The W
Views: 97771156
Main | FAQ | Search: Y! / G | Calendar | Color chart | Log in for more!
29.7.14 0348
The W - Current Events & Politics - Ten Commandments
This thread has 70 referrals leading to it
Register and log in to post!
Pages: 1 2 3 Next(1847 newer) Next thread | Previous thread
User
Post (43 total)
Zeruel
Thirty Millionth Hit
Moderator








Since: 2.1.02
From: The Silver Spring in the Land of Mary.

Since last post: 3 hours
Last activity: 3 hours
#1 Posted on | Instant Rating: 4.05
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A52660-2003Aug27.html

I couldn't find the quote I saw on my local NBC news, but they are liking this to ROSA PARKS!!!!!

What is so hard to understand? It's the Seperation of Church and State.

Ten Commandments = church

Alabama Supreme Court building = state

"That is the same position taken by evangelical leaders such as Land and Robertson. Although there is "no question" that the courts erred in declaring the monument an unconstitutional infringement on the separation of church and state, "we are people who respect the role of law," Robertson said in a radio interview this week."

WHAT? I mean, what kind of crack is he smoking? It's like he's trying to debate "Well, 2 + 2 does not always equal 4 and you have to realize that in the eyes of god that it equals 10"

I know I'm a little late on all this, but how can they liken this to the Civil Rights movement where people where denied practacally everything because of their skin color, and this where they don't want a religious display on state grounds?

There were only 2 logical solutions.

1) Include ALL religions to have a 2 ton momument (yeah, right, just wait until the Pagans, Wiccans, and Jedi try to place their alters "SATAN-WORSHIPPERS!" they would cry)

2) Exclude ALL religions, to show preference to none.

I think they made the right choice...

But really, comparing this to Rosa Parks really burns me up.
(Yes, I know that they feel that their rights are being trampled, but imangine if people were crying "We have to fight to keep the Expos in Montreal! Our struggle is like the Jews in the nazi death camps!"

Doesn't that feel just a tad uncomfortable and wrong?)




Almost finished my 2002-2003 College Football raitings. Watch this space!!!

Promote this thread!
CRZ
Big Brother
Administrator








Since: 9.12.01
From: ミネアポリス

Since last post: 10 hours
Last activity: 1 hour
AIM:  
ICQ:  
Y!:
#2 Posted on | Instant Rating: 8.65
    Originally posted by rikidozan
    It's like he's trying to debate "Well, 2 + 2 does not always equal 4 and you have to realize that in the eyes of god that it equals 10"
He could do that! In a quadriary system, 2 plus 2 DOES equal 10. God probably invented base-4.

Find me "separation of church and state" in the following text.

FIRST AMENDMENT

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.


http://www.house.gov/Constitution/Constitution.html
http://www.house.gov/burr/text_of_the_amendments_of_the_co.htm



(edited by CRZ on 28.8.03 1424)


CRZ
Bizzle Izzle
Bockwurst








Since: 26.6.02
From: New Jersey, USA

Since last post: 160 days
Last activity: 160 days
#3 Posted on


OOooooh! Word Search! I've always been pretty good at that game, but I'll be damned if I can find "separation of church and state" in that quote. You didn't hide the text with those spoiler tags did you?



'But if one is struck by me only a little, that is far different, the stroke is a sharp thing and suddenly lays him lifeless, and that man's wife goes with cheeks torn in lamentation, and his children are fatherless, while he, staining the soil with his red blood, rots away, and there are more birds than women swarming about him.' Diomedes, The Iliad of Homer

Maiden RULES!!!
Zeruel
Thirty Millionth Hit
Moderator








Since: 2.1.02
From: The Silver Spring in the Land of Mary.

Since last post: 3 hours
Last activity: 3 hours
#4 Posted on | Instant Rating: 4.05
    Originally posted by CRZ
    Find me "separation of church and state" in the following text.

    FIRST AMENDMENT

    Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.



You are correct, the first amendment doesn't make a direct reference to seperation of church and state, but just like all laws and admendments, they are open to interpertation.

And the interperatation that most people have is that the church (religion) and state must be seperated.



Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof;




That can be read that congress will not make laws that endorse nor restrict religion.

http://members.tripod.com/~candst/tnppage/tnpidx.htm

Since you brought it up, I did a google search and found an interesting site on "The Seperation" since, as you subtly stated, that it is not word for word in the 1st admendment.

I wanted to know where this started and it's a pretty interesting read, considering some "founding fathers" were for the seperation, or against religion in general.

edit, to be fair, here is an anti-seperation website
http://www.spiritual-answers.com/Laws/church_and_state.htm
which basicall said what crz and i said:
"The First Amendment is in fact a law. What you've just read is the written law. Yet the observance of this law, is in the hands of people. And what is written, is less relevant than what the people enforcing it claim that it means."

We interperate what that admendment says...more research for me before I debate further...

(edited by rikidozan on 28.8.03 1752)



Almost finished my 2002-2003 College Football raitings. Watch this space!!!

DMC
Liverwurst








Since: 8.1.02
From: Modesto, CA

Since last post: 3389 days
Last activity: 3383 days
#5 Posted on
Which of the Founding Fathers were "against religion"? Even the darling of the ACLU Thomas Jefferson believed in God and the value of Christianity in American society. He simply had some liberal theological views.

Can someone tell me how this monument was some type of official *endorsement* of religion? Were people being required to read it or bow to it? It was simply *art*, a cultural statement about an important piece of the legal traditions of western civilization. Even if Justice Moore had some type of religious agenda for erecting the monument, that doesn't matter. There are certainly more "tame" interpretations of it. Just because some dorky atheists with speech impediments who live in their basement and never comb their hair get an anxiety attack from seeing the statue is no reason to kow tow.

DMC



"Baby you send me, baby you send me,
Set adrift on memory bliss of you" -PM Dawn
calvinh0560
Boudin rouge








Since: 3.1.02
From: People's Republic of Massachusetts

Since last post: 474 days
Last activity: 8 hours
#6 Posted on | Instant Rating: 0.00
Both sides are wrong this time. First the court should never have ordered the monument out of the building in the first place. As written already there is no Endorsement of religion here.

BUT, Justice Roy Moore should have removed the monument once he was ordered too. Its no his job or right to disregard the rules of law when he does not think they are right. A chief justice should know better.

eviljonhunt81
Pepperoni








Since: 6.1.02
From: not Japan

Since last post: 2901 days
Last activity: 2898 days
#7 Posted on
What exactly counts as endorsement if a giant statue of a religious artifact doesn't? Furthermore, Justice Moore didn't help his cause by saying that U.S. Law is based on the Ten Commandments.

And the Supreme Court has recognized a seperation of Church and State for roughly 100 years, and their reading of the Constitution tends to trump everyone elses.



Weekly Visitor - PSSSSHAW!

Jersey Is Dead - New Old Stuff!!!
Jaguar
Knackwurst








Since: 23.1.02
From: Phoenix, AZ

Since last post: 112 days
Last activity: 112 days
#8 Posted on
    Originally posted by DMC
    Even if Justice Moore had some type of religious agenda for erecting the monument, that doesn't matter. There are certainly more "tame" interpretations of it. Just because some dorky atheists with speech impediments who live in their basement and never comb their hair get an anxiety attack from seeing the statue is no reason to kow tow.

    DMC



Yikes. Were you bitten by an atheist when you were a small child?

    From the Washington Post Article
    Several leading voices on the religious right -- including Christian broadcaster Pat Robertson, Southern Baptist minister Richard Land, legal strategist Jay Sekulow and Free Congress Foundation chairman Paul M. Weyrich -- have criticized Moore for undermining "the rule of law."


They don't sound like atheists to me...

-Jag


(edited by Jaguar on 28.8.03 1953)


And there's a million of us just like me
Who dress like me, walk, talk, oppress like me
Mustache like me, a big piece of trash like me
And just might be a piece of shit, but not quite me!

I'm Saddam. Yes, I'm the real Saddam.
And you other Saddams can all kiss my bottom.
So won't the real Hussein please stand up?
Please stand up?
Please stand up?

-The Real Hussein
-proletarian-
Chipolata








Since: 29.4.03

Since last post: 3970 days
Last activity: 3969 days
#9 Posted on
What does religion have to do with government?

What are the ten commandments doing outside the Alabama supreme court? Call me crazy but isn't that a part of the government apparatus?

Hint; that's why we have churches.

Keep religion where it belongs; in the churches and the synagogues and the mosques. It doesn't belong in school or outside government buildings.
Guru Zim
SQL Dejection
Administrator








Since: 9.12.01
From: Bay City, OR

Since last post: 2 days
Last activity: 3 hours
AIM:  
#10 Posted on | Instant Rating: 9.41
http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/church-state/decisions.html

There seem to be many different cases that establish that the US Supreme court views the ammendment as establishing a separation of church and state.



Willful ignorance of science is not commendable. Refusing to learn the difference between a credible source and a shill is criminally stupid.
DMC
Liverwurst








Since: 8.1.02
From: Modesto, CA

Since last post: 3389 days
Last activity: 3383 days
#11 Posted on
You do realize that the Supreme Court has also ruled that black people are no different than mules, right? (See Scott, Dred)

DMC



"Baby you send me, baby you send me,
Set adrift on memory bliss of you" -PM Dawn
OndaGrande
Kolbasz








Since: 1.5.03
From: California, Home of THE LAKERS!

Since last post: 11 days
Last activity: 2 hours
#12 Posted on

According to my college US history professor; the word "Establishment" refers to the use of public funds to support a church, "establish" meaning to provide the local church with public funds to keep the building sound and pay the preacher. the "prohibiting the free practice thereof" is self explainatory.
MY intererpetation is that we are not only given freedom OF religion, but freedom FROM religion. That's what I personally believe in and would like to keep it that way.



LEARN IT, KNOW IT, LIVE IT!
Bizzle Izzle
Bockwurst








Since: 26.6.02
From: New Jersey, USA

Since last post: 160 days
Last activity: 160 days
#13 Posted on

Hey if any of you God hating athiests are so obsessed with the interpreted separation of church and state, you can take that green paper that says "In God We Trust" out of your wallets and send it right over to meeeeeee. I'm not religious AT ALL, but I don't walk around offended by Christian Images. Want to rent a Billboard and put up a picture of Christ? I sure won't be the cry baby to sue to get it removed. Ditto for any statues you put in the park.

This country was founded by God Fearing Christians and it burns my ass to see the heathens and liberals destroy our American traditions. I've heard the argument about Freedom FROM religion, but who will protect the Christians and their way of life from the heathens and athiests? It seems like with the age of Political Correctness the left is forcing on us a philosophy of the "needs of the few outweigh the needs of the many." If one or two athiests are "offended" by Christian Images, or even Christian themes at Christmas, then ALL of the Christians must suffer because of the athiest's/heathen's hurt feelings. Any Star Trek fan can tell you the needs of the MANY outweigh the needs of the few, or the one.

And to me the argument of "well then if you have Christian images then you have to give equal space to Muslims, Pagans..." just doesn't wash. This country wasn't founded by Muslims or Devil Worshippers or Tree Huggers or Scientologists. It was founded by Christians.



'But if one is struck by me only a little, that is far different, the stroke is a sharp thing and suddenly lays him lifeless, and that man's wife goes with cheeks torn in lamentation, and his children are fatherless, while he, staining the soil with his red blood, rots away, and there are more birds than women swarming about him.' Diomedes, The Iliad of Homer

Maiden RULES!!!
-proletarian-
Chipolata








Since: 29.4.03

Since last post: 3970 days
Last activity: 3969 days
#14 Posted on
I'm no atheist. I pray every night, if you must know, but don't attend church. Still, I like to think of myself as a good person first, and a good christian second.

But belief in God is not mutually exclusive with a belief that government is just that; a human construct that we use to bring order to humanity. What that has to do with religion is beyond me. The two are apples and oranges, and I don't see how religion got all mixed up with government, but them's the breaks.....

Religion is great as a PERSONAL way of bringing meaning and a sense of security to one's life, but as a tool of the state it can be hugely destructive. Keep the two seperate.

(edited by -proletarian- on 28.8.03 2111)
calvinh0560
Boudin rouge








Since: 3.1.02
From: People's Republic of Massachusetts

Since last post: 474 days
Last activity: 8 hours
#15 Posted on | Instant Rating: 0.00
    Originally posted by -proletarian-

    Religion is great as a PERSONAL way of bringing meaning and a sense of security to one's life, but as a tool of the state it can be hugely destructive. Keep the two seperate.

    (edited by -proletarian- on 28.8.03 2111)


I agree with everything you said about keep Goverment and Religion two seperate things. The problem I see with THIS CASE is that I don't see how a shaped piece of stone in a court's hallway being all that destructive.
spf
Scrapple








Since: 2.1.02
From: The Las Vegas of Canada

Since last post: 17 days
Last activity: 5 days
AIM:  
#16 Posted on
    Originally posted by calvinh0560
      Originally posted by -proletarian-

      Religion is great as a PERSONAL way of bringing meaning and a sense of security to one's life, but as a tool of the state it can be hugely destructive. Keep the two seperate.

      (edited by -proletarian- on 28.8.03 2111)


    I agree with everything you said about keep Goverment and Religion two seperate things. The problem I see with THIS CASE is that I don't see how a shaped piece of stone in a court's hallway being all that destructive.
\
Because when we put up monuments on government buildings, the general implication is that it's something we believe to be good and proper. And while some of the 10C are really good things that we ought to all live by, there are other ones in there that really only apply to those who believe in a monotheistic deity. So when the government tells me it agrees that I shalt keep holy the sabbath day, or that I shall have no gods before the god of the Middle Eastern religions, that makes me wonder just what they're saying.



She was worth 800 miles driving to see her play - Brenda Weiler

blogforamerica.com
Michrome
Head cheese








Since: 2.1.03

Since last post: 3746 days
Last activity: 2812 days
#17 Posted on | Instant Rating: 0.00
There is nothing in the constitution that implies that you have freedom from religion. If you want to believe it's there, then go ahead, but you'd be just as well off believing that there's a section about purple elephants in it.

I'm not Christian, but it still annoys me how people speak all the time about the intolerant "religious right", as if it was an official state. However, most of the time, it's atheists that can't stand anything religious in the public square. Who attempts to destroy symbols more often? Religious christians or atheists? Who tries to get things another group worships made illegal more? Religious christians or Atheists? Nutball Christians burn Harry Potter books, nutball atheists try to change everything the country was founded on to suit what they wish it was founded on.

The country is founded on being a god-fearing nation, it was John Adams that said that the constitution can only properly govern a religious and moral people, and "endowed by their creator" was not just a line randomly thrown in without much thought. If no religion was to be permitted in the public square, why are so many of the original documents in the U.S. signed with "in the year of our lord". Here are various quotes from founders regarding religion:

"We have staked the whole future of American civilization not upon the power of government, far from it. We have staked the future of all our political institutions upon the capacity of mankind for self-government, upon the capacity of each and all of us to govern ourselves, to control ourselves, to sustain ourselves according to the Ten Commandments."--James Madison

"It is impossible to rightly govern the world without God and the Bible"--President George Washington, September 17th, 1796

"It cannot be emphasized too strongly or too often that this great nation was founded not by religionists but by Christians, not on religion but on the Gospel of Jesus Christ. We shall not fight alone. God presides over the destinies of nations."--Patrick Henry

"I have lived, a long time, and the longer I live, the more convincing proofs I see of this truth -- that God Governs in the affairs of men. And if a sparrow cannot fall to the ground without His notice, is it probable that an empire can rise without His aid?"--Benjamin Franklin Address at the Constitutional Convention Thursday June 28, 1787

"The highest story of the American Revolution is this: it connected in one indissoluble bond the principles of civil government with the principles of Christianity."--President John Adams

"The reason that Christianity is the best friend of Government is because Christianity is the only religion that changes the heart."--Thomas Jefferson

"It is no slight testimonial, both to the merit and worth of Christianity, that in all ages since its promulgation the great mass of those who have risen to eminence by their profound wisdom and integrity have recognized and reverenced Jesus of Nazareth as the Son of the living God."
--President John Quincy Adams
----------------------------------------------------------
From all of my research, I think it is plainly obvious that the founders of this country wanted the government to butt out of the business of religion entirely, and leave it up to the people.
ges7184
Lap cheong








Since: 7.1.02
From: Birmingham, AL

Since last post: 85 days
Last activity: 8 days
#18 Posted on
I think both sides fight way too hard on this sort of thing. Despite what others apparently believe, I just can't believe society will fall apart due to a statue inside an Alabama courtroom. Also, despite what others apparently believe, I just can't believe society will fall apart due to a statue NOT BEING inside an Alabama courtroom.

I believe that the purpose of the First Amendment was to protect religion from government, not protect government from religion. But whatever, I find it hard to believe that people apparently believe that the mere sight of something that has the 10 commandments on it will do some sort of harm to them. If that is the case, wouldn't the sight of churches with crosses have the same effect? Or references to Christmas? Look, you can't be anymore shielded from Christianity as I can from Islam, etc. I figure the judge is going to rule how he/she is going to rule, regardless of what kind of decorations he/she puts up, and that is what is going to matter to me in a courtroom.

On the other hand, there is no great good that having this thing in there is going to accomplish. For the most part, it will be ignored, some big obstacle you have to walk around. Keeping this in is not worth fighting for (and why the heck should it matter where this thing is?), and certainly not worth getting fired over.

But given the way this has been done, I think this judge has some higher political aspirations anyway, maybe that is why he is trying to get fired. I also have this question, how the heck was he able to put that thing in there in the first place. Just because he is a judge, it doesn't make it HIS courthouse. That belongs to the people. It would seem that such a item would have required approval by the state. Did he get that, and if so, why aren't they under the gun as well? And who paid for it?

(edited by ges7184 on 29.8.03 0032)

(edited by ges7184 on 29.8.03 0034)

Everything that is wrong in this world can be blamed on Freddie Prinze Jr.
MoeGates
Andouille








Since: 6.1.02
From: Brooklyn, NY

Since last post: 4 days
Last activity: 16 hours
#19 Posted on | Instant Rating: 6.28
    Originally posted by DMC
    You do realize that the Supreme Court has also ruled that black people are no different than mules, right? (See Scott, Dred)

    DMC


Yes, and then the 14th Amendment to the Constitution was passed, so that case went out the window. That's the remedy when the Supreme Court screws one up.

I totally agree that this is launching pad of "Roy Moore for Governor."



"I'm sorry, I didn't think I was going to talk about 'man on dog' with a United States Senator. It's sort of freaking me out."


Associated Press interview with Senator Rick Santorum (R-PA), 04-07-2003.
CRZ
Big Brother
Administrator








Since: 9.12.01
From: ミネアポリス

Since last post: 10 hours
Last activity: 1 hour
AIM:  
ICQ:  
Y!:
#20 Posted on | Instant Rating: 8.65
My counter link to YOUR link:

http://www.straight-talk.net/socas/s-badjudgments.shtml
http://www.straight-talk.net/socas/socas.shtml

DISCLAIMER: Bias! Still, food for thought.



CRZ
Pages: 1 2 3 Next
Pages: 1 2 3 NextThread ahead: Bodybuilders' cocks
Next thread: Huge Victory for Freedom
Previous thread: France: No Evidence Hamas is a Terrorist Group
(1847 newer) Next thread | Previous thread
I agree with what Gov.-elect Blagojevich said by stating that it should've been handled on a case-by-case baiss. When you stat issuing blanket this and blanket that, baad things tend to happen.
The W - Current Events & Politics - Ten CommandmentsRegister and log in to post!

The W™ message board

ZimBoard
©2001-2014 Brothers Zim

This old hunk of junk rendered your page in 0.144 seconds.