A religious
symbol in a public place does not offend me.
And there is nothing about the presence of such
a symbol in a public place that makes it more intimidating.
All the more misplaced... are the efforts by some supposedly Jewish organizations to arouse, through their battles against Christmas
symbols in public places, the ill will and resentment of Christians» at the very time when the Christian religion, more than at other times of the year, inspires its followers with irenic and philanthropic sentiments.»
Not exact matches
The reason I'm against putting it
in the museum is because it is a Judeo - Christian
symbol and has no
place in a memorial paid for by
public funds.
A national group called American Atheists is suing the museum to stop the display of the cross, arguing that a religious
symbol has no
place in a memorial that's backed by
public funds and that is supposed to serve as a monument to victims of many different religions - and to those who had no religion at all.
Essentially, part of the point of the campaign is to let «secularists» know that (
in AiG's opinion) when creationism is removed from the classroom or «Christian
symbols from
public places,» the First Amendment is being violated.
MarkinFL said: «I have yet to see another religion besides Christianity try so hard to get its
symbols put
in public places.
If anything other religious
symbols should be introduced
in public places thus haveng a mixture of
symbols for every citizen and promoting collaboration between religions / beliefs.
Christian arguments for the cross to be displayed 24/7
in a
public classroom as a constant reminder every second of the day that Jesus was murdered by Jews and died for our sins won't hold up to Christian review if all other religious
symbols were
placed right next to it.
If Muslims can wear their scarfs
in public places, if I am living
in MY country, I HAVE THE RIGHT to see a
SYMBOL who I believe
in,
in public places.
No religious
symbols have
place in a
public school classrooms.
With the recent Supreme Court ruling
in the case of Allegheny County v. ACLU, I believe a new and exciting chapter
in the church - state debate may be evolving around Jewish attempts
in Pittsburgh and other
places to legitimate the display of Jewish religious
symbols in the
public square.
Implicit
in the doctrine of church - state separation that the Supreme Court enforced
in this case is the assumption that religious
symbols such as the yarmulke, while appropriate for private religious devotion
in home or synagogue, have no legitimate
place in any
public institution.