I was in secularchat discussing symbols and separation of church and state in america...and about how religious symbols should be kept out but not anything secular....
And I wonder....which religions would this include...and presumably it wouldn't include symbols of Zeus, mythology? What about pastafarianism?
I assume Atheist 'Scarlet A' symbols (like my avatar here) would be allowed cos they're secular....
And where do you draw the line here and what actual harm does it do and what motives....
And I was thinking:
In what context would a Cross or other religious symbol be an unacceptable symbol but graffiti would be perfectly acceptable? In which a cross is harmful somehow...(??) But graffiti or a secular symbol or a scarlet 'A' (for example) isn't?
And isn't suppressing people''s expression of their beliefs a good way to piss them off more??
Sure you don't want religious symbols throughout the government and on the money....but I don't think you'd necessarily want graffiti or atheist symbols there either (well, the public...I'd want atheist symbols lol).
Of course, objectively speaking people have no reason to be offended by symbols. For there are no evil symbols there are only symbols of evil.
For example: The Swastika is (now) a symbol of evil. It itself isn't evil - it's objectively just a symbol. And it's a symbol of evil now -but it didn't use to be. Before Hitler corrupted it it was a positive symbol, of peace I think -for more than one culture too, hundreds (and more) years before I think. I believe it was Indian, Hindu I think - and originally I I read it may have even been Ancient Egyptian or something?
So in what context would a religious symbol be unacceptable but a symbol that's secular would be perfectly acceptable? In which a religious symbol would be harmful and a secular one would be harmless?
Any thoughts? I myself think that either both the religious and atheistic sides can express their views or neither can (that's the fair way)...
And I don't think expressing atheism should be supressed! ANd I think the freedom of speech is very important! People should be able to express their beliefs and their views.
And besides...on a final note: There's nothing wrong with Satantic images so what's wrong with Crosses?
And I think it perhaps annoys me a bit the idea of removing symbols if there's no actual reason to - it seems like those who believe that having no religion should equate to burning all the bibles, iow - small minded.
EvF
And I wonder....which religions would this include...and presumably it wouldn't include symbols of Zeus, mythology? What about pastafarianism?
I assume Atheist 'Scarlet A' symbols (like my avatar here) would be allowed cos they're secular....
And where do you draw the line here and what actual harm does it do and what motives....
And I was thinking:
In what context would a Cross or other religious symbol be an unacceptable symbol but graffiti would be perfectly acceptable? In which a cross is harmful somehow...(??) But graffiti or a secular symbol or a scarlet 'A' (for example) isn't?
And isn't suppressing people''s expression of their beliefs a good way to piss them off more??
Sure you don't want religious symbols throughout the government and on the money....but I don't think you'd necessarily want graffiti or atheist symbols there either (well, the public...I'd want atheist symbols lol).
Of course, objectively speaking people have no reason to be offended by symbols. For there are no evil symbols there are only symbols of evil.
For example: The Swastika is (now) a symbol of evil. It itself isn't evil - it's objectively just a symbol. And it's a symbol of evil now -but it didn't use to be. Before Hitler corrupted it it was a positive symbol, of peace I think -for more than one culture too, hundreds (and more) years before I think. I believe it was Indian, Hindu I think - and originally I I read it may have even been Ancient Egyptian or something?
So in what context would a religious symbol be unacceptable but a symbol that's secular would be perfectly acceptable? In which a religious symbol would be harmful and a secular one would be harmless?
Any thoughts? I myself think that either both the religious and atheistic sides can express their views or neither can (that's the fair way)...
And I don't think expressing atheism should be supressed! ANd I think the freedom of speech is very important! People should be able to express their beliefs and their views.
And besides...on a final note: There's nothing wrong with Satantic images so what's wrong with Crosses?
And I think it perhaps annoys me a bit the idea of removing symbols if there's no actual reason to - it seems like those who believe that having no religion should equate to burning all the bibles, iow - small minded.
EvF
