“I don’t think you have a right to control their thoughts.”
No question about that. and certainly an individual should be allowed to dispose any symbol or statue on his property. But the state paying for and glorifying a symbol that represents hate (in the view of many) is a different story.
The arch of titus is a good question. no I dont think it should be knocked down.
I’m not sure if I’m being inconsistent. (I dont think so – please tell me if you disagree ) for the followign reasons (some of these may be linked and arent necessarily distinct reasons) :
1) The historical aspect the arch is almost a 1000 years old the confederate staues are less than a century old and arent historically significant
2) The arch no longer serves as a “glorification” it is a tourist and historical cite. I don’t think its existence today shows the Italian government glorifying its predecessor’s triumph over Judea
3) It doesn’t bother me. in fact it provides a form of nechama here we still are a thousand years later while the once mighty Roman empire is a sophistical tourist sight. netzach yisroel Lo yishaker. (“Titus Titus vi bizt du” )
that one I find easy.
A harder one for me to answer is statues like Calvary on the Charles Bridge in Prague* which I find very painful, and to a lesser extent representations of “Ecclesia and Synagoga,” On the one hand they arent nice, but on the other hand we are in golus so perhaps that pained feeling is appropriate . On the other (third?) hand it is a chilul Hashem I just dont know.
If I had to vote I’d vote to remove them, but I wouldn’t organize a moment to remove them I guess as some sort of peshara, but I feel torn about this
(*when I was there in 2005 the legs of the heh’s in the Shem Havaya had been removed so that it was yud-daled-yud -daled which was a partial nechama, it was said that this was done by a “vandal” but that the Governent acquiesced However I see on more recent pictures that was “repaired” and is now fully written again)