Posted on 06/13/2008 6:45:56 AM PDT by Sub-Driver
South Carolina to Become First State to Issue 'I Believe' (in Jesus) License Plates
Friday, June 13, 2008
COLUMBIA, S.C — South Carolina's lieutenant governor announced Thursday that he is willing to put up $4,000 of his own money so his state can become the first in the nation to issue "I Believe" license plates with the image of a cross and a stained glass window.
The legislation allowing the plates was one of several religious-themed bills to became laws in the closing days of the state's legislative session.
The bills mean South Carolinians attending local government meetings could soon see the Ten Commandments and the Lord's Prayer posted on walls, pray without fear of being sued and drive home in cars with the "I Believe" plates.
Civil rights groups are considering lawsuits. An attorney for the New York-based American Jewish Congress, Mark Stern, said the bills are an obvious endorsement of religion by legislators in an election year. His group is looking to sue over the plates.
(Excerpt) Read more at foxnews.com ...
I see. I guess that might explain their motivation. But as I wrote above, it seems strange to evangelize with your vehicle when the vast majority of other drivers either:
A). Already believe in Jesus, or
B). Are not likely to accept Jesus based on a license plate.
I understand that Christians are commanded to spread their faith. I don't mind when they do as long as the methods are peaceful- which they overwhelmingly are.
I just don't get *this* particular method of trying to spread the Gospel.
I think it’s absolutely as least as valid as putting your alma mater on a license plate and you don’t seem to be questioning that.
Well, the article doesn't mention alumni plates so until now I haven't really had a reason to call them into question.
But since you've mentioned it, I find alumni plates even more perplexing than religious plates. Religion guides how a person lives, but what difference does it really make if you went to State U. versus U. of State?
As a Christian I find a lot of non-Christians always asking “why must ____?” To me, it comes off, and most often is, when you dig beneath the surface, a way to squash and suppress the Gospel. There are many who would try to corral it to just inside four walls of a building. That’s not going to happen.
I'm sorry if I came across that way. I'm not out to suppress the Gospel.
I guess I don’t understand why a license plate is a problem but a bumper sticker isn’t. Nobody is forced to buy a vanity plate. That would be quite another matter.
I don't think either are a problem. It's a voluntary matter and it appears that the plates are paid for only by those who want them.
I just find it perplexing. I find some bumper stickers perplexing (like the Darwin fish, or the little guy peeing on a Chevy/Ford symbol). That doesn't mean I want to ban any of them or sue the makers, I just don't understand why people would display them on their vehicles.
Thank you for taking the time to clarify things for me.
That doesn't imply that there aren't some limitations on your activities.
As a Christian I find a lot of non-Christians always asking “why must ____?”
Do you think it is just non-Christians who ask that?
To me, it comes off, and most often is, when you dig beneath the surface, a way to squash and suppress the Gospel.
Nonsense. Now this may come as a shock to you, but some of us simply want to get on with things without being stopped on the public streets and bothered by people trying to push their beliefs down our throats.
There are many who would try to corral it to just inside four walls of a building. That’s not going to happen.
Evangelists have the right to use the television, radio, and the Internet to get their message out. They can rent open land and even a stadium and gather there. Like anyone else with something to say, they can speak in the parks that have dedicated 'speakers' corners', providing the rest of us can sit or play peacefully without being approached.
I don't want to be accosted while I'm riding on public transportation, or stopped on the street, or approached when I take the kids to the park. We citizens should have the right to use the public facilities we pay for without those facilities being turned into venues where we are fair game for anyone who has decided to spent a few hours proselytising.
Whether or not someone is a Christian is none of anyone else's business, unless that person chooses to divulge that information. Whether some evangelical approves of the denomination individuals choose to follow doesn't interest most people. People have a right to be left alone with their thoughts.
I have no problem with the idea of the plates because I would avoid anyone who would choose to have them. If people want to call attention to themselves to emphasise their holiness, they look like phonies to a lot of people.
However, unless other denominations/religions get the right to choose vanity plates that hype their faith, the state is practising favoritism. How do' Follow Baha'i' and 'Believe in Buddha' look to you?
Earlier this week I flew from Glasgow (Scotland) -- not Kentucky :) -- to Newark seated next to a little old lady from the deep South. She didn't shut up for the entire flight, so focused she was on converting me to her particular flavour of Christianity. Every time I would put on my noise-cancelling headphones, she would tap on my arm. And it isn't the first time this has happened, though those instances were cab drivers in Atlanta and Houston. When I changed my seat, she changed hers to the one next to mine.
Someday I will laugh about it, but I am still hacked off at the intrusion as well as the agony of her endless chatter.
Not that this has anything to do with license plates....
According to the article any group in South Carolina can design their own plate, as long as they put up the money for it.
As far as I can tell it sounds like a pretty fair program. The state is simply giving individuals and groups a unique medium for expressing their beliefs.
As far as I can tell it sounds like a pretty fair program. The state is simply giving individuals and groups a unique medium for expressing their beliefs.
I read that, and it seems fair enough. However, I can imagine some messages being deemed inappropriate, and some actually being inappropriate. Who will judge, and who will draw the line? In that regard, I would think that it is in the state's best interest to chuck the idea and let people address these issues with bumper stickers and magnets.
From the tone of your responses, I believe you.
BTW, I’ve had a lot of bad experiences with Christians too, over the years. Everbody’s still human.
We all have had a few.
That's a good point...I hadn't thought that far ahead.
As a practical matter, it probably would be easier for all involved to rely on bumper stickers. Except of course for politicians, who can score easy political points from their support for specialty plates.
I suspect that is the case. I can see lawsuits resulting from this one, which will eat any profit the state makes.
Except of course for politicians, who can score easy political points from their support for specialty plates.
You got that right.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.