I take off my dusty old fedora to Brown Eyed Girl for supplying solid information to this thread. Sometimes pure information tips the balance in a debate.
Wow, thanks. All I did was Google-fu, really, but I appreciate that. There was a lot of good info and debate by a lot of other people, too. 
[QUOTE=jtgain]
But that’s not what you said. You said that:
“The cross points out a particular deity, thus establishing Christianity as the one approved religion of Florida”
So if we are going to be consistent, then you would say that the Support Teachers plate establishes teaching as the one approved profession of Florida, right?
I’m not asking if it would be constitutional or not.
[/QUOTE]
If you admit that you aren’t addressing the relevant question, why bother to bring it up at all?
[QUOTE=jtgain]
But that’s not what you said. You said that:
“The cross points out a particular deity, thus establishing Christianity as the one approved religion of Florida”
So if we are going to be consistent, then you would say that the Support Teachers plate establishes teaching as the one approved profession of Florida, right?
I’m not asking if it would be constitutional or not. I’m asking if an optional license plate about teaching, wildlife, NASCAR, or Christianity, or whatever else makes such a broad statement regarding the state of Florida’s endorsement of it, to the exclusion of all similar things.
Since you can get a Florida State plate, does that mean that it is the only “approved” university in Florida? But you can also get a Florida Gators plate, so is that the only one approved school?
We have a paradox under your interpretation of what this Christian license plate means..
[/QUOTE]
But this is where you strawman falls apart. If you can get a plate for EVERY state school then they are not endorsing one school over the others. If you can get a NASCAR plate OR an NFL plate OR an MLB plate then they are not endorsing any particular sport. But that is not the case in FLA. They are proposing a plate that singles out ONE religion over the others. In the story, one of the chief concerns with it is that it might allow other religions to have a plate and they DON’T want that. The purpose is implicitly stated by both sides that this is intended to support the Christian belief and being done by a government agency with the intention to exclud others is a tacit support of that one belief system and is therefore unconstitutional.
If they were propsing a set of plates that represented the various religious belif systems and people could choose the one that represented themselves then there would not be the outcry that there is with this. The problem here is that they are intentionally singling out one religion for government support.
I don’t understand why the state can allow private entities to advertise on license plates.take MA; you can (by payoing extra) have a REDSOX logo on your plate, or a Fireman’s Memorial Logo. Why should the state be in the business of advertising?
The REDSOX is a privately owned organization; it is NOT the state’s business to subsidize them, in any way.
[QUOTE=ralph124c]
I don’t understand why the state can allow private entities to advertise on license plates.take MA; you can (by payoing extra) have a REDSOX logo on your plate, or a Fireman’s Memorial Logo. Why should the state be in the business of advertising?
The REDSOX is a privately owned organization; it is NOT the state’s business to subsidize them, in any way.
[/QUOTE]
They can because there is no rule prohibiting it. Your lawmakers probably think this voluntary tax is a great idea. Only those who choose to pay it are obliged to. If you didn’t buy a RedSox plate, those Sox fans are carrying part of your tax load.
After seeing many publically financed stadiums sell naming rights to businesses, I semi-seriously predict that we’ll see a DuPont courthouse someplace, or a Sony bridge, each with huge brightly lit signs. :rolleyes: It’s tacky, of course, but less painful than taxing the voters. If your state has a lottery (another voluntary tax,) you can thank those ticket buyers for paying part of your tax bill.
It stalled in the legislature.
http://www.cnn.com/2008/US/04/30/license.plate.ap/index.html
Thank God.
[QUOTE=CNN]
The South Carolina legislature is also considering the same license plate, however, and it won key approval in the state Senate there Tuesday.
[/QUOTE]
Make it stop! That’s my new home! :smack: :mad: 
[QUOTE=mswas]
How about ‘Florida, closer to Heaven.’?
[/QUOTE]
Isn’t that a bit presumptious for a state where the highest point is only 345 ft above sea level?
[QUOTE=Alessan]
I don’t get you Americans. Why should a license plate have *anything * on it except for the vehicle’s license number?
[/QUOTE]
If you would have read the whole article you might have noticed that the plates are ways for special interest groups to get money.
[QUOTE=ManiacMan]
If you would have read the whole article you might have noticed that the plates are ways for special interest groups to get money.
[/QUOTE]
Finally, a voice for the special interest groups! Hallelujah!
[QUOTE=Anaamika]
Are there no non-Christians in Florida?
[/QUOTE]
I think all the Jewish retirees from New York should protest by driving slowly with their turn signals on.
[QUOTE=Voyager]
I think all the Jewish retirees from New York should protest by driving slowly with their turn signals on.
[/QUOTE]
I’ve seen that four times already this week! My friends, it must be a movement!
[geezer]If we could have movements, we wouldn’t be so gol-darn onery![/geezer]
[QUOTE=Coil]
[QUOTE=mswas]
How about ‘Florida, closer to Heaven.’?
[/QUOTE]
Isn’t that a bit presumptious for a state where the highest point is only 345 ft above sea level?
[/QUOTE]
..
[QUOTE=Sir Humphrey Gilbert]
We are as near to heaven by sea as by land!
[/QUOTE]