Do Athiest have the right to demand that individuals remove religious symbols or words from their personal property?

1SG Larry Everly — Sat, 13 Sep 2014 11:20:56 -0400

Response by 1SG Larry Everly made Sep 13 at 2014 11:23 AM

1SG Larry Everly — Sat, 13 Sep 2014 11:23:20 -0400

Arkansas State football players were forced to remove a cross decal from their helmets which honored 2 fellow students that were killed. I think this is a huge overreach by Athiest groups and unfortunately the University complied.

This particular incident made me wonder how far the demands of Athiest could/would go, thus the question about personal property.

Response by Cpl Private RallyPoint Member made Sep 13 at 2014 1:17 PM

Cpl Private RallyPoint Member — Sat, 13 Sep 2014 13:17:16 -0400

Absolutely not! I find it ironic that an atheist would attempt to use the system to limit someone's freedom of religion. How does seeing a religious symbol of any kind affect anyone? It shouldn't, live and let live. Make your own choices and let other people choose to believe how they believe.

Response by Sgt Jennifer Mohler made Sep 13 at 2014 3:36 PM

Sgt Jennifer Mohler — Sat, 13 Sep 2014 15:36:45 -0400

Lol, no. That goes both ways btw.

EDIT: I am seeing all kinds of comments about how this is about some football team, or 9/11. What is the question here? If it is just straight forward like was asked, my answer stands, but if there is some story I am missing here...

Sorry I don't have TV (too expensive and worthless to me), so if this was some news thing that "everyone knows about" can someone clue me in? thanx

Response by SFC Private RallyPoint Member made Sep 13 at 2014 3:46 PM

SFC Private RallyPoint Member — Sat, 13 Sep 2014 15:46:08 -0400

1SG, I have to answer this in three two parts:

1) The question is asked is a hypothetical one (it lacks details of a specific instance, context, etc) and so to answer your question, no. An atheist does not have the right to demand individuals remove religious symbols or words from their personal property.

2) With regard to the Arkansas State University matter, yes. The equipment is owned by a government-funded school. The students who attend ASU are from a diverse social and religious background and may potentially view such symbolism as government-sponsored religion (no matter the positive intent of the players or the 'common sense' factor at play here).

3) You make a remark about a, "small group of atheists," in a response to SFC Crouch. Our Constitutional rights as codified in the Bill of Rights are specifically written to protect "small groups". The right to freedom of press protects minor dissident groups from the large government. The right to bear arms protects the smaller militias of states from the larger federal military force. The right to freedom of religion protects members of minority faiths (like me) from government-sponsored religion and the tyranny that follows- as we learned in England with the Protestant/Catholic wars during monarchy transition.

Personally, I understand your point. I am not offended by crosses and like that the players wanted to remember their dearly departed, and I believe they had no malice in their hearts by choosing a religious symbol to do so. That said, I would choose the mild inconvenience of those players needing to create another way to remember their friends over the possible infringement of religious freedoms (or even the perception of it) in a government institution.

Response by Col Private RallyPoint Member made Sep 13 at 2014 6:09 PM

Col Private RallyPoint Member — Sat, 13 Sep 2014 18:09:28 -0400

Nope!

Response by SGT Private RallyPoint Member made Sep 14 at 2014 12:13 AM

SGT Private RallyPoint Member — Sun, 14 Sep 2014 00:13:22 -0400

Explain the context. School? City Hall? Park? Street?

EDIT:
This is from a Todd Starnes editorial? Nevermind. Whatever this story is, it's going to be paranoid by virtue of its author. Must research.

Response by Cpl Murray Estes made Sep 14 at 2014 12:36 AM

Cpl Murray Estes — Sun, 14 Sep 2014 00:36:02 -0400

Simply put, they have to right to demand whatever they want. Those of faith have the right to refuse those demands. Whatever it is being a religious matter, the government has an obligation to not get involved. While there is a freedom of religion, there is not a freedom from religion. If religion offends you, then avoid it. Same goes with everything else.

Response by SFC Mark Merino made Sep 14 at 2014 1:23 AM

SFC Mark Merino — Sun, 14 Sep 2014 01:23:14 -0400

They have every right to demand and I have every right to laugh hysterically.

Response by SGT Suraj Dave made Sep 14 at 2014 6:23 AM

SGT Suraj Dave — Sun, 14 Sep 2014 06:23:10 -0400

During my 1st deployment, I spent a little bit of time working in a role II aid station. I was monitoring a soldier who had been injured in combat. We were talking about God and Christianity.

One of my fellow soldiers took it upon themselves to tell my shift leader I was talking about God. I was pulled aside by the NCO and told what I was doing was "Un-professional". I told this NCO that they should give me a formal written punishment because I will not ever stop, and according to what I believe in, it is a blessing to get persecuted for what I believe in. I requested the harshest punishment she could give me, so I could get the most blessings out of the situation.

All the sudden, I was dismissed and no one ever talked to me about that again. I really hoped I would have had the opportunity to suffer on behalf of Christ, but that didn't happen for me.

I know that story doesn't have much to do with anything, but its one of those memories I will never forget. I don't think that religious symbols, weather Christian, Jewish, Muslim, Hindu, etc... should not be banned. If that is a part of a service members identity, I do not see why they can not show that on their personal belongings. I do not believe they should display this on any of their TA-50 though. For the SM's safety they should not have anything extra (patches, writing, etc....) on their gear that would differentiate them from their fellow soldiers. (As a sniper looks for the person who sticks out the most, as because they are different the must be important, and killed first)

Response by LTC Hillary Luton made Sep 14 at 2014 9:19 AM

LTC Hillary Luton — Sun, 14 Sep 2014 09:19:25 -0400

Seriously? I can't believe we even need to ask this question! How would this NOT be an infringement on personal liberties and religious freedom?

I guess the subject of "Separation of church and state" is where everyone gets confused. The fact of the matter is, there is absolutely NOWHERE in the constitution in which the words "separation of church and state" are even used. What the constitution actually does say is government shall make no law “respecting an establishment of religion or prohibiting the free exercise thereof.”
In fact, a strict separationist view is actually not supported by the constitution.

The constitution forbids an official establishment of religion. This is very different from the much looser, imprecise term “separation of church and state." In fact, the terms "separation of church and state" actually contradicts the First Amendment by creating a war against religion. This is the opposite of the founding father's intent.

"In a nutshell, government may neither compel nor prohibit religious exercise. The Establishment Clause side of the coin says that government may not prescribe religious exercise; the Free Exercise side says that government may not proscribe, disfavor or otherwise punish or prevent religious exercise voluntarily chosen by the people. But the two phrases are two sides of the same coin. It is little wonder, then, that the Supreme Court has abandoned entirely the misleading metaphor “separation of church and state.” It simply does not help explain the true meaning of the First Amendment."

Before we start quoting terms that do not exist, we may want to consider going back and rereading the Constitution. Considering the fact that it is our responsibility as service members to protect the constitution, wouldn't it be wise that we know what we are protecting?

Response by CPT Private RallyPoint Member made Sep 14 at 2014 1:54 PM

CPT Private RallyPoint Member — Sun, 14 Sep 2014 13:54:56 -0400

1SG Larry Everly, I think you should amend your original question because you are getting muddled responses. Some people, in reply to the exact question you asked, unaware of the actual story and point of view you are trying to promote, are writing to say that they do not believe that atheists (or anyone) can force you to remove religious markings from personal property. They are not necessarily intending to agree with your point of view on the FOX News story you later posted in the comments.

For clarity's sake, can you please post the article as part of your original question?

Response by PO2 Rocky Kleeger made Sep 14 at 2014 1:59 PM

PO2 Rocky Kleeger — Sun, 14 Sep 2014 13:59:58 -0400

No more than a Christian/Catholic has the right to as an Atheist to remove, say, a T-shirt that is offensive to some.

Response by LCpl Steve Wininger made Sep 14 at 2014 6:08 PM

LCpl Steve Wininger — Sun, 14 Sep 2014 18:08:25 -0400

They can demand, but it does not mean I will listen. this si a bit over the edge for political correctness. Does this mean I shouldn't talk about or eat a steak around a vegetarian? Sounds like the same premise.

All I can say, and I do not say this to try to upset anyone, but they need to get over it. As long as I am not pushing it on them, I am doing nothing wrong.

Peace to all!!!

Response by MAJ Robert (Bob) Petrarca made Sep 14 at 2014 6:10 PM

MAJ Robert (Bob) Petrarca — Sun, 14 Sep 2014 18:10:26 -0400

IMHO, the issue is we have too many people jumping on their soap boxes DEMANDING rights and no one is listening to anyone, most importantly THEMSELVES. Again we're running down the road to the intersection of Politically Correct Blvd and the one way, This Is Offensive Street. What happened to tolerance and coexistence? Why does someone always have to be wrong in their thoughts and beliefs so someone else can be right?

If no one has any tolerance for anyone else's philosophy, beliefs and points of view and we're repeatedly asking questions of this nature, then anyone who has died defending our Constitution has died in vain.

Response by MAJ Robert (Bob) Petrarca made Sep 14 at 2014 6:55 PM

MAJ Robert (Bob) Petrarca — Sun, 14 Sep 2014 18:55:13 -0400

1) I have yet to hear a story about any Atheist refusing to use or handle US currency.

2) I heard yet to hear of any proposed legislation to spend the billions of dollars necessary to make US currency non-denominational and politically correct.

IF the problem were truly that big a deal then these issues SHOULD be central to the argument.

Response by SSG Steve Furman made Sep 14 at 2014 8:28 PM

SSG Steve Furman — Sun, 14 Sep 2014 20:28:04 -0400

NO! I will not tolerate liberal intolerance. If a POTUS wants a manger he gets one if the majority of the people in a city want Catholic or Jewish symbols up during the Holidays at city hall ok great. The founding documents say FREEDOM OF RELIGION NOT FREEDOM FROM RELIGION. To stop the majority from believing is not what the founders envisioned. To stop govt intrusion is. The Constitution does not guarantee a citizen will never be offended. We are being bullied into giving up our rights. I say you can have what ever religion on display the majority wants unless that religion say to cut the heads off of nonbelievers. Or perhaps like our day room at Christmas it have several religions represented and no one complained about the other guys faith. I can have a cross on my desk if that offends you too bad. I do not have the right to stop you from putting a wiccan symbol on your desk. As soldiers we fight for freedom, not to keep people from being offended. To stop some one from showing their faith is denying then religious freedom. Liberals teach hate liberals teach race and class warfare. I am offended by what liberals say but i defend their right to say it. They will not give me the same consideration.

Response by SSG Steve Furman made Sep 14 at 2014 8:30 PM

SSG Steve Furman — Sun, 14 Sep 2014 20:30:48 -0400

Response by CMSgt Private RallyPoint Member made Sep 14 at 2014 10:14 PM

CMSgt Private RallyPoint Member — Sun, 14 Sep 2014 22:14:19 -0400

Of course not! Do you have an example of this actually happening? If you're asking in the context of the Arkansas State situation, the question doesn't seem relevant. The school is a state institution and operates under a different set of rules.

While I can only speak for myself, I suspect most atheists would gladly endorse your right to display religious symbols on your private property. Religious displays really only become a potential issue when public property is a part of the equation.

Response by SPC(P) Private RallyPoint Member made Sep 15 at 2014 2:18 AM

SPC(P) Private RallyPoint Member — Mon, 15 Sep 2014 02:18:21 -0400

Everyone is entitled to the right of free speech under the 1st Amendment in the Bill of Rights. However, athiests do not believe in a god so what should they care if someone else does? Its not hurting them. But then again, if athiests are coming together stating that religious items in public or religious point of views are offensive, then technically they believe in something or no offense would be taken.

Response by SFC Michael Hasbun made Sep 15 at 2014 7:37 AM

SFC Michael Hasbun — Mon, 15 Sep 2014 07:37:51 -0400

Is there a story or news article that this question pertains to, or is it just a hypothetical loaded question?

In any case, no one of any religion (or lack thereof) can force you to take down religious propaganda from your personal property, unless it's somehow obscene or indecent, and the law gets involved.

This is a legal question, not a religious one, and it certainly is not limited to any one group.

Response by SSG Jacob Wiley made Sep 15 at 2014 8:08 AM

SSG Jacob Wiley — Mon, 15 Sep 2014 08:08:57 -0400

Absolutely not. It's MY personal property. This is 100% a case of 'don't like it, don't look". Would an atheist remove his/her "Jesus was a lie" shirt because a Christian didn't like it or was offended? Absolutely not - why would it be considered the other way around?

Response by CPT Ahmed Faried made Sep 15 at 2014 10:06 AM

CPT Ahmed Faried — Mon, 15 Sep 2014 10:06:26 -0400

If you are entering their personal property I suppose it'd be the polite thing to do if they requested it. In the back of my mind i'd consider them douchebags and probably never visit them again.

Response by SGT Marvin "Dave" Bigham made Sep 15 at 2014 10:42 AM

SGT Marvin "Dave" Bigham — Mon, 15 Sep 2014 10:42:37 -0400

Their property- yes (no need to ask... it's theirs). Not their property- no (see definition of "personal"). Free speech works both ways... they can demand, others can display.

Response by SFC Private RallyPoint Member made Sep 15 at 2014 1:05 PM

SFC Private RallyPoint Member — Mon, 15 Sep 2014 13:05:09 -0400

This question is absolutely asinine; I cannot think of a single atheist friend that I have that would ask this (both military and civilian). I wouldn't ever ask someone to remove stuff of their personal property -- it's that exactly, PERSONAL PROPERTY. In the same respect, I wouldn't want someone removing something off of my property. So when I drive by and you see my little Darwinian lizard eating your fish, please don't vandalize my property.

Seriously, why is this even a question right now? People should be able to express themselves freely without reprise when it comes to their personal ideologies/belief systems.

Response by Capt K Fishnish made Sep 15 at 2014 1:19 PM

Capt K Fishnish — Mon, 15 Sep 2014 13:19:13 -0400

That is an open ended and very baited question. I posit that there is an appropriate time and place to express your own faith. But there are times and places that are not appropriate as well because they are completely disrespectful.

Someone trying to destructively scrape a flying spaghetti monster off their truck was inappropriate (a friend caught a stranger doing this to their truck in a parking lot).
Someone wearing a satanic shirt to a christian congregation is inappropriate.
Someone loudly ridiculing a child for not believing the same as they is inappropriate (a parent did this to my son in public school).

However a nativity scene on someone's lawn at christmas is appropriate and should not be protested any more than a harvest display on a wicca lawn or a satanic statue on a satanist house.
Tolerance is important but I believe it is more a matter of respect that must flow both ways even when one side doesn't necessarily understand the other.

Response by SFC Private RallyPoint Member made Sep 15 at 2014 1:19 PM

SFC Private RallyPoint Member — Mon, 15 Sep 2014 13:19:00 -0400

Only if it is offensive by design. Words such as "Do not suffer a witch to live" may be seen as a threat to someone who practices witch craft.

Response by SSgt John Carroll made Sep 15 at 2014 2:23 PM

SSgt John Carroll — Mon, 15 Sep 2014 14:23:29 -0400

No they don't just like they didn't have the right to demand the removal of the crosses on the helmets of ASU's football team honoring their dead. They have to right to request it respectfully & we have the right to respectfully tell them to get bent. But the fact that no one will stand up & tell people "Fuck Off" foe discriminating against people's religion, freedom of speech (Self-Expression) & freedom to exercise religion of their own choosing, causes people to keep getting away with this garbage.

Response by MSgt Carl Daubenspeck made Sep 15 at 2014 5:24 PM

MSgt Carl Daubenspeck — Mon, 15 Sep 2014 17:24:23 -0400

Well Shirt, I don't see how they could or should have a right to demand anything like that. For that matter in actuality athiest's can not really be Americans. To be an American you fall under the Declaration of Independence that states the we are "created equal with inalienable rights endowed by the Creator...", and see Shirt they do not believe in the Creator, so no being American. Sorry. It is a mute point.

Response by SGT Alicia Brenneis made Sep 15 at 2014 6:52 PM

SGT Alicia Brenneis — Mon, 15 Sep 2014 18:52:04 -0400

No, No one has the right to demand anyone remove their religious symbols. I will never understand how someone can be so offended by something they do not believe is real to begin with. I do not believe in unicorns but I do not demand they be removed from toy stores.

Response by SGT Kristin Wiley made Sep 15 at 2014 11:24 PM

SGT Kristin Wiley — Mon, 15 Sep 2014 23:24:29 -0400

They have the right to demand, but that doesn't mean their demands should be met. Atheists have the right to not believe in a higher power. I have the religious freedom to believe in a higher power. You do not see me demanding Atheists to put religious symbols or words on their personal property (against their beliefs). We might offend them through our beliefs, but they offend us by condoning our beliefs (plus we are genuinely concerned for their souls!!!). That's my opinion and I'm sure some religions or individuals are overly eccentric in this matter (how do you think religious extremism starts?). For an example of atheist extremism please Google League of Militant Atheists.

Response by SGT John Wicks made Sep 16 at 2014 2:09 AM

SGT John Wicks — Tue, 16 Sep 2014 02:09:52 -0400

They have the right as much as I do to go to their house and open the bible and force them to have bible study! Really?!!

Response by SrA Jacob Cosola made Sep 16 at 2014 10:14 AM

SrA Jacob Cosola — Tue, 16 Sep 2014 10:14:30 -0400

Personal property is personal property, I don't understand how this can even become a question? But then again, everyone is so selfish about their own rights, they forget that other people have rights as well.

Response by MAJ Private RallyPoint Member made Sep 16 at 2014 1:34 PM

MAJ Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 16 Sep 2014 13:34:43 -0400

"Do Athiest have the right to demand that individuals remove religious symbols or words from their personal property?"

As an atheist (although I prefer the more accurate designation of Humanist) the answer is pretty simple:
NO.

Or, to be more precise, we can demand, but as long as something on personal property violates no laws for other reasons, they'd be hollow words. Personal property is just that. Besides, I would support your *right* to have that on your property in the first place; religious freedom must go all ways, or it's meaningless. As long as you don't try to do the same over *government* property, I see no issue here.

Response by PO1 Steven Kuhn made Sep 16 at 2014 2:50 PM

PO1 Steven Kuhn — Tue, 16 Sep 2014 14:50:01 -0400

If I am wearing my cross or carrying my Bible on my personal property while on their personal property then I will just leave. I do not force my religious beliefs with anyone, but share them out of love and respect for them and the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob that I serve. Since I do not force, but share out of love and respect then I would not allow anyone to force me to take any of my items of Faith from my person or property. It is my individual right just as it is their right not to believe!

Response by SFC Private RallyPoint Member made Sep 16 at 2014 8:23 PM

SFC Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 16 Sep 2014 20:23:27 -0400

I am just wondering, Why would an atheist care? I was brought up Catholic and consider myself an atheist now and could care less what you worship or what symbols you use.

Response by MSgt Private RallyPoint Member made Sep 17 at 2014 1:16 AM

MSgt Private RallyPoint Member — Wed, 17 Sep 2014 01:16:34 -0400

No. Unless someone provides verifiable period that viewing a religious symbol of any kind provokes a spontaneous and uncontrolled conversion to that religion, their point of offense is nonsense.

Response by TSgt Private RallyPoint Member made Sep 17 at 2014 5:48 AM

TSgt Private RallyPoint Member — Wed, 17 Sep 2014 05:48:05 -0400

According to the constitution, yes. Freedom of speech -they can demand all day long. Freedom of religion- you, I, and everyone else have the right to carry on expressing our beliefs through the display of religious symbols and words. To paraphrase the constitution, the government shall make no laws that either establish or prohibit the free exercise of a particular religion. Unfortunately, because of the free speech part, and our overly litigious society, people, businesses, schools, and the military willingly give up their constitutionally protected freedom of religion because they simply cannot afford to defend it in court when someone challenges them to a protracted legal battle.

Response by 1SG Private RallyPoint Member made Sep 17 at 2014 12:22 PM

1SG Private RallyPoint Member — Wed, 17 Sep 2014 12:22:50 -0400

Yeah they have the right to demand it. However, they should not be disappointed when their expectation is not met.

Response by SSG Private RallyPoint Member made Sep 17 at 2014 12:29 PM

SSG Private RallyPoint Member — Wed, 17 Sep 2014 12:29:10 -0400

You know I always read about atheists and that they don't believe in God but the only thing I have ever witnessed is atheists attacking my God, the Christian God. I don't think I have ever read a story about atheists going after islam, Buddhism, Hinduism, Wiccan, or any other god. I guess it isn't politically correct to go after anything except Christians. People are threatened by standards, morality, and dislike because it means that they can't act wickedly without consequences. They know deep inside that they are doing wrong but refuse to acknowledge it. In the Bible it says a fool hates the rod. That is a hate for disipline. As a soldier I know that disipline is a must to maintain order. Look at the condition of our country and nothing else needs to be said. The funny thing is even if we took God out of the Bible, the tenants espoused in the book are universal. The basic message is that there is and always will be consequences for actions. If we accept that then that is the beginning of wisdom. God Bless everyone and I pray for my country because I love this nation. I believe that God did bless us to be a light in a very dark world.

Response by SFC Private RallyPoint Member made Sep 18 at 2014 7:05 AM

SFC Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 18 Sep 2014 07:05:12 -0400

No, they do not have a right to "demand...." But atheists, being a religious minority, tend to respect religious freedom, generally. I haven't heard any atheists object to personal religious symbols.

Response by CPT Private RallyPoint Member made Sep 18 at 2014 6:55 PM

CPT Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 18 Sep 2014 18:55:24 -0400

No. Nobody does. Remember, its ok if something offends you but that doesn't mean you're right.

Response by 1SG Private RallyPoint Member made Sep 19 at 2014 9:46 AM

1SG Private RallyPoint Member — Fri, 19 Sep 2014 09:46:50 -0400

As an Atheist, I could care less about religious symbols and words. I routinely bow my head in ceremonies when prayer is given. I do this moreso out of a social norm. It doesn't bother me in the least. I feel this issue comes from the evolving public sentiment of "I have the right to sue, buck the system, and make everyone suffer because I can".
Americans have become whiny in my opinion because the media has empowered these individuals to feel that "believers" are proselytizing everyone. It's a two way street, many Atheists are taking their right of belief and using that as a platform to dissuade public displays of other beliefs since they don't have a belief to tangibly promote. By this I mean they don't have crosses to display, prayers, houses of worship, etc.
It truly is sickening that the legal system and media sources promote the opression of religious beliefs for the sake of appeasing a secular group of individuals on the basis of political correctness, out of fear of being plastered all over media outlets.
In my opinion let everyone believe in what they want and if you don't like it, ignore it.

Response by CPT Private RallyPoint Member made Sep 20 at 2014 8:57 AM

CPT Private RallyPoint Member — Sat, 20 Sep 2014 08:57:38 -0400

Atheist could bring the individuals to court to claim the symbols are an eyesore to the public and request the court order the symbols be removed. However the counter argument would then be using the "separation of church and state" clause against the atheists. Atheism is a belief (faith) there is no God. I think many people do not catergorize atheism as a religion but if you do then the court is favoring one religion over another, which is the heart of the separation of church and state.

Response by SFC Private RallyPoint Member made Oct 3 at 2014 6:17 AM

SFC Private RallyPoint Member — Fri, 03 Oct 2014 06:17:22 -0400

Everyone has a right to complain and demand whatever they want. It is called freedom of speech. That being said I also reserve the right to go tell them to go do something to themselves. If I decide I want to put up a giant cross on my property to celebrate Easter, or a nativity scene during Christmas that is my right to do so. If you come on my property and tell me I have to take it down because it offends you I will gladly help you look away as I escort you off my property. It is your choice to have no faith in anything, do not try to take mine away.

Response by SPC James Mcneil made Oct 5 at 2014 2:35 PM

SPC James Mcneil — Sun, 05 Oct 2014 14:35:00 -0400

They have the right to turn their head. If I saw an atheist with a shirt that said "God is dead" or "God doesn't exist," I wouldn't demand that person take that shirt off or turn it inside out. Why not? Because I am a grown man, and I can handle it.
For an atheist to demand that anyone remove a religious symbol or word from their own personal property is childish at best.

Response by SSG Private RallyPoint Member made Dec 20 at 2014 5:32 AM

SSG Private RallyPoint Member — Sat, 20 Dec 2014 05:32:09 -0500

If they didn't buy it for me then they don't have a right to demand I do a damned thing with my personal items. Fk them!

Response by Cpl Benjamin Long made Mar 19 at 2019 2:27 PM

Cpl Benjamin Long — Tue, 19 Mar 2019 14:27:59 -0400

Yes, they have the right to demand... but they don't have the right to expect someone to obey thier demands because they lack basic authority or agency to enforce those same demands

Response by SGT David Petree made Nov 5 at 2019 5:07 PM

SGT David Petree — Tue, 05 Nov 2019 17:07:07 -0500

under free speech, they can demand what they want. under religious words & symbols they can kiss my ass. I ant changing just because they want it !!