The First Amendment Is Not a Directive to Banish All Mention of God From the Public Sphere

Atheist group demands Rhode Island city remove cross from atop war memorial

I'm not sure if there's actually more of these sorts of challenges recently, or if it's just a particularly trendy news topic. That happens a lot -- one story gets really good play, so news outlets start promoting that sort of story. It's like when a particular genre TV show does well, it spawns imitators.

In any case, there is at least a perception on my part that these sorts of stories are increasing lately: atheists pursuing legal challenges against a public display of a religious symbol.

I am all for enforcement of the First Amendment to the Constitution, including the part "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof."

However, I must object to the current trend. There is unmistakable malice in the way in which these suits are pursued. Does anyone seriously believe that an atheist is in any meaningful way persecuted by strolling by a war memorial featuring a cross? Is he inhibited in any way from living by his atheist beliefs or from promoting them to others? Is he treated unequally under the law?

"An establishment of religion" actually means something. It means to establish a state religion that is given favorable treatment under law from other religions (or no religion). It doesn't mean "ever mentioning God, anywhere, even in a non-specific sense." We are so far from a theocracy in this nation that it's ridiculous. We don't have religious tests or requirements for employment or elective office: indeed, such things are expressly forbidden. There are absolutely no government-supported barriers in our society holding an atheist down, keeping him from advancing in public and private life. Thus, atheist groups are reduced to attacking harmless memorials, forcing people to expend vast amounts of money to protect an honored community symbol. Who, exactly, is really being persecuted here?

The memorial in question is 91 years old! It reflects the cultural and religious traditions of the community in which it was built, and of the soldiers it honors. It takes a particularly petty, mean-spirited individual to find offense in this. I cannot, in my heart or in my mind, believe that this was the use to which the First Amendment was intended to be put.

Update: The Freedom From Religion Foundation -- the plaintiff in the above suit is also suing the Woonsocket Fire Department to remove this prayer from their website:

The FireFighters Prayer

When I am called to duty, God, wherever flame may rage,
Give me strength to save some life, whatever be its age.

Help me embrace a little child, before it is too late,
Or save an older person from the horror of that fate.

Enable me to be alert and hear the weakest shout,
And quickly and efficiently, to put the fire out.

I want to fill my calling, and to give the best in me,
To guard my every neighbor, and protect his property.

And if according to my fate, I am to lose my life,
Please Bless with your protecting hand, my children
and my wife.

Once again, it takes a pretty mean-spirited person to object to something like this. The removal of these sentiments, their banishment from the speech and pronouncements of government, can only coarsen and diminish our culture.