You have got to love a good old fashioned debate on the public square. What could be more American? Today we have Christians versus the athiests and dueling monuments. Read about it here: http://www.racinepost.blogspot.com/.
Now I do not wish to debate the theology, rather, I wish to explore the reasoning and the behavior of the atheist.
If I understand the atheists argument, it is that there ought to be seperation between church and state, and that religious displays should not be on public property as this amounts to shoving religion down other's throats. Presumably the atheists would also want laws which forbid their own beliefs, or lack of them, from being expressed on public property. Lead atheist Al Sorenson said as much; "if that (nativity scene) wasn't here, then this pyramid wouldn't be here either."
Thus, Sorenson holds the principle that expressions of belief should not occur on public property. But he is willing to abandon his own principle, by displaying a monument to atheism, in order to demonstrate what exactly? That two wrongs make a right?
I am not impressed.