Media Matters reports:
[A]ccording to the American Red Cross website, it was “[i]n honor of the Swiss ... [that] the symbol of a red cross on a white background (the reverse of the Swiss flag) was identified as a protective emblem in conflict areas.” While the cross on the Swiss flag originated in the 1200s from “a symbol of the Christian faith,” according to the Swiss Embassy in the United States, the Red Cross makes no mention of Christianity as a reason for adopting the symbol. ...
In addition to stating that its symbol was chosen as the reverse of the Swiss flag, the American Red Cross website adds that “[t]he Red Cross idea was born in 1859, when Henry Dunant, a young Swiss man, came upon the scene of a bloody battle in Solferino, Italy,” and that the “emblem was adopted at this first International Conference as a symbol of neutrality” at the first-ever Geneva Convention at Geneva, Switzerland, in 1864.
Media Matters put up this information to explain how Bill O’Reilly was incorrect to use this as an example for why it’s wrong to remove the large Christian cross from Mt. Soledad in San Diego. O’Reilly isn’t the only person who thinks that the red cross is a Christian cross, though — that appears to be a belief held by many Muslims and why Muslim organizations use a red crescent. Vehicles with a red cross on them might be targeted as a Christian vehicle in wrong place. Thus, Christians like Bill O’Reilly who are trying to defend Christianity are making the same mistakes as non-Christian terrorists who would like to attack Christianity.
The irony of this is truly astounding.
Separation of Church & State:
- Separation of Church and State 101
- Secularism 101
- What is the Separation of Church and State?
- Religion's Place in the Public Square
- Myths About Church/State Separation
Christian & Religious Privilege: