Should Atheists Ever Support Religious Icons on Public Property?

[rug]

July 2, 2013
This is an unsolicited guest post by BG on the important subject of the recent dedication of the first atheist monument on public property.

The answer is no.

On June 29, there was a dedication ceremony for the first atheist monument on public property. First, some background will be given on what led up to this event and then a brief discussion will be provided on American Atheists' president Dave Silverman's declaration that he would support other religious minorities should they choose to erect a religious monument.

In May of last year, it was discovered that there was a Ten Commandments (10C) monument on the Bradford County courthouse courtyard in Starke, FL. A protest was organized, and several Floridians from all over the state protested against this structure because they felt it violated the Establishment Clause of the U.S. Constitution. When the protest did not result in the removal of the Decalogue, American Atheists (AA) sued to have it removed. After mediation, there was a settlement that resulted in the 10C monument remaining on public property as well as the allowance of an AA display.

The individuals responsible for the 10C monument were surprisingly rather gracious about it. From The Christian Post:

Ken Weaver, member of the Starke, Fla.-based group Community Men's Fellowship, told The Christian Post about how he feels regarding the atheist monument bench.

"Simply put, while we do not agree with the 'faith' of the American Atheists that disregards the existence of God, we do believe in their right to freely express their beliefs," said Weaver. "As long as their display meets the requirements of our county ordinance, they have the same freedoms of expression as those of any other citizen or group."

In October 2011, Bradford County established a "Free Speech Forum" outside of its courthouse so that various private groups could place monuments at their own expense."

http://www.atheistrev.com/2013/07/should-atheists-ever-support-religious.html

[BlueToTheBone]

1. Religious icons of any "faith" should not

appear on public spaces.

[enlightenment]

3. Actually, I'm okay with this one:

It was there first, after all.

[on point]

2. Yes. History and sociology museums in mythology section

[cbayer]

4. Interesting analysis on this.

It was also interesting to see the range of response from DU'ers when this story was posted in GD.

While I understand why they did this, I would agree that it is a very slippery slope.

And the plan to erect 50 more could be a huge mistake unless they do that only in cases where they have lost the court battle.

As it is, the quotes on this bench are much more about secularism than they are about atheism. I think the large atheist "symbol" may confuse people into thinking that atheism=secularism, which it must assuredly does not.

[rexcat]

5. I would say that...

atheism is a subset of secularism.

[cbayer]

6. OTOH, there are religious people who are also secularists.

How do you see atheism as a subset? I think it's pretty much an entirely different category.

While many, if not most, atheists may also be secularists, are they all secularists?

This becomes particularly interesting as some atheist groups do things like put up monuments on public land and have their "officiants" listed as clergy.