1 readers online now  |  69 million page views

Changing historic place names & symbols not about citizenship or tolerance

Reader comment on item: Away with Crusaders, Crucifixes, Crosses, and Christmas
in response to reader comment: Jews and Muslims

Submitted by Non-Catholic (United States), Jun 10, 2009 at 15:29

Dave, this is NOT an issue of citizenship or tolerance (which are in any case 2 different issues, not the same. I.e. Jews were usually tolerated in traditional Muslim and medieval Christian regimes, but they were certainly not treated as equal citizens. You can have tolerance without even coming close to approaching civic and legal equality). Jewish and Muslim citizens already are tolerated and have legal equal rights in Trinidad and Western countries, even though there often is informal social discrimination, (which in any case can not always be overcome simply through legal changes).

This is whether you must change every single historical symbol and name referring to Christian dogmas and saints in order not to violate the "citizenship rights" of non-Christians. If you change the name "Trinity Cross" even though it refers to Trinidad itself (which means Trinity in Spanish) to not offend non-Christians, by what logic do you maintain the name Trinidad for the nation at all? Why tolerate other symbols and place names referring to Christian saints, ideas and dogmas? Should Saint Paul Minnesota, and every object that contains that name then be changed, because of course many people not only don't consider Paul of Tarsus a saint, but find his ideas offensive? Same for Saint Louis, Missouri. Why retain Corpus Christi, referring to the specifically Roman Catholic doctrine of transubstantiation, and so on. Must the Swiss, Danish, Swedish, Norwegian, Icelandic and British flags be changed because they have crosses on them, and were adopted precisely because they are Christian symbols or else the non-Christian citizens living there are having their citizenship rights violated? The mind boggles at the unending slippery slope this sort of logic opens up.

Submitting....

Note: Opinions expressed in comments are those of the authors alone and not necessarily those of Daniel Pipes. Original writing only, please. Comments are screened and in some cases edited before posting. Reasoned disagreement is welcome but not comments that are scurrilous, off-topic, commercial, disparaging religions, or otherwise inappropriate. For complete regulations, see the "Guidelines for Reader Comments".

Comment on this item

Mark my comment as a response to Changing historic place names & symbols not about citizenship or tolerance by Non-Catholic

Email me if someone replies to my comment

Note: Opinions expressed in comments are those of the authors alone and not necessarily those of Daniel Pipes. Original writing only, please. Comments are screened and in some cases edited before posting. Reasoned disagreement is welcome but not comments that are scurrilous, off-topic, commercial, disparaging religions, or otherwise inappropriate. For complete regulations, see the "Guidelines for Reader Comments".

See recent outstanding comments.

Follow Daniel Pipes

Facebook   Twitter   RSS   Join Mailing List

All materials by Daniel Pipes on this site: © 1968-2021 Daniel Pipes. daniel.pipes@gmail.com and @DanielPipes

Support Daniel Pipes' work with a tax-deductible donation to the Middle East Forum.Daniel J. Pipes

(The MEF is a publicly supported, nonprofit organization under section 501(c)3 of the Internal Revenue Code.

Contributions are tax deductible to the full extent allowed by law. Tax-ID 23-774-9796, approved Apr. 27, 1998.

For more information, view our IRS letter of determination.)