Florida drivers can order more than 100 specialty license plates celebrating everything from manatees to the Miami Heat, but one now under consideration would be the first in the nation to explicitly promote a specific religion.

The Florida Legislature is considering a specialty plate with a design that includes a Christian cross, a stained-glass window and the words “I Believe…”

If the plate is approved, Florida would become the first state to have a license plate featuring a religious symbol that’s not part of a college logo. Approval would almost certainly face a court challenge.

Bullard, the plate’s sponsor, isn’t sure all groups should be able to express their preference. If atheists came up with an “I Don’t Believe” plate, for example, he would probably oppose it.

It’s amazing how many endless loops the “faithful” construct.




  1. Thorndike says:

    This separation of church and state becomes a NON-issue IF and ONLY IF the state will print license plates for any oganization that requests them. If there is no problem printing FSM plates, Islamic plates, etc, then the state is being equal to all. The moment the state tries to decide WHICH religion it will support over another they cross the line.

  2. bobbo says:

    #81–thorndike ((Oh, so tempting that nickname))==I’m thinking the same as you, but would like to find a lawcase on point “because” there is a concept of something being unbiased on its face or original intent, yet still biased and illegal in its effect.

    I can see a line of argument that allowing all vanity to be displayed is illegal if it coerces a person to get religious plates in order not to be singled out for a helping of good christian love?

    That is the rule in much of racial discrimination laws, and I could see the argument for it here. I am also a bit leary of the Government having free speech rights. They don’t. Only we the people do.

  3. Wikipedia does have a section on specialty plates, which these are.

    http://tinyurl.com/6e3a87

    Here are a couple of relevant paragraphs from the above link, leaving in the note about a missing citation:

    Because specialty plates are government issued, they are required under First Amendment issues to be issued as a type to any group or organization that qualifies under the same terms as any other group to be issued a type of plate. The State of Maryland was going to revoke permission for use of the Confederate flag from a certain plate by the Sons of Confederate Veterans, but a court ruled that the only way the state could do that was to revoke permission on all specialty plates. As this would have cost the state several million dollars in revenue, the state decided it could live with the flag plate.[citation needed]

    In addition states may provide commemorative plates as a standard issue. A number of states issued plates recognizing the U.S. Bicentennial in 1976. Several states have issued plates commemorating milestones in their own state; in 1998 Alaska celebrated the Centennial of the Klondike Gold Rush with new license plates showing prospectors on the trail to the Yukon. States often issue plates with their motto or slogan, such as North Carolina’s “First in Flight” and Ohio’s “Birthplace of Aviation.” These are arguably also general commemoratives.

    I think Bullard is going to have a problem keeping any requests off the plates if this goes through. He should keep Pandora’s Rule in mind, “never open anything you did not close yourself.”



Bad Behavior has blocked 24576 access attempts in the last 7 days.