RubySoho
Winston
Holy Rollers
July 7th 2008 22:47
Picture this: several weeks after placing an order with the Department of Motor Vehicles, you receive a package. It's your custom license plates! Eagerly, you rip open the packaging and inspect them to make sure that they are what you ordered. Sure enough, all is well. You are now the proud owner of the state-issued "God is Fake" plates. Even better, you paid practically nothing for them, as the cost was absorbed by the government! Congratulations.
If the above scenario sounds implausible, that's because it is. The state has no business sponsoring license plates that either endorse or refute religion, and such a license plate would never, ever, be approved through the legislature. Well, not a plate refuting religion, anyway.......
The state of South Carolina legislature has voted unanimously to issue customized plates that are based on this (rejected) design from a similar proposal in Florida:
This isn't even the dubious "everyone's god" sometimes claimed to be represented in the phrase "In God We Trust" on our money or mentioned in the Pledge of Allegiance. This is a clear reference to Jesus and Christianity. An obvious violation of church/state separation, right? Well, actually, in most cases the answer would be no. Why not? Because:
1) Clearly, these plates are an elective purchase. No one is compelled in any way to display them or endorse them against their will
2) Any private organization can submit a design for a custom plate to be sold through the DMV. An initial production deposit is required (it varies by state, but it is generally in the low thousands of dollars), and profits exceeding the regular state registration fees, etc. go back to the sponsoring organization. In short, custom plates are generally privately funded and as such sidestep church/step entanglement. The state facilitates the transaction, but does not put forward any money towards production nor make any money on the sale.
In light of the above, I don't have a huge problem with a religiously themed license plate. However, the South Carolina case contains some variables that change the nature of the issue significantly. Consider the following information, taken from cnn.com
[Lt. Gov. Andre] Bauer has offered to personally pay a $4,000 deposit required for the Department of Motor Vehicles to begin producing the plates. The fee would be returned to him later.
While individuals can ask the DMV to print plates for other faiths -- for a $4,000 fee -- the request would be subject to significant limits and rules not imposed for the Christian plate. Other tags could feature a religious symbol -- such as the Star of David -- but no words would be allowed.
Bauer said allowing Christians to have a specialty license plate is freedom of speech. He said those who oppose are prejudiced against Christians.
There is no sponsoring organization. The sponsor is the Lt. Gov, the second highest-ranking elected official in the state. How is it possible not to interpret this as a directly state-sponsored endorsement of a particular religion? Not to mention that plates for other faiths would face restrictions to which this plate is not subject?! Prejudiced against Christians, Mr. Bauer? Try prejudiced against government officials who take liberties with the law.
Another snippet of info, taken from the New York Times:
Mr. [Gov. Mark] Sanford told the department to charge people just enough to reimburse the state for the cost to produce the plate, estimated at $4 to $6, and to not allow any organization to benefit from its sales.
So, while Gov. Sanford did not sign this bill, apparently acknowledging the potential issues with the proposal, he did address the fee situation. Since there is no sponsor group, and since it is clearly a constitutional violation for Lt. Gov. Bauer to profit from sale of these plates, Gov. Sanford sought to limit the cost of the plate to the bare minimum and thus avoid any charges of government profit from religious endorsement. This raises another problem, however. It still results in preferential treatment for Christians, in that a plate that should cost them $70 now only costs $4! Were a Jewish, Muslim, Hindu, or atheist group to sponsor plates, purchasers would pay the full price. An unintended benefit for Christians, perhaps, but an unequal one all the same.
Now, personally, I find the idea of advertising either for or against faith on a license plate fairly asinine. I'm not much of a fan of Jesus fish stickers, yellow ribbon magnets, flying spaghetti monster decals, or any other car-borne faith advertisements. Just my personal preference. So, to me, these license plates are just plain silly. Still, I have no problem with people having them, provided the proper channels are observed. But when a high-ranking government official personally funds and sponsors this, and the plates are then offered for a discounted rate unavailable for any other designs, I have a BIG problem. If Christians in South Carolina want custom Cross plates, then Christians in South Carolina can come up with the funds to produce them, and charge the proper fees. This is government endorsement of a particular religion, clear as day. Either the state must provide custom plates relevant to every faith, at reduced cost, or this design must be withdrawn.
"If I were never to get elected or serve in another capacity because I pronounce my faith as a Christian, I don't have a problem with that," Bauer said.
Mr. Bauer, you can profess your faith as Great High Priest of the Smiling Benevolent Radish Cult for all I care. What you can't do is make that pronouncement part of an explicit government endorsement of your faith. See what I'm driving at?
Opinions?
If the above scenario sounds implausible, that's because it is. The state has no business sponsoring license plates that either endorse or refute religion, and such a license plate would never, ever, be approved through the legislature. Well, not a plate refuting religion, anyway.......
The state of South Carolina legislature has voted unanimously to issue customized plates that are based on this (rejected) design from a similar proposal in Florida:
"Separation of what and what now?"
This isn't even the dubious "everyone's god" sometimes claimed to be represented in the phrase "In God We Trust" on our money or mentioned in the Pledge of Allegiance. This is a clear reference to Jesus and Christianity. An obvious violation of church/state separation, right? Well, actually, in most cases the answer would be no. Why not? Because:
1) Clearly, these plates are an elective purchase. No one is compelled in any way to display them or endorse them against their will
2) Any private organization can submit a design for a custom plate to be sold through the DMV. An initial production deposit is required (it varies by state, but it is generally in the low thousands of dollars), and profits exceeding the regular state registration fees, etc. go back to the sponsoring organization. In short, custom plates are generally privately funded and as such sidestep church/step entanglement. The state facilitates the transaction, but does not put forward any money towards production nor make any money on the sale.
In light of the above, I don't have a huge problem with a religiously themed license plate. However, the South Carolina case contains some variables that change the nature of the issue significantly. Consider the following information, taken from cnn.com
[Lt. Gov. Andre] Bauer has offered to personally pay a $4,000 deposit required for the Department of Motor Vehicles to begin producing the plates. The fee would be returned to him later.
While individuals can ask the DMV to print plates for other faiths -- for a $4,000 fee -- the request would be subject to significant limits and rules not imposed for the Christian plate. Other tags could feature a religious symbol -- such as the Star of David -- but no words would be allowed.
Bauer said allowing Christians to have a specialty license plate is freedom of speech. He said those who oppose are prejudiced against Christians.
There is no sponsoring organization. The sponsor is the Lt. Gov, the second highest-ranking elected official in the state. How is it possible not to interpret this as a directly state-sponsored endorsement of a particular religion? Not to mention that plates for other faiths would face restrictions to which this plate is not subject?! Prejudiced against Christians, Mr. Bauer? Try prejudiced against government officials who take liberties with the law.
Another snippet of info, taken from the New York Times:
Mr. [Gov. Mark] Sanford told the department to charge people just enough to reimburse the state for the cost to produce the plate, estimated at $4 to $6, and to not allow any organization to benefit from its sales.
So, while Gov. Sanford did not sign this bill, apparently acknowledging the potential issues with the proposal, he did address the fee situation. Since there is no sponsor group, and since it is clearly a constitutional violation for Lt. Gov. Bauer to profit from sale of these plates, Gov. Sanford sought to limit the cost of the plate to the bare minimum and thus avoid any charges of government profit from religious endorsement. This raises another problem, however. It still results in preferential treatment for Christians, in that a plate that should cost them $70 now only costs $4! Were a Jewish, Muslim, Hindu, or atheist group to sponsor plates, purchasers would pay the full price. An unintended benefit for Christians, perhaps, but an unequal one all the same.
Now, personally, I find the idea of advertising either for or against faith on a license plate fairly asinine. I'm not much of a fan of Jesus fish stickers, yellow ribbon magnets, flying spaghetti monster decals, or any other car-borne faith advertisements. Just my personal preference. So, to me, these license plates are just plain silly. Still, I have no problem with people having them, provided the proper channels are observed. But when a high-ranking government official personally funds and sponsors this, and the plates are then offered for a discounted rate unavailable for any other designs, I have a BIG problem. If Christians in South Carolina want custom Cross plates, then Christians in South Carolina can come up with the funds to produce them, and charge the proper fees. This is government endorsement of a particular religion, clear as day. Either the state must provide custom plates relevant to every faith, at reduced cost, or this design must be withdrawn.
"If I were never to get elected or serve in another capacity because I pronounce my faith as a Christian, I don't have a problem with that," Bauer said.
Mr. Bauer, you can profess your faith as Great High Priest of the Smiling Benevolent Radish Cult for all I care. What you can't do is make that pronouncement part of an explicit government endorsement of your faith. See what I'm driving at?
Opinions?
| 108 |
| Vote |
Add To: 
Subscribe to this blog
Comment by Morgan Bell
Science News
Deep Pencil
Business News
Movie Train
Artist Quirk
Comment by Steven Barrett's OpEd Blog
You're talking about South Carolina, DEEP SOUTHERN FRIED IN THE BIBLE BELT.
Bauer can get away with it because it's ingrained in that state's culture. Now, if the guy's a Baptist, all the more shame to his reputation because Baptists have long resisted any encroachment of the state into the governance of church matters.
When Thomas Jefferson wrote those words "wall of separation of church and state" they were part of a private letter sent to Danbury CT Baptists who were taking a hard time from the Congregationalists (who ran New England and Mass. as a theocracy until the 1830s, no less!)
While Columbia, SC's capitol is the only city in the Bible Belt to welcome a Pope (JPII) no less! it's very much a rock-solid Protestant evangelical semi-theocracy -- and there are some imovements and nstitutions that get more than a wink and blind eye favorable treatment, most notably the "born again hard-core evangelical me gachurch movement" and Bob Jones University. (Lawdy!) BJU promotes BIGOTRY and close-mindedness like you probably would never experience in Austrailia -- or for that matter most states outside of the Bible Belt over here. Even the late Rev. Jerry Falwell's Liberty University is almost liberal by comparison to BJU.
I'm not at all surprised that Florida and SC led the way on this religious symbol/lic plate squabble. One of Fla's leading "bible colleges" is Pensacola Bible College," which is very similar theologically speaking to BJU.
Small coincidences?
Interestingly enough, you don't have the problem in FL because the state is becoming predominately Catholic and the large and very influential Jewish sector in SE Florida's Gold Coast would rise up in high dudgeon and rightly so if there were any shennanigans going on like those in SC.
I have little or no problems with college alumni plates, historically themed plates (of a very generic nature, i.e. the Challenger memorial plates) or something very non-controversial to add some color. But the state has no business allowing for religious symbols for practical, never mind legal reasons. You're always going to upset somebody and please damn few. Best to have good old plain plates, no matter how boring, esp . when government money is involved and state pols are using them to demogogue their faith. That Bauer isn't evangelizing the Lord, he's hurting Him.
If you ever want to hear a funny song, listen to Travis Tritt's "Bible Belt" written for "My Cousin Vinny." Funny as hell ... jes' like the movie. And get the lyrics!
Comment by RubySoho
Music Zone
Thought Zone
But just in case you think this situation is limited to South Carolina, Mississippi also has license plates that read "Choose Life".
Comment by Winston
Small Thoughts on Big Questions
And really, as I've said, I'm OK with the plates. It's the way these plates came about that gets under my skin.....
Comment by Winston
Small Thoughts on Big Questions
I live in Massachusetts, so I'm quite familiar with the geographical divides as they pertain to religious zeal. I can't say that I'm surprised at the attempt, being that SC is the way it is, but I'm a bit surprised that it's the Lt. Governor leading the charge. I would have thought that experience, common sense, or political advisers would have cautioned him about taking such action. Shows what I know.
Overall I think you're on the right track. To be safe, the state should stick with things like sports teams and hobbies. Once you start mixing gov't and religion, even in regards to something as insignificant as a license plate, you're getting into dangerous territory that's probably better left undisturbed. Still, I personally have no problem with the cross plates, provided they are processed just like every other design out there (private funds, proper charges, no gov't endorsement).
Thanks for the feedback!
Comment by Winston
Small Thoughts on Big Questions
Comment by RubySoho
Music Zone
Thought Zone
Comment by Josie
In the name of equality, religion should be just as allowed on a licence plate as environmental causes or a school. I DON'T agree with the government giving any type of preferential treatment to these plates.
Seperation of church and state doesn't mean that god isn't allowed in people's lives, it just means that the government not give preferential treatment to one religion over another. If they aren't sponsoring other religious plates, they shouldn't be sponsoring any.
Personally I think they are all pretty tacky, but the founding fathers didn't account for good taste.
Comment by Winston
Small Thoughts on Big Questions
Thanks for the comment
Comment by Steven Barrett's OpEd Blog
Hmmm, maybe a set of plates in honor of Daniel Shays outta be in the works. You know that'll NEVER get past Beacon Hill!
LOL or Howl Out Loud -- can you imagine one of our Lt. Guvs trying to pull what Bauer's up to in SC. They'd find out when the next piece of the Big Dig was going to collapse and place him there.
Comment by RubySoho
Music Zone
Thought Zone
But do the sentiments of one antiabortion activist say anything about the position of state officials? Apparently so: Mississippi actually sells license plates that say "Choose Life" on them, with all proceeds going to Crisis Pregnancy Centers. What can women get at these centers, 2,000 of which exist nationwide? Free pregnancy tests, confidential counseling, free ultrasounds so the women can see their unborn children, and free baby clothes. What can't they get? Free birth control or birth control counseling, information on where to get an abortion, or free prenatal care.
Hmmm.
Comment by RubySoho
Music Zone
Thought Zone
salon.com
Comment by Clint Emry
Strategy and Solutions
Comment by Jeff Musall
Secular Humanity
Comment by Morgan Bell
Science News
Deep Pencil
Business News
Movie Train
Artist Quirk
Most of states with "Choose Life" programs provide, as does Florida, that the proceeds of these sales go exclusively to organizations that counsel women with unwanted pregnancies to choose adoption. In fact, the legislation in most states expressly provides that any program offering referrals or even discussing the option of abortion is barred from funding.
Really Long Link
the pro-adoption specialty plate must be approved in each state via particular government legislation
in Florida it is:
Title XXIII Motor Vehicles Chapter320 Motor Vehicle Licenses
320.08058 Specialty license plates.--
(29) CHOOSE LIFE LICENSE PLATES.--
Really Long Link
im not sure who puts up the deposit money for the designs (if any), but the "Choose Life" plate people seem to be a highly organised group purposely and openly using plates as political propaganda, which is readily approved by many politicians
apparently lobbyists for the death penalty may attempt a "Choose Death" plate
crazy world
Comment by Winston
Small Thoughts on Big Questions
As for a MA governor trying to hustle that license plate through.....good luck. Deval Patrick tried using taxpayer money to buy luxury curtains for his office and got nailed, so I doubt he'd have any luck on this front.
"They'd find out when the next piece of the Big Dig was going to collapse". That would be funny if it wasn't probably true. Our tax dollars at work!
(sorry for all the MA specific chat here, everyone!)
Comment by Winston
Small Thoughts on Big Questions
Comment by Winston
Small Thoughts on Big Questions
Thanks for stopping by!
Comment by Winston
Small Thoughts on Big Questions
Comment by Winston
Small Thoughts on Big Questions
Comment by Morgan Bell
Science News
Deep Pencil
Business News
Movie Train
Artist Quirk
id be interested to know how many designs are proposed in any given year by any given state and how many are approved with legislation
i would have less to say about an adoption charity if it wasnt taking a direct swipe at the rights of women to have abortions through the wording of its slogan . . . the wording of the plate is politically charged and borders on hate-mongering (in my opinion)
i wonder if they would let the KKK sponsor a plate saying "Choose Whites"
also from the CNN info you provided above:
"Other tags could feature a religious symbol -- such as the Star of David -- but no words would be allowed."
i note that almost all of the florida plates include words
heres some pictures:
Really Long Link
i guess in the end it isnt that much different to a bumper sticker, it just depends how consistant they are with their approvals
in my opinion i dont think political slogans of any kind are appropriate for license plates
thanks for inspiring me to research it further, i really am enjoying going the extra mile!
Comment by Winston
Small Thoughts on Big Questions
Ultimately I agree. There's plenty of bumper stickers, magnets, decals and signs for cars out there for purchase that promote whatever position you want without involving the state. I don't see why that isn't sufficient, personally. Political slogans and such on state-issued license plates are bound to annoy certain groups, and to draw accusations of government endorsement of one position or another. Still, for the time being, as long as the designs aren't flagrantly racist or hateful and are sponsored by private funds, and as long as competing ideologies are equally represented, then I can't see an alternative but to allow them to go through. Now that custom plates are a part of the culture, it would be tough to put that genie back in the bottle.
Glad you're enjoying yourself
Comment by Steven Barrett's OpEd Blog
Just wait'll license plates go all out commercially privatized, not just for colleges, symbols, pro-ball teams, etc. That's when Ben and Jerry's buys all of Vermont and puts "chunky monkey" plates out; NH puts company logos of businesses that used to exist in MA and Bean's buys out ME and plugs its catalogues.
I guess Patrick will try to shill that curtain store up in Stockbridge, very "upscale" like himself; RI will mooch off the MA Patriots and CT will have pix of blackjack and roulette tables on their plates.
And maybe you'll get your UM plates if the BC, Harvard, BU and UM/Boston-boyos on Beacon Hill will remember there's a large state university some 90 miles to their west. As for Shays? Yeah, sure.
My parody here isn't a geography tour of New England, but an a flashlight on the absurdity of all this license plate political nonsense.
But it sure beats the old "who do YOU know" whispering game people played if they saw you driving with any plates with numbers under a 1000. To have a plate under 100, you had to know either God or the Guv, and not necessarily in that order!