SOC 101-NO2

1) I personally believe that considering that America was founded on religious purposes and in our pledge of allegiance we state "...in one nation under god..." that those sayings and phrases should still be allowed on state and government facilities. However I don't, think that satanic symbols should be allowed on government property, however I think that it can be allowed on personally property that one has bought from the state. I am a christen and I will not impose my personal beliefs and values on people who think differently. So in the situation of Arkansas as they allowed them to build a satanic symbol, they should accept that their will be controversial issues, and not everyone in that state will not mind being subjected to viewing satanic symbols. In the video it shows that a christen is yelling things at the group because they believe differently. I think that everyone should be able to worship what they believe in their religious facility without having to face prosecution. However, I will say it is one thing to be outside in public preaching about the building and its beliefs, and another to worship in the building without having the general public putting in their input. An example would be if one were to not believe the same beliefs as one church, then they will not attend the service. So in return if you do not wish to attend a satanic service then one shouldn't be subjected into doing so, and if someone disrupts the service they should be allowed to escort them else where, just as in different religious services.

2) Do religious symbols belong on state property? I have very mixed emotions regarding this topic. My gut says yes. I say yes, because religion is a significant factor regarding history and without it, our history may have been written very differently. Who are the people of the 2000's to determine what is right and wrong after all of these years. History can not be changed and should not be altered because a political or religious group finds it offensive. History is history, take it or leave it. Why has our world become so sensitive and why do they believe that their opinions matter?

Should religious symbols be limited on state property? I say no. Where do the limitations begin and where do they stop? Why now, in today's world must everything change? The definition of offensive hasn't changed, it just has been misunderstood and everything seems to be offensive today. There are parts of history that are very offensive, but why should statues, etc. be removed or placed because a "certain" group is upset and feels that is the fair thing to do? In all of history, you do not see a Satanic symbol used to represent any form of history, so why start now? The First Amendment to the United States Constitution is a part of the United States Bill of Rights that protects freedom of speech, freedom of religion, freedom of assembly, freedom of the press, and right to petition. Is it freedom of religion or is it entitlement that our generations are speaking vs. true freedom within these two examples? 

What do you think about the situation regarding religious symbols and the government in Arkansas? I personally think the liberals have lost their mind in our country and challenge anything and everything that represents conflict with the government. This incident just so happens to be the Santanic group. I find the Satanic symbol offensive, however, I do not know enough about its representation to demand it be taken down or stand. Its presentation is evil and has no relation to history, therefore I do not believe it deserves a presence near the 10 commandment statue. 

3) After hearing about the situation in Arkansas, I do not believe religious symbols belong on state property, and I disagree with the Satanic symbol being installed in the Illinois Statehouse. Although, I believe that religion is everyone's personal choice, I feel that there is a difference between allowing someone to be free to worship whoever they please and wanting to put your specific religion's symbols on state public property. What would happen if everyone's religious organization wanted to come together and protest about why their religious symbol deserves to be put on state property more than another religion's symbol? On the other hand, I do not feel that we should change the specific use of religion that has been represented in our history. For example, the famous Pledge of Allegiance has a line that states "one Nation under God." The Pledge of Allegiance has been an important part of our history since 1892. A significant portion of our history and where we come from involves religion, and I do not feel that we should change our history or pretend that our history did not involve religion. If a property uses a religious symbol in a way that is meant to represent something from our history, I feel that it should be allowed on state property.