Jesus on my license plate!

Published on April 29, 2008 By SanChonino In Religion

Gotta love those crazy Floridians.

It seems as though there's a motion being put forward to make a new specialty license plate that you can purchase in the 'great' state of Florida. Yes, that's right - rather than plastering another in your fleet of Jesus fish on the back of your car, you can slap a cross on your actual license plate.

Wanna see what they're considering? It's just glorious, let me tell you.

Wow. That's just . . . special.

My issue with this, however, runs deeper than my distaste for gaudy crosses. The problem? What happens to the other religions? Are we going to offer a nice Buddhist license plate with a silhouette of the Buddha or perhaps a nice wheel with eight spokes? Or one with the moon and star of Islam? Or one with a big, gold Angel Moroni for us Mormons?

And where's my Flying Spaghetti Monster one?

Frankly, I think that Florida may have opened a can of worms it won't know how to close if this is actually created. Offering from a state office certain religious symbols without making equal consolations for all other faiths will be a mess, and the creator of this initiative will be crucified in court.

The ACLU has made a statement about it, saying,

The problem with the state manufacturing the plate is that it “sends a message that Florida is essentially a Christian state” and, second, gives the “appearance that the state is endorsing a particular religious preference,” said Howard Simon, executive director of the American Civil Liberties Union of Florida.

I agree with them completely. This is wholly inappropriate in just about every way you can slice it. You've got to love this quote, though, from Rep. Kelly Skidmore about this situation:

“It’s not a road I want to go down. I don’t want to see the Star of David next. I don’t want to see a Torah next. None of [those other religions that I am not a part of] are appropriate to me,” said Skidmore, a Democrat who voted against the plate in committee. “I just believe that.”

I wonder if this passes, will Atheists be offered one that says "I DON'T BELIEVE"?

This is the one I'd go for . . .

PS I know I promised my murder story next, but it's taking a long time for me to write it. Longer than I thought. I guess I still haven't completely processed what happened that night. I'll get it done soon, I hope.

Comments (Page 4)

Leauki

on May 02, 2008

You might see it as a picking a religion it 'prefers' but maybe it sees it as a large group of people to gain increased revenue? Or is the gov't not allowed to us capitalism?

No. It isn't. It's not the government's job to run itself as a business. They are not getting paid like businesses and they shouldn't run like businesses.

I am sure they chose Christianity because it provides the largest number of suckers that would give more money to the DMV for such a licence plate. But the government is specifically forbidden to promote a religion. It doesn't say "even if it makes extra money".

I can see preferring Christianity over other religions (because it's the majority religion) when the purpose is something that has to be done and the question, whom will we serve first. For example, there is probably a need for one or two yearly big holidays and why not choose a Christian such (Christmas and Easter). In that case the government is not so much promoting a religion as it is acknowleding a religion.

But there is no genuine need for religious licence plates at all. They are not acknowledging demand and a limit on what to offer, they are simply promiting a religion. And that is illegal.

For example:

1. State schools acknowledge Christmas as a national holiday and do a Christmas thing.

This is fine because there should be national holidays and school parties/plays. Christianity is chosen here because it covers the most people. You also cannot have too many holidays and school parties hence you have to choose one or the others. The government is here not promoting a religion but merely acknowledging its existence.

2. State schools organise prayers for the students in class.

This is wrong because school prayers are not needed and there is hence no need to introduce them at all. School prayers COULD be introduced for any religion or all (major) religions, hence there is no reason to favour one. Introducing school prayers and choosing Christianity for them would hence be a violation of the law forbidding the promotion of a religion by the state.

SetarcosNous

on May 02, 2008

I'd have to anonymously, as I don't want to lose those days off

, disagree here. While I am not going to complain about the extra days off, I think the government is out of place deciding such things as which religious holiday's to celebrate. The school situation isn't as bad though, as it usually isn't just a single day (at least it wasn't when I was that young) and is labeled a "Winter Break"; but when government offices are closed for Christmas, that strikes me of favoritism.

foreverserenity

on May 02, 2008

I live here and I didn't even hear about that! And no, I won't be getting one!

Welcome Guest! Please take the time to register with us.
There are many great features available to you once you register, including:

Richer content, access to many features that are disabled for guests like commenting on the forums.
Access to a great community, with a massive database of many, many areas of interest.
Access to contests & subscription offers like exclusive emails.
It's simple, and FREE!