Atheist Gestapo Bullies Another City into Removing Crosses


It’s the atheist Gestapo, and they’re coming to your town!
If you have a cross in public, they are here to tear it down!
Look at Steubenville, Ohio—they removed a cross from view,
Which was just the sort of horror that the Nazis used to do—
They defend the first amendment, through the power of the court;
Just another Nazi tactic, I am saddened to report.
It’s so typical of bullies that they have to get their way
By denying the majority the right to have a say.
The atheist Gestapo trample Christian rights with pride…
And the damnedest thing about it is… the law is on their side.

I’m on a bunch of spam mailing lists that, were it not for amusing stories like this, I would unsubscribe from in a heartbeat. My title today is the same as theirs, word for word, just in case their usual audience wants to search for it some day.

It is becoming a familiar refrain: the Freedom From Religion Foundation (FFRF) has utilized its vast amount of time and resources to force a community—in this case, Steubenville, Ohio—to alter its new logo due to the fact that a cross was prominently displayed as a part of it. The horror! Atheists nationwide can rest easy knowing that little old Steubenville is once again open to all citizens, not only the Christian ones.

Of course, the FFRF does not go looking for these cases; cases are brought to them. As for resources, I have no way of knowing, but I’d love to see a comparison between the FFRF’s annual budget and the annual tithing from the Steubenville churches.

The FFRF has been on a tear, sanitizing everything they can find of Christian symbols. In the case of Steubenville, the offending cross was attached to Franciscan University’s Christ the King Chapel, apparently a Steubenville landmark. It is quite shocking indeed to think that a Christian chapel would have the audacity to display a Christian symbol on its roof.

Did you catch it? That was the first false framing of the issue. The FFRF have no problem with the cross on the church. What they object to is that cross being featured on the city’s logo. The cross on the church is protected religious expression. The cross on the logo is prohibited by the establishment clause. But “Political Outcast” (hee, hee, Christianity really is a death knell for any politician, isn’t it?) takes that lie and runs with it:

So now that the “city’s imprimatur” has been removed from the logo, what do we do about the real cross in the real city? It is still there. If the cross being on the logo is a symbol of solidarity with the church, what message does allowing the actual church to display its cross proudly on its roof send to unsuspecting citizens? If the cross on the logo shows approval, then certainly the wooden cross on the church itself shows it as well. How is removing one and not the other any more honest or less of a “theocracy”? The stupidity is limitless.

The stupidity is, indeed, limitless. Allowing the church to display the cross, and prohibiting the logo from displaying it, are both completely consistent with the first amendment. The FFRF know this. Political Outcast do not.

When it comes to a conflict between privilege and constitution, the rule of law is important. Because we cannot trust patriots like “Political Outcast” to see that the first amendment only protects them when it protects all of us.

Comments

  1. Cuttlefish says

    Oh… only look at their comments if you are stout of heart and strong of stomach.

  2. otrame says

    Do you know about the young woman who reads some of FFRF’s hate mail which they publish in their news letter each month on Youtube? This is the first one, and there are 17 more, including a special edition where she reads some of the hate mail that Jessica Alquist received. It seems that FFRF makes some people so unhappy they can’t spell or write an intelligible English sentence.

  3. Devin Emarr says

    And then the rest of the article goes on to say how “theocratic” the people at the FFRF are, about how they want to force their secular humanism on everyone (which, by the way, IS a religion, not a philosophy). And of course atheism is just as faith based as Christianity.

    … Right.

  4. machintelligence says

    You were right about the comments, by the way. The stupid and paranoia there are almost weapons grade.

  5. left0ver1under says

    One could paraphrase an old saying in regard to the religious:

    If it wasn’t for half-truths, they wouldn’t have truths at all.

  6. Quodlibet says

    Atheists nationwide can rest easy knowing that little old Steubenville is once again open to all citizens, not only the Christian ones.

    How ironic that they frame this as sarcasm, when it’s actually the whole point.

    They are so eager to portray themselves as martyrs that they practice willful ignorance of the law, and work actively to lead their followers into ignorance as well. The law is crystal-clear, both in spirit and intent.

  7. gfeltham says

    Digging just a little deeper into ‘Politicaloutcast’ ‘s framing of his article, one discovers yet another ‘device’ commonly used by those of his ilk. He offers up this as a direct ‘quote’ from FFRF on the issue:

    “Steubenville is a theocracy and is a Christian city where non-Christians or nonbelievers are not favored citizens. The city may not depict the university chapel and cross because to do so places the city’s imprimatur behind Christianity. The city of Steubenville must not endorse ‘faith’ and church. While we understand that Franciscan University is part of the City, the City may not depict the University chapel and cross because to do so places the City’s imprimatur behind Christianity. This excludes non-Christians and violates the Constitution.”

    While the last three sentences are actual quotes from the FFRF formal letter to the City of Steubenville (May 22, 2012); Mr. Rauch (the article’s author)has added the first two sentences himself. These statements do NOT exist in the actual letter. In the second sentence, he merely repeats what the FFRF actually conveys later, in the fourth sentence. However, it is the alledged opening statement of the ‘quote’ that, so cleverly appended, set-ups his readership for outrage over those obiviously rabid, anti-Christian attitudes always expressed by the FFRF.

    Jeezies Beezies!

  8. Cuttlefish says

    … and I just got a visitor using the search term “lawsuit in steubenville, ohio to tear down church”.

    This is how rumors get started.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>