem with the all-inclusive approach is that what counts as "nice" is subjective opinion and changes from person to person. Christians might find a Muslim display to be offensive to them, Muslims might find a display that promotes the Trinity to be offensive to them, Jews might find the nativity scene to be offensive to them, atheists might find them all to be equally offensive and all the religions might find the atheists' display to be offensive. Case in point, while Washington had grudgingly accepted the atheists' Solstice display, the state of Michigan refused to allow the atheists to put up their Solstice display on their government property because they found it to be offensive to them, even though they had promised to allow all religious displays on their property and even though it was the exact same display that the Freedom From Religion Foundation had up on the Washington state capital. It is simply more pragmatic that if religious believers want to wish everyone a Happy Holidays and put up their own explicitly religious displays for the holidays, they should do it on their own time on their own property instead of wasting everyone else's time and money on these meaningless court battles they keep repeating year after year. You should be at the state capital to do work for the state, not to promote a religious agenda. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JenellYB Posted January 27, 2012 Share Posted January 27, 2012 We all know full well that the demands of the Christian right for the "freedom of religion" to have public displays of religon and such things as public prayer in school classrooms has nothing at all to do with freedom of religion and freedom to express religion in the public sphere.....clearly and plainly it is only their own religion they demand the "right" for, and no other, even to the formal exclusion of any other. Jenell Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
minsocal Posted January 28, 2012 Share Posted January 28, 2012 These days, I spend more time reading the articles presented by the hosts of this board and have become more comfortable in my own skin. Wish you all well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JenellYB Posted January 29, 2012 Share Posted January 29, 2012 These days, I spend more time reading the articles presented by the hosts of this board and have become more comfortable in my own skin. Wish you all well. I read Sacrficial Lambs...really liked that one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.