The Ten Commandments

Discussion in 'Religion and Ethics' started by Adam's Apple, Mar 2, 2005.

  1. Adam's Apple
    Offline

    Adam's Apple Senior Member

    Joined:
    Apr 25, 2004
    Messages:
    4,092
    Thanks Received:
    445
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Ratings:
    +447
    The Supreme Judge & the Supreme Court
    By Cal Thomas
    March 2, 2005

    In the latest culture war battle, the Ten Commandments have reached the Supreme Court. One federal court has ruled that displaying the 10 standards God requires in order to be declared righteous is constitutional because it is part of this country's legal heritage. Another federal court has ordered them removed from public property because their message implies a government endorsement of religion. The justices will decide whether displaying the commandments in government buildings is constitutionally "kosher."

    There are some amusing things about this case. First, it is a group of conservative Christians behind the effort. Not many Jewish groups are petitioning government for this right, even though the Ten Commandments are uniquely Jewish. Moses was Jewish, and the Ten Commandments preceded all of the other laws that followed.

    No human has ever obeyed them all. That's why the ancient Israelites had to slaughter so many animals and offer blood and other offerings (grain, fellowship and "wave" among them) and once a year slaughter the Passover lamb to atone for their sin (for younger readers, sin was our condition before we became dysfunctional).

    What puzzles me is the extent to which those who want government to endorse their faith seem ready to compromise their true beliefs in order to receive an honorable mention from the state.

    Some seem willing to settle for a moment of silent prayer in government schools, a type of religious Miranda right, in which believing students have the right to remain mute. Others are willing to place their God as co-unequal with almost anything, just to have his name publicly mentioned...

    Justice Sandra Day O'Connor defended the "under God" clause in the Pledge of Allegiance case the court dismissed last year, calling those words "ceremonial deism." She defined the term as the use of religious idiom for "essentially secular purposes," thus satisfying the court's requirement that basically says Rudolph, Santa and Jesus may co-mingle on public property at Christmas (X-mas?) and Rudolph or Santa may be displayed separately or together, but not Jesus alone.

    Is this what conservative Christians wish to settle for: a governmental genuflection or acknowledgement that they exist? Do Christians wish to permit government not only to set the parameters for the pubic expression of their faith, but to define the faith itself?

    www.jewishworldreview.com/cols/thomas030205.asp
     
  2. dilloduck
    Offline

    dilloduck Diamond Member

    Joined:
    May 8, 2004
    Messages:
    53,240
    Thanks Received:
    5,552
    Trophy Points:
    1,850
    Location:
    Austin, TX
    Ratings:
    +6,403
    I'm thinking that removal of the 10 commandments is the ultimate anti-semtic act.----where is the JDL on this one?
     
  3. Adam's Apple
    Offline

    Adam's Apple Senior Member

    Joined:
    Apr 25, 2004
    Messages:
    4,092
    Thanks Received:
    445
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Ratings:
    +447
    Good question, Dillo. As the article indicates, the Jews have not involved themselves in the Ten Commandments issue currently before the SC. Maybe they think they have been persecuted enough for their religion and are hesitant to become involved in another battle.
     
  4. no1tovote4
    Offline

    no1tovote4 VIP Member

    Joined:
    Apr 13, 2004
    Messages:
    10,294
    Thanks Received:
    616
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Location:
    Colorado
    Ratings:
    +616

    What if they just think that they can work to follow the 10 Commandments without them being displayed in the courts? That it really is unimportant in the big picture.

    I can't figure out why people get so angry over the Commandments being displayed somewhere. To me, a Buddhist, the first three are not followed, but it is much like art. Sometimes I like it, sometimes I don't there is no reason that people can't show art that I don't like. The 10 Commandments have a cultural value to most of the country, can't see why I would want them to take it down...
     
  5. ScreamingEagle
    Offline

    ScreamingEagle Gold Member

    Joined:
    Jul 5, 2004
    Messages:
    12,887
    Thanks Received:
    1,610
    Trophy Points:
    245
    Ratings:
    +2,159
    The liberal Jews are stupid then - if they think they can just ignore this issue without ultimate negative consequences to their people. In the long run this is a critical issue in the big picture.

    Why do some people "get so angry"? There is organization behind this "anger" and basically people are set up to complain. This "anger" does not just come out of the blue. They are pushing this issue in the courts because THEY ARE OUT TO DESTROY RELIGION IN THIS COUNTRY AND REPLACE IT WITH SECULARISM AND THE STATE AS THE HIGHEST AUTHORITY OVER MAN. The commies love this stuff and as I have stated before the ACLU is a Communist organization.

    There is NO valid reason for us to bow to the wishes of a tiny minority which we know is OUT TO DESTROY AMERICAas we have known it for centuries. It just blows me away that this issue in all it nickpicky stupidity even reached the level of the Supreme Court. The Courts should have rejected this legal assault before it even got started. But stupid Americans and activist judges are so enthralled with PCness today they don't even know what is really going on here. We are doing nothing more than watch our freedoms get eroded before our very eyes.
    :blowup:
     
  6. dilloduck
    Offline

    dilloduck Diamond Member

    Joined:
    May 8, 2004
    Messages:
    53,240
    Thanks Received:
    5,552
    Trophy Points:
    1,850
    Location:
    Austin, TX
    Ratings:
    +6,403
    I guess Jews would rather just let Christians think that it is only a Christian symbol to avoid a conflict between the religions and will just let the Christians do the work to protect it.
     
  7. freeandfun1
    Offline

    freeandfun1 VIP Member

    Joined:
    Feb 14, 2004
    Messages:
    6,201
    Thanks Received:
    295
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Ratings:
    +296
    Since the Old Testament is revered by Jews, Christians and Muslims alike, and the 10 Commandments come from the Old Testament, just which religion is the government "endorsing"? It is quite confusing to me. I heard a lawyer that was arguing against the display say that displaying the Commandments is tantamount to the government endorsing A religion. So which one? Are the attorneys arguing against the Commandments truly so IGNORANT?
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 1
  8. dilloduck
    Offline

    dilloduck Diamond Member

    Joined:
    May 8, 2004
    Messages:
    53,240
    Thanks Received:
    5,552
    Trophy Points:
    1,850
    Location:
    Austin, TX
    Ratings:
    +6,403

    no--but most of em will just do anything for money. Good point tho!
     
  9. ReillyT
    Offline

    ReillyT Senior Member

    Joined:
    Mar 2, 2005
    Messages:
    2,631
    Thanks Received:
    164
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    London, UK
    Ratings:
    +164
    Actually, not a good point. The establishment clause forbids government endorsement of religion - not just a particular religion, but any religion. It doesn't matter if the display makes all members of all religions happy - if the display is for a religious purpose (as opposed to an homage to lawgivers or a de minimus display of religion), it has generally be forbidden.
     
  10. manu1959
    Offline

    manu1959 Left Coast Isolationist

    Joined:
    Oct 28, 2004
    Messages:
    13,761
    Thanks Received:
    1,625
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    california
    Ratings:
    +1,626
     

Share This Page

Search tags for this page

madrassafunctions