(In) God We … Dispise?
November 19th, 2007 Posted in Sanity Check
SANITY CHECK - Since when is anti-god not a religion of it’s own? Take a look at webster’s dictionary at the definition of religion and you will see something like, “a personal set or institutionalized system of religious attitudes, beliefs, and practices” I am not one to put a lot of faith in a definition (pun intended), but being anti-religion is a religion! Working from that standpoint, when the American Atheists, Inc. bring a lawsuit against the State of Utah for allowing memorials of fallen State Troopers in the form of crosses on public land, it is no more than one religion trying to force their beliefs upon another.
Newsweek.com, and many others, are reporting on the story.
On a highway in southern Utah, midway between Tropic and Cedar City, a mammoth cross marks the place where, 29 years ago this month, state trooper Lynn Pierson was killed by a car thief. Pierson’s son Clint, a 36-year-old county deputy, sees the stark white memorial every time he takes his kids to the local Wal-Mart. “It’s a huge source of pride,” he says. “As a family, it helped us heal.”
The controversy started in December 2005, when American Atheists Inc. filed suit to have the markers removed, arguing that the cross is a universal symbol of Christianity and, when placed on public property, illegal. The lawsuit sparked outrage from the families of fallen officers, other police officers and legislators . Even some atheists went out of their way to dissociate themselves from the Texas-based group.
But that source of pride and healing is now being torn from them. It is not about kindness or concern. It is not about the the government endorsing any particular religion, but it is about someone being offended. Someone no liking what others are doing. The problem stems from those against a memorial (which is in the shape of a cross) don’t care about offending. They don’t care about pushing their own dogma upon others. They don’t care about how much pain they would cause. They don’t care about taking your freedom of religion, freedom of expression, and locking it behind the the intentional wresting of the constitution. In fact, that which they are fighting will be the means by which they succeed. They expect the government to remove one religion and replace it with another. This is, in truth, a perfect example of what the First Amendment created to protect against.
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.
Ahhh. But congress isn’t the group making the change. It is the court system. Another misuse of the courts. “But those crosses should no be on private land!” So I should not allow anything that may have any vague or direct relationship to any religious affiliation to be on public land? Some worship trees, rocks, cats, crosses, the moon, whatever. This is not about a cross. This is about a group of people demanding their voice be more important that the millions that want to just be left alone. This is about Lynn Pierson and his family.
When will this stop? It will not be at a cross. Will I be able to have a cross on my church? It is publicly seen? Will I be told to remove the Angel or star from my Christmas tree because someone will be offended? There are already people being told in apartment buildings they can’t have any religious symbols on trees or other decorations in the hallway of their apartment complex. Will they also make me take mine out of the window because you can see it in the hallway? We will, sooner than later, have to take off In God We Trust from our currency. That’s public property. They just haven’t had the guts to bring a lawsuit against the government yet because they want more precedence, precedence like a cross by the highway.