From the Provo Daily Herald:
"... [A]theists say they were brought into "unwelcome personal contact" with the crosses and forced to alter their behavior to avoid contact with the memorials..."
I agree with the Herald editorial in asking: what are they — atheists... or vampires?
Hat-tip: Charley Foster.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
6 comments:
that's pretty funny. very curious reacion on their part, I would say. they're just trying to prove a point.
Yes, I agree: they're not the complete loons that their lawsuit makes them out to be... and their complaint (though not their lawsuit) deserves attention.
If I were a Sikh or Muslim or Buddhist highway patrolman, I wouldn't want my death to be memorialized by a cross. That said, a cross in the ground seems to be a nearly universal symbol of death.
I wonder if folks couldn't develop a better memorial — perhaps _more_ universal?
That would be my hope... and this lawsuit does nothing to _solve_ a problem. It seems to only castigate and complain.
I bet they'd use different symbols for muslims, jews or buddhists. Typically star of davids are used for jews and crescent moons for muslims. I'm not sure what atheists used. Interestingly I was wondering that the other day while looking at picture of some WWII graveyards in France with the endless rows of crosses with the occasional star of david.
My dream would be to find a symbol that _united_ us in death... a spire, perhaps, or a circle.
My faith isn't nearly as important to the observer as my death, is it?
I think the problem is that the meaning of death is inherently tied up into issues of faith - even for atheists clearly.
I whole-heartedly agree... but these aren't burial sites, they're memorials of a related-but-different sort.
Of course, if we wanted to grouse, we'd muse on the fact that most of the fallen which are memorialized by these roadside markers are probably LDS — and there's a good argument to be made that a cross isn't appropriate for them, either.
Post a Comment