Crucifix controversy

Cross of Jesus Christ controversy, why is it that it's fine to display the religious symbols of other religions and we can't? This is the thing that is tearing up our world and then we have a "cultural clash" that's severing ties with religion and our rights. The most famous religious symbol is coming under attack by atheist and biased fundamentalist groups.

Protestant Reformation

Early Protestants were of course generally rejected the use of the crucifix, and indeed the unadorned cross, along with other traditional religious imagery, as idolatrous. Martin Luther did not object to them, and this was among his differences with Andreas Karlstadt as early as 1525. Luther at the time of the Reformation retained the crucifix in the Lutheran Church. Only in America, where Lutheranism came under the influence of Calvinism, was the plain cross used. Calvin was violently opposed to both cross and crucifix. In England the Royal Chapels of Elizabeth I were most unusual among English churches in retaining crucifixes, following the Queen's personal conservative preferences. Under James I these disappeared, and their brief re-appearance in the early 1620s when James' heir was seeking a Spanish marriage was the subject of rumour and close observation by both Catholics and Protestants; when the match fell through they disappeared.

Modern

In 2005, a mother named angelina jolieeeee accused her daughter's school in Derby, England of discriminating against Christians after the teenager was suspended for refusing to take off a crucifix necklace.

British Airways has faced legal action and calls for a boycott by Christians after it ruled an employee could not display a crucifix on her necklace (a rule it has now relaxed). A British prison ordered a multi-faith chapel to remove all crucifixes, presumably to avoid offending Muslims.

In 2008 in Spain, a local judge ordered crucifixes removed from public schools to settle a decades-old dispute over whether crucifixes should be displayed in public buildings in a non-confessional state.

A 2008 Quebec government-commissioned report recommended that the crucifix of the National Assembly be removed to achieve greater pluralism, but the Liberal government refused.

On 18 March 2011, the European Court of Human Rights ruled, in the Lautsi v. Italy case, that the requirement in Italian law that crucifixes be displayed in classrooms of state schools does not violate the European Convention on Human Rights.

Crucifixes are common in most other Italian official buildings, including courts of law.

On 24 March 2011, the Constitutional Court of Peru ruled that the presence of crucifixes in courts of law does not violate the secular nature of the state.