Reader comments: Fringe sect's lawsuit delays monument to fallen WWII soldiers
4 comments | Read story
Ken Goddard | 7:07 p.m. May 7, 2008
This country is burdened by way to much religious freedom. Time to separate religion from the tax and corporate codes and require distribution of the funds collected to helping society's less fortunate. Isn't that what religion is supposed to be all about anyway.
Reasonable Realist | 8:49 p.m. May 7, 2008
This whole issue, plus the Summum sham driving it, is really about being reasonable. The 10 commandments display is in PG because the vast majority of its citizenry subscribe to that particular set of ideas. This is reasonable. But to have the Summum monument displayed there is like having the Vatican display an Angel Moroni statue--it is not reasonable. So, I would appeal to people of good conscience everywhere to reject cheap stunts (like that of the Summums) that have unfortunate unintended consequences, and just be reasonable. I think our country was reasonable for its first 180 years of existence, but since then, things have really gotten silly. Too many lawyers, says I...
Definately | 11:25 a.m. May 8, 2008
Clearly, the majority should rule in all religious affairs. That's what caused all the mormon problems in Missouri and Illinois back in Joseph Smith's day, after all -- the mormons wouldn't acquiesce to the will of the majority.
Or, the city could just let the Summums erect their stupid monument, and avoid all the kerfuffle. When you deny religious freedom to other people, why can't they deny it to you? How can you grow up in the USA and not understand that? What do they teach in Utah classrooms?
Or, the city could just let the Summums erect their stupid monument, and avoid all the kerfuffle. When you deny religious freedom to other people, why can't they deny it to you? How can you grow up in the USA and not understand that? What do they teach in Utah classrooms?
Comments continue below
Dr. Cletus | 8:12 p.m. May 13, 2008
I wish they would have described the proposed military monument. I'm curious what the hold-up is.
As an atheist, I think too much time and money are wasted on lawsuits to remove religious symbols, especially long-standing ones, from the public square. The U.S. Supreme Court building is, for example, rife with them. (The corollary is I think religious groups spend far too much time trying to get their monuments on public land, when private land is just as available, because they believe it's some form of endorsement.) Nevertheless, it seems kind of churlish to oppose a religious monument on sectarian grounds.
As an atheist, I think too much time and money are wasted on lawsuits to remove religious symbols, especially long-standing ones, from the public square. The U.S. Supreme Court building is, for example, rife with them. (The corollary is I think religious groups spend far too much time trying to get their monuments on public land, when private land is just as available, because they believe it's some form of endorsement.) Nevertheless, it seems kind of churlish to oppose a religious monument on sectarian grounds.
Add your comment
Comments are monitored. Any comments found to be abusive, offensive, off-topic, misrepresentative, more than 200 words or containing URLs will not be posted.
Words Remaining
