Should we replace the cross on flags with modern symbols?

[Reploid Productions]

We have been dealing with unreasonable religious zealots for millenniums. It is the twenty first century, why don't we have progress? Why can't we replace the horrible repressive symbols of the church on our flags. The Church has done a lot of evils, the inquisitions, the destruction of science, abuse of children through enforcing religion and the prosecution of other faiths to name a few. The church has caused racism, homophobia, transphobia, sexism and other problems. It is about time we remove those evil symbols and replace them with scientific symbols. Symbols that fit this modern era of change.

Now I will leave you some sources why religion is the worst thing man has ever invented:
http://www.rantlifestyle.com/2014/08/13 ... -is-wrong/
http://www.alternet.org/belief/6-ways-r ... e-bad-good
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UiScqni8yTo

As you can see science is the only way forward, we should be removing religious influences from society, ban religious schools and public religious displays, we can then replace religious holidays with secular names, instead of Christmas Day we can call it Present Day or Day of the Gifts. Easters can be called Chocolate day. We must move forward in society by every aspect we can possibly do, alongside with the free market we can eliminate poverty, then go for the stars, colonizing planets and making a better tomorrow?

[The Portland Territory]

Well, what about the people who are for religion and are religious? These symbols aren't "oppressive", so why change them? It aint hurting anyone

[Minzerland]

What flags? Specify.

Even if you'd specify, I'd still say, without a doubt, NO.

There is no reason to change a nations already preexisting flag unless the people of said nation calls for it. Even then I'd say no as, despite not liking traditionalism, I have no reason to.

[Allentyr]

Short answer: No.
Long answer: NOOOOOOOOOOO. Just because a few people are butthurt.

[Eirin]

No. I think most flags with crosses on have moved beyond their original Christian symbolism. Sweden (as well as all Nordic countries) is one of the least religious nations on Earth but I think you'd struggle to find a Swede who wanted to remove the cross from the flag just because it represented Christianity. They'd more readily argue it represents Sweden, not a religion.

[United States of Atheism]

Well, what about the people who are for religion and are religious? These symbols aren't "oppressive", so why change them? It aint hurting anyone

They represent things that hold back humanity. It's simple sir, the dominance of the church has stifled scientific growth. Religious people oppose cloning, GMO and important things like stem cell research. People need adapt. I suggest compulsory education classes so they understand, basic principles such as the big bang theory and evolution. The most basic theories that is needed to grasp science, I might add.

What flags? Specify.

There are flags that have the Christian cross. England, Scotland, Denmark, Norway and Finland are all examples. Protestant crosses, it is not needed Church and State are separated for a reason.

Short answer: No.
Long answer: NOOOOOOOOOOO. Just because a few people are butthurt.

Separation of Church and State good Sir.

[The Portland Territory]

What flags?

I think he may be thinking of like England, the Scandinavians, a few others

[Rupudska]

Separation of Church and State good Sir.

Does not require changing a flag.

And why would you? All the flags that feature large crosses on them (England, the Scandinavian countries, Northern Ireland, Scotland technically) are aesthetically pleasing as they are.

[Alvecia]

This reads like what an Evangelical thinks atheists are all like.

[Rupudska]

This reads like what an Evangelical thinks atheists are all like.

Yep. Sure is summer in here.

[Allentyr]

Short answer: No.
Long answer: NOOOOOOOOOOO. Just because a few people are butthurt.

Separation of Church and State good Sir.

A flag is now infringing on that?

Cultural and historical ties are now more connected with the flag than religion is. There is absolutely no reason to change a flag just because it has a cross in it under the pretense of "Separation of Church and State".

[United States of Atheism]

Separation of Church and State good Sir.

Does not require changing a flag.

And why would you? All the flags that feature large crosses on them (England, the Scandinavian countries, Northern Ireland, Scotland technically) are aesthetically pleasing as they are.

So, it represents thousands of years of repression. I will use an example, Germany does not have the Nazi flag.

Separation of Church and State good Sir.

A flag is now infringing on that?

Cultural and historical ties are now more connected with the flag than religion is. There is absolutely no reason to change a flag just because it has a cross in it under the pretense of "Separation of Church and State".

It does not represent the identity of the entire population good sir. Flags should be devoid of religious influence.

This reads like what an Evangelical thinks atheists are all like.

You say it is a bad thing. We should not be welcoming of religious people interfering with matters of states good sir. Religious people should keep their beliefs where it should be, at home.

[Rupudska]

Does not require changing a flag.

And why would you? All the flags that feature large crosses on them (England, the Scandinavian countries, Northern Ireland, Scotland technically) are aesthetically pleasing as they are.

So, it represents thousands of years of repression. I will use an example, Germany does not have the Nazi flag.

Yeah this is clearly bait, but I'm going to bite anyway.

I highly doubt countries such as Norway or better yet Finland would associate their flag with repression.

England might but they're going through a weird phase about their flag.

[Vassenor]

My reaction.

[The Portland Territory]

Does not require changing a flag.

And why would you? All the flags that feature large crosses on them (England, the Scandinavian countries, Northern Ireland, Scotland technically) are aesthetically pleasing as they are.

So, it represents thousands of years of repression. I will use an example, Germany does not have the Nazi flag.

Ah yes, Christianity=Nazism

[United States of Atheism]

So, it represents thousands of years of repression. I will use an example, Germany does not have the Nazi flag.

Yeah this is clearly bait, but I'm going to bite anyway.

I highly doubt countries such as Norway or better yet Finland would associate their flag with repression.

England might but they're going through a weird phase about their flag.

You mean the slaughters of innocent Pagans. Religion causes bloodshed.

[Allentyr]

Does not require changing a flag.

And why would you? All the flags that feature large crosses on them (England, the Scandinavian countries, Northern Ireland, Scotland technically) are aesthetically pleasing as they are.

So, it represents thousands of years of repression. I will use an example, Germany does not have the Nazi flag.

A flag is now infringing on that?

Cultural and historical ties are now more connected with the flag than religion is. There is absolutely no reason to change a flag just because it has a cross in it under the pretense of "Separation of Church and State".

It does not represent the identity of the entire population good sir. Flags should be devoid of religious influence.

Flags can have whatever the people want it to have. Until all the Nordics and English suddenly want their flag changed, it's fine the way it is.
Besides, it's very aesthetically pleasing.

[Vassenor]

Does not require changing a flag.

And why would you? All the flags that feature large crosses on them (England, the Scandinavian countries, Northern Ireland, Scotland technically) are aesthetically pleasing as they are.

So, it represents thousands of years of repression. I will use an example, Germany does not have the Nazi flag.

A flag is now infringing on that?

Cultural and historical ties are now more connected with the flag than religion is. There is absolutely no reason to change a flag just because it has a cross in it under the pretense of "Separation of Church and State".

It does not represent the identity of the entire population good sir. Flags should be devoid of religious influence.

This reads like what an Evangelical thinks atheists are all like.

You say it is a bad thing. We should not be welcoming of religious people interfering with matters of states good sir. Religious people should keep their beliefs where it should be, at home.

Clearly we need to overhaul mathematics to remove the +.

[South-East Antarctica]

So maybe we should put on them islamic symbols instead? This idea is just stupid and overly liberal. Secularism is good, but only to some excent.

[United States of Atheism]

So, it represents thousands of years of repression. I will use an example, Germany does not have the Nazi flag.


It does not represent the identity of the entire population good sir. Flags should be devoid of religious influence.

You say it is a bad thing. We should not be welcoming of religious people interfering with matters of states good sir. Religious people should keep their beliefs where it should be, at home.

Clearly we need to overhaul mathematics to remove the +.

It's the symbol of Protestantism. Don't be sarcastic.

So maybe we should put on them islamic symbols instead? This idea is just stupid and overly liberal. Secularism is good, but only to some excent.

It's hardly liberal, it's common sense, separation of Church and State like the founding fathers wanted.

[Rupudska]

You mean the slaughters of innocent Pagans. Religion causes bloodshed.

Actually I'm pretty sure the Finnish flag represents the slaughter of non-innocent Soviet invaders now.

[Minzerland]

So, it represents thousands of years of repression. I will use an example, Germany does not have the Nazi flag.


It does not represent the identity of the entire population good sir. Flags should be devoid of religious influence.

Flags can have whatever the people want it to have. Until all the Nordics and English suddenly want their flag changed, it's fine the way it is.
Besides, it's very aesthetically pleasing.

Preach! Oh wait...

[Alvecia]

FYI OP, you should probably put more effort into this kind of thing.

Your sources are 3 of the 4 top results when you google "reasons why religion is bad"

[Imperializt Russia]

No. I think most flags with crosses on have moved beyond their original Christian symbolism. Sweden (as well as all Nordic countries) is one of the least religious nations on Earth but I think you'd struggle to find a Swede who wanted to remove the cross from the flag just because it represented Christianity. They'd more readily argue it represents Sweden, not a religion.

I was thinking of the Nordic countries. Not countries I'd readily associate with Christianity, so I'm not certain that's even what the cross there represents.

[United States of Atheism]

FYI OP, you should probably put more effort into this kind of thing.

Your sources are 3 of the 4 top results when you google "reasons why religion is bad"

It should be obvious to the rational why religion is bad. I mean reddit and 9gag gets it.

No. I think most flags with crosses on have moved beyond their original Christian symbolism. Sweden (as well as all Nordic countries) is one of the least religious nations on Earth but I think you'd struggle to find a Swede who wanted to remove the cross from the flag just because it represented Christianity. They'd more readily argue it represents Sweden, not a religion.

I was thinking of the Nordic countries. Not countries I'd readily associate with Christianity, so I'm not certain that's even what the cross there represents.

It originally represented Protestantism.