Reply #245: Chuckle

[GOPFighter]

Your little slapdown, or intended slapdown, actually makes the atheist's point quit well. How would Utah memorialize a slain atheist officer? With a cross? I think you would agree this would be inappropriate, right? And since there is no universally recognized symbol for an atheist, what would they do? If they use a secular symbol instead, like an officer's shield, that would be an admission that the crosses for the other officers are, indeed, religious symbols. If they go ahead and use a cross, the atheist's family would have every right to be angry and sue, and they would probably win.

You might wonder why atheists file lawsuits like this. One reason is that it is wrong to use a religious symbol on public property even though the majority support it. The second is to make lawmakers think twice in the future before using a religious symbol on public property. Maybe the next state that wants to erect memorials to fallen officers will use a likeness of an officer's shield instead of a cross, and then everyone will be happy.