Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 21 to 24 of 24
  1. #21  
    Quote Originally Posted by clulup
    ... just the removal of symbols for one particular religion from government buildings, not the removal of all religious symbols (from churches, private schools, houses, etc.).
    Interesting phrase: "one particular religion"
  2. #22  
    Quote Originally Posted by RicoM
    ...And back to my quote....removing of religous symbols from public places would in fact be supporting atheism.
    I don't know that banning religious symbols is necessarily support of atheism. Absence of symbols no more establishes atheism as presence of symbols establishes a particular religion (or religion at all).
  3. #23  
    Quote Originally Posted by shopharim
    Absence of symbols no more establishes atheism as presence of symbols establishes a particular religion (or religion at all).
    True...and this interpretation is probably dependant on the individual...but does a lack of religious symbols (to the individual) mean that God has no place here or that God does not exist. If it's the latter, then I feel that it's promoting atheism...if it's the former, then you are absolutely correct.
  4. #24  
    Quote Originally Posted by RicoM
    And back to my quote....removing of religous symbols from public places would in fact be supporting atheism.
    Imagine a company or a university saying: We don't support a particular baseball team, our policy is not to takes sides in baseball, and therefore we remove all symbols promoting the BaltingtonSuxs (or the BushRangers, or any other team).

    According to your logic, removing the symbols promoting baseball teams means promoting the belief that baseball does not exist...


    P.S.: In fact, baseball indeed does not exisit, at least where I come from, but that's a totally different story.
    “Reality is that which, when you stop believing in it, doesn't go away.” (Philip K. ****)
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12

Posting Permissions