Here is an interesting First Amendment church-state issue that was recently before the U.S. Supreme Court (SCOTUS) It’s a contentious issue but even a partisan hack like myself, who is skeptical of all things religious, can see both sides of- Sort of. Supreme Court Allows 40-Foot Peace Cross on State Property Well Sam, a Christian cross most certainly does convey a Christian message, and in fact that was the intent when it was dedicated in 1925 Only Ginsburg and Sotomayor dissented. Ginsburg wrote: I tend to agree with the dissenting opinion, but there are a couple of other facts that gave me pause as to whether or not the cross should be removed. It has been there a very long time and no doubt is seen by many as a monument to the fallen of WW! As much as or more than a religious symbol. To destroy it would be a slap in the face of the descendants of the deceased. In addition, at the time that it was dedicated, the land was not state owned- that changed in 1969. Perhaps some sort of grandfather clause could or should be invoked in this case. There is a lot more of interest in the article and it is worth a read. Of course, the crackpots have to weigh in: Christian Nationalist Claims Constitution Gives Christians More Protection Than Atheists This is the kind of crap that makes me all the more skeptical of religion and religious people. This guy is only reinforcing the idea held by some that religion is irrational, dogmatic and anti-intellectual. Instead of sticking to the plausible legal and logical arguments for the ruling, he goes off on a Christian Supremacist rant.