# Objecting to religious symbolism in public places. **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [August 17, 2003, 12:25am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/objecting-to-religious-symbolism-in-public-places/195676 "2003-08-17T00:25:56Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![Nobody](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/94ad74/32.png) [@Nobody](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Nobody)\ **Post date:** [August 17, 2003, 7:19am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/objecting-to-religious-symbolism-in-public-places/195676/21 "2003-08-17T07:19:00Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Lilairen \* > \*\*Very cute. > > It doesn’t tell me what you mean by it. > > Do you have a _useful_ answer to the question, or shall I fall back on my first understanding of how you mean the term, which was, “Recognised by the government”? \*\* I knew the game that you were going to play, and I didn’t feel like playing it. I would say that established meant A, B, and C, then you would go something like, “Well, what do you mean by B?”, and I’d go, “B means A, B, and C.”, and this would just repeat over and over again. Or, I would give an example, and you would find an absurd extreme and go, “You mean like this?” But since you told me what you think I meant, I’ll clarify. When one hears the word “established” it usually carries certain connotations with it. For example, to become established, a person or organization usually has to be around for a while. Also, being established usually means that a person or organization has become part of a community, or city, or state, or nation, or a bunch of communities, cities, states or nations. Also, being established usually means being recognized by your peers. For example, even though we have different beliefs, the Catholic church recognizes Islam, Judaism, and Hinduism as established, mainstream religions. And finally, I was talking about mainstream religions as opposed to cults. And no, don’t ask me what I mean by cult, everybody knows what a cult is, and like I said, I’m not in the mood for games of semantics. ---
**Author:** ![Nobody](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/94ad74/32.png) [@Nobody](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Nobody)\ **Post date:** [August 17, 2003, 7:28am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/objecting-to-religious-symbolism-in-public-places/195676/22 "2003-08-17T07:28:40Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by MEBuckner \* > **But I think that in the case of putting up Ten Commandments monuments in public courthouses, that’s a sufficiently blatant symptom of at best a total disregard for the equal rights and privileges of other citizens…** I’m interested in this part of your post. By a judge posting the a Ten Commandments monument, what rights or privilegs are taken away from the people? People still have the freedom of speach, religion, press, the right keep and bear arms, and so on, do they not? ---
**Author:** ![Lilairen](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/8491ac/32.png) [@Lilairen](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lilairen)\ **Post date:** [August 17, 2003, 7:30am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/objecting-to-religious-symbolism-in-public-places/195676/23 "2003-08-17T07:30:32Z")
I wasn’t interested in games of semantics either, but thank you for your presumption of bad faith. I was interested in knowing whether or not you had a definition of “established religion” that was capable of including mine. ---
**Author:** ![MEBuckner](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mebuckner/32/2896_2.png) [@MEBuckner](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MEBuckner)\ **Post date:** [August 17, 2003, 7:53am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/objecting-to-religious-symbolism-in-public-places/195676/24 "2003-08-17T07:53:23Z")
> [@](#): > > I’m interested in this part of your post. By a judge posting the a Ten Commandments monument, what rights or privilegs are taken away from the people? > People still have the freedom of speach, religion, press, the right keep and bear arms, and so on, do they not? Government endorsement of the Ten Commandments–and I don’t care who paid for the monument, putting them up in the middle of a courthouse constitutes government endorsement–is an encroachment on the right of individual citizens to decide for themselves what god or gods to worship, according to the dictates of their own consciences. The government has no right to tell the people that _this_ god is the LORD, before whom you should have no other gods. My point is, posting the Ten Commandments in courthouses is symbolic, yes, but I maintain it’s also symptomatic of a general disregard for the individual freedom of conscience of one’s fellow citizens (or even outright contempt for one’s fellow citizens, especially when it comes to atheists or members of small minority religions or what are perceived as “cults”). This disregard will likely manifest itself in more substantive ways, to the extent that the politician in question can get away with it. You seem to agree that Roy Moore is an “extremist”. Fortunately, Roy Moore isn’t in any position to enforce laws against Sabbath-breaking or blasphemy (or “sodomy”, thanks to the SCOTUS), even if that is ultimately his desire. Whenever the Ten Commandments are posted in these settings, it’s always with the claim that they are “the basis for our laws”. If that were really true, there would be no “free exercise of religion”. There is no provision for “free exercise of religion” in the Ten Commandments or in the larger law code from which they are taken. That law code’s penalty for Sabbath-breaking, for blasphemy, or for worshipping “false gods” is death. If the Commandments are regarded as the foundations of civil law (as opposed to a religious moral code, binding only on those who freely accept them, as putting them in a church or a private home may signify, in opposition to putting them in a civil courthouse or capitol), then they necessarily imply a theocracy with no religious liberty for unbelievers in the Biblical God. Allowing politicians to get away with this symbolic declaration of opposition to the basic principles of the Bill of Rights–that the Ten Commandments are or ought to be the foundation of our _civil_ law–allows them to at least try to undermine respect for the liberties of people with whose religious convictions (or lack thereof) evangelical Christians disagree. These symbolic declarations of opposition to the basic principles of the Bill of Rights also let us know which politicians we need to vote out of office. ---
**Author:** ![Nobody](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/94ad74/32.png) [@Nobody](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Nobody)\ **Post date:** [August 17, 2003, 8:17am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/objecting-to-religious-symbolism-in-public-places/195676/25 "2003-08-17T08:17:33Z")
MEBuckner, I think that I see your point. Actually, I’m not going to argue, I just want to see if I understand you, so please correct me if I’m wrong. You’re saying that if government official puts up a religious display, or allows private citizens to put up a display, then the whole government is involved, not just that one individual or individuals. Further more, acknowledgment of a religion = endorsement of a religion. Also, displaying a religious symbol on public property = forcing people to believe in that religion. Am I understanding you correctly? ---
**Author:** ![Nobody](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/94ad74/32.png) [@Nobody](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Nobody)\ **Post date:** [August 17, 2003, 8:19am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/objecting-to-religious-symbolism-in-public-places/195676/26 "2003-08-17T08:19:27Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Lilairen \* > \*\*I wasn’t interested in games of semantics either, but thank you for your presumption of bad faith. > > I was interested in knowing whether or not you had a definition of “established religion” that was capable of including mine. \*\* I’m sorry that I jumped the gun. In a GD thread a long time ago, somebody tried playing semantics games with me, and it looked to me that you were going to go that rout too. I guess I was wrong, my apologies. ---
**Author:** ![MEBuckner](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mebuckner/32/2896_2.png) [@MEBuckner](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MEBuckner)\ **Post date:** [August 17, 2003, 9:44am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/objecting-to-religious-symbolism-in-public-places/195676/27 "2003-08-17T09:44:57Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Joel \* > You’re saying that if government official puts up a religious display, or allows private citizens to put up a display, then the whole government is involved, not just that one individual or individuals. Obviously we’re talking about a display on government property, and not on private property (including private property which is “public” in the sense of “open to the general public” or “exposed to public view”), nor in a “free speech forum” (like a publically-owned park where anyone is permitted to put up a temporary banner, with access governed by fair and impartial rules). Yes, under those circumstances, displaying religious symbols on public property involves the state. It is no longer a question of an individual exercising his or her right to free exercise of religion. > [@](#): > > Further more, acknowledgment of a religion = endorsement of a religion. Pretty much. What is “acknowledgment”? The Central Intelligence Agency’s [_World Factbook_](http://www.cia.gov/cia/publications/factbook/geos/us.html#People) notes that 56% of the American people are (or identify as) Protestant, 28% are Roman Catholic, 2% are Jewish, 4% are adherents of other religions, and 10% do not claim to have any religion\*. _That_ is a government “acknowledgment” of the religious views of the people. What other “acknowledgement” is needed? Of course, the government exists to protect the lawful and peaceful expression and practice of the religious or non-religious views of the people; that’s a fundamental part of what governments are for–establishing justice, insuring domestic tranquility, and securing the liberty to the people. \*Those figures may or may not be accurate, and at any rate the _World Factbook_ does not even claim that it’s numbers are any more up to date than 1989. > [@](#): > > Also, displaying a religious symbol on public property = forcing people to believe in that religion. I would say rather that it shows a dangerous contempt for the rights and conscience of people who don’t believe in that religion. Also, to the extent that public funds are involved–and even if private funds are provided to “donate” the religious symbol, once it’s in the courthouse, its upkeep will likely be borne by the taxpayers–public displays of religion may force non-believers in that religion to pay for that religion, whether they believe in it or not. ---
**Author:** ![Dogface](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/9d8465/32.png) [@Dogface](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Dogface)\ **Post date:** [August 19, 2003, 2:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/objecting-to-religious-symbolism-in-public-places/195676/28 "2003-08-19T14:19:38Z")
Of course, we must remember that, according to US courts, the Menorah, the Magen David, and a Crescent are not “religious symbols” at all, nosirreebob! The all-knowing Courts have said so. They are “cultural symbols” and thus can be displayed with impunity on government property. ---
**Author:** ![Apos](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/838e76/32.png) [@Apos](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Apos)\ **Post date:** [August 19, 2003, 2:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/objecting-to-religious-symbolism-in-public-places/195676/29 "2003-08-19T14:32:48Z")
Think of the public civil sphere is like a national park: you only bring in what you can take out, to leave the area ready for other people. It’s there for everyone to to enjoy, but no one to dominate, especially when they are not even present. ---
**Author:** ![catsix](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/e19b73/32.png) [@catsix](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/catsix)\ **Post date:** [August 19, 2003, 3:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/objecting-to-religious-symbolism-in-public-places/195676/30 "2003-08-19T15:19:41Z")
It’s extremely hard to be a witch who lacks belief in gods where I live, because the people around me have expressed some pretty extreme intolerance of the fact that I do not share their mostly-Protestant religious beliefs. I’ve been accused of everything from drinking goat blood to condoning or participating in the sacrifice of babies, told that sick freaks like myself don’t belong in America, that this is a ‘god fearing’ country and I don’t deserve to be a citizen of it, threatened and harassed, sent to guidance counselors throughout high school because I did not want to sing _Silent Night_ with the rest of my class and because I celebrated the Solstice instead of Christmas. The display on public property of religious symbols bothers me because it has, in my own life, come part and parcel with authority figures trying to ‘fix’ what was wrong with me, and the sneering and taunts that came from the town’s council members when they were on ‘their own time’. I don’t for a minute think that a district magistrate who puts up a nativity scene and calls witches unworthy of being Americans, or animal slaughterers would give me a fair shake if I were in his court room for any reason. He certainly didn’t think I deserved any protection from harassment, in fact remarked to me while he was ‘off the job’ that if I’d just learn to behave like the rest of the town, I wouldn’t be treated badly. I’d fear that same attitude if I walked into Moore’s court and saw the ten commandments on the wall. ---
**Author:** ![Mehitabel](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/8797f3/32.png) [@Mehitabel](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mehitabel)\ **Post date:** [August 19, 2003, 4:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/objecting-to-religious-symbolism-in-public-places/195676/31 "2003-08-19T16:31:17Z")
Hmmm…the main public library of Cambridge, Mass, hardly a backwater and decidedly secular and tolerant, has a beautiful Richardson-designed building near Harvard Square with murals in what used to be the main reading room. One of the murals features the Ten Commandments, mixed in with other venerable works of literature and science like The Principia, etc. It (the mural) was finished in 1889. AFAIK, nobody has objected to it, and there they are, right on the wall, in a prominent place for innocent children to see! It hasn’t stopped the library from offering programs for anybody and everybody and believe me, there is nothing Judeo-Christian about their return policies. 😉 But the point is, the Commandments are important and everyone should know what they are just as they should know what Confucianism is and the Five Pillars of Islam and the Roman gods. When does it stop being about belief and become about cultural literacy (to coin a phrase)? And FWIW, I also think Moore goes too far but I still agree with the OP. And **Catsix** , the kind of junk you’ve gone through is inexcusable. One of my college friends married a male Wiccan and it was one of the most moving ceremonies I’ve ever been to. And my best friend is a Unitarian. Half the discussions we’ve had dealt with me overturning their assumptions about Christians and Catholics as well as their informing me! ---
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [August 19, 2003, 4:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/objecting-to-religious-symbolism-in-public-places/195676/32 "2003-08-19T16:46:07Z")
**Joel** , Your distinction between “established” and “unestablished” religions (whatever that may mean) may make sense to you, personally, but the the government is forbidden from making any distinctions at all as to what constitutes a legitimate religious view and what doesn’t. The government is simply not allowed to endorse one view over another for any reason. ---
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [August 19, 2003, 4:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/objecting-to-religious-symbolism-in-public-places/195676/33 "2003-08-19T16:58:24Z")
> [@](#): > > But the point is, the Commandments are important and everyone should know what they are just as they should know what Confucianism is and the Five Pillars of Islam and the Roman gods. When does it stop being about belief and become about cultural literacy (to coin a phrase)? 1.) Why are the commandments important to anyone who doesn’t believe in that particular God? 2.) The judge in the commandments case has made it clear that this is purely a religious statement for him and not an attempt to enforce any “cultural literacy.” As a matter of fact he has refused to install any other religious or historical artifacts around his commandments monument despite repeated requests. His reason for these refusals is that he doesn’t want to distract from the “importance of God” in his courthouse. ---
**Author:** ![Mehitabel](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/8797f3/32.png) [@Mehitabel](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mehitabel)\ **Post date:** [August 19, 2003, 5:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/objecting-to-religious-symbolism-in-public-places/195676/34 "2003-08-19T17:13:29Z")
Point one is that they are, in many respects, the moral foundations of the society they live in. No, they’re not the only ones, and aspects of them have of course cropped up unrelated in societies for eons, but they’re extensively referenced, quoted directly and indirectly, etc. in thousands of ways in the culture. I’m not saying it should be mandatory to memorize them but any well-rounded person should know that there’s ten of them, that they were given to the Jews by Moses, and that they prohibit killing (or murder), stealing, and adultery. Belief doesn’t really come into it. For example, I know full well that the sun doesn’t revolve around the Earth, but I should also know that Aristotle, etc., thought that it did before I can understand why Galileo and Copernicus were so revolutionary. Point two I already agree with you on. And there’s already a couple of Moore threads. Good summation, though, thanks. ---
**Author:** ![Apos](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/838e76/32.png) [@Apos](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Apos)\ **Post date:** [August 19, 2003, 6:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/objecting-to-religious-symbolism-in-public-places/195676/35 "2003-08-19T18:33:00Z")
> [@](#): > > But the point is, the Commandments are important and everyone should know what they are I’m not sure the commandments even have the sort of historical significance people claim they do. They certainly are not given the same sort of special precedence in the Bible that is claimed. Nor are they even all that central _culturally_, to Judiasm or Christianity. If you wanted cultural symbols, there are far more representative ones. The difference with the Commandments is that they are more than represenative of a culture: they are forceful statements of a particular religious belief system. It’s hardly the same thing as a symbol or cultural artifacts. > [@](#): > > I’m not saying it should be mandatory to memorize them but any well-rounded person should know that there’s ten of them, that they were given to the Jews by Moses, and that they prohibit killing (or murder), stealing, and adultery. There is no “ten” of them really. The only place “the ten commandments” are reffered to in the Bible is a DIFFERENT set of ten commandments, a set which few people have ever heard of, but that the text, at least, treats as being just as important. “All that openeth the matrix are mine” isn’t exactly well known. And again, I think their historical significance is extremely overplayed, and more a modern invention than a balanced historical perspective. ---
**Author:** ![Spoke](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/a88e57/32.png) [@Spoke](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Spoke)\ **Post date:** [August 19, 2003, 8:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/objecting-to-religious-symbolism-in-public-places/195676/36 "2003-08-19T20:04:53Z")
Hell, I just wish the nutty judge would pay some heed to his own _state_ Constitution: > [@](#): > > SECTION 3 > > Religious freedom. > That no religion shall be established by law; that no preference shall be given by law to any religious sect, society, denomination, or mode of worship; that no one shall be compelled by law to attend any place of worship; nor to pay any tithes, taxes, or other rate for building or repairing any place of worship, or for maintaining any minister or ministry; that no religious test shall be required as a qualification to any office or public trust under this state; and that the civil rights, privileges, and capacities of any citizen shall not be in any manner affected by his religious principles. [Constitution of Alabama, 1901](http://www.legislature.state.al.us/CodeOfAlabama/Constitution/1901/Constitution1901_toc.htm), [Section 3](http://www.legislature.state.al.us/CodeOfAlabama/Constitution/1901/CA-245534.htm). ---
**Author:** ![Dogface](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/9d8465/32.png) [@Dogface](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Dogface)\ **Post date:** [August 19, 2003, 8:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/objecting-to-religious-symbolism-in-public-places/195676/37 "2003-08-19T20:47:08Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Apos \* > \*\*Think of the public civil sphere is like a national park: you only bring in what you can take out, to leave the area ready for other people. It’s there for everyone to to enjoy, but no one to dominate, especially when they are not even present. \*\* Sounds good to me. Too bad the courts have interpreted matters in such a way that only Christian symbols get the boot. ---
**Author:** ![wonky](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/wonky/32/393_2.png) [@wonky](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/wonky)\ **Post date:** [August 20, 2003, 2:16am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/objecting-to-religious-symbolism-in-public-places/195676/38 "2003-08-20T02:16:49Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by catsix \* > \*\*I’ve been accused of everything from > > 1. drinking goat blood to > > 2. condoning or participating in the sacrifice of babies, > > 3. told that sick freaks like myself don’t belong in America, that this is a ‘god fearing’ country and I don’t deserve to be a citizen of it, > > 4. threatened and harassed > \*\* (Numbering mine.) What’s funny (funny strange, not funny haha) is that I’ve been accused of all of the above, too–for being Catholic. I don’t have a point other than that it shows how mutable the idea of an “established” religion can be. Julie ---
**Author:** ![Nobody](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/94ad74/32.png) [@Nobody](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Nobody)\ **Post date:** [August 20, 2003, 4:38am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/objecting-to-religious-symbolism-in-public-places/195676/39 "2003-08-20T04:38:21Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Diogenes the Cynic \* > \*\ ***Joel** , > Your distinction between “established” and “unestablished” religions (whatever that may mean) may make sense to you, personally, but the the government is forbidden from making any distinctions at all as to what constitutes a legitimate religious view and what doesn’t. The government is simply not allowed to endorse one view over another for any reason. \*\* Well, if the government is forbidden from making any distinctions at all as to what constitues a legitamate religion, then if tommorow I went to the IRS and told them I that I just started my own reglion and wanted a tax exempt status, what do you think would happen? See, that’s what I mean by established. Mainstream Christian, Jewish, Islamic, and Hindu sects/denominations are examples of established religions. ---
**Author:** ![Nobody](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/94ad74/32.png) [@Nobody](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Nobody)\ **Post date:** [August 20, 2003, 5:00am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/objecting-to-religious-symbolism-in-public-places/195676/40 "2003-08-20T05:00:41Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by MEBuckner \* > **Obviously we’re talking about a display on government property, and not on private property (including private property which is “public” in the sense of “open to the general public” or “exposed to public view”), nor in a “free speech forum” (like a publically-owned park where anyone is permitted to put up a temporary banner, with access governed by fair and impartial rules).** So what if anybody was able to put up a temporary banner at someplace like city hall, or a courthouse, or state capitol, what would be your opinion on that? > [@](#): > > **Yes, under those circumstances, displaying religious symbols on public property involves the state. It is no longer a question of an individual exercising his or her right to free exercise of religion.** Hmmm, I was thinking that a government official putting up a religious display could be thought of in the same was as a radio talk show host with the disclaimer “The views expressed are not necessarily those of this radio station, it’s staff or management…” > [@](#): > > \*_Pretty much. What is “acknowledgment”? The Central Intelligence Agency’s [World Factbook](http://www.cia.gov/cia/publications/factbook/geos/us.html#People) notes that 56% of the American people are (or identify as) Protestant, 28% are Roman Catholic, 2% are Jewish, 4% are adherents of other religions, and 10% do not claim to have any religion_. _That_ is a government “acknowledgment” of the religious views of the people. What other “acknowledgement” is needed? Of course, the government exists to protect the lawful and peaceful expression and practice of the religious or non-religious views of the people; that’s a fundamental part of what governments are for–establishing justice, insuring domestic tranquility, and securing the liberty to the people. > > _Those figures may or may not be accurate, and at any rate the World Factbook does not even claim that it’s numbers are any more up to date than 1989._\* I’ll have to get back to you on this one. > [@](#): > > \*\*I would say rather that it shows a dangerous contempt for the rights and conscience of people who don’t believe in that religion. Also, to the extent that public funds are involved–and even if private funds are provided to “donate” the religious symbol, once it’s in the courthouse, its upkeep will likely be borne by the taxpayers–public displays of religion may force non-believers in that religion to pay for that religion, whether they believe in it or not. \*\* Dangerous contempt? I disagree with that, but, the point about tax dollars paying for upkeep, that’s something that’s never crossed my mind. You’ve given me something to think about. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/objecting-to-religious-symbolism-in-public-places/195676.md?page=1) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/objecting-to-religious-symbolism-in-public-places/195676.md?page=3)