10 Commandments are SO offensive!

[ScreamingEagle]

"To put the Supreme Court's recent ban on the Ten Commandments display in perspective, here is a small sampling of other speech that has been funded in whole or in part by taxpayers:

— Graphic videos demonstrating how to put a condom on and pep talks by "Planned Parenthood educators." — sex education classes at public schools across the nation

— Korans distributed to aspiring terrorists at Guantanamo. — U.S. military

— "If there was a better, more effective, or in fact any other way of visiting some penalty befitting their participation upon the little Eichmanns inhabiting the sterile sanctuary of the twin towers (than the attack of 9/11), I'd really be interested in hearing about it." — Ward Churchill, professor, University of Colorado

— We need "a million more Mogadishus" (referring to the slaughter of 18 American soldiers during a peacekeeping mission in Somalia in 1993). — Nicholas De Genova, assistant professor, Columbia University

— "The entire federal government — the Congress, the executive, the courts — is united behind a right-wing agenda for which George W. Bush believes he now has a mandate. That agenda includes the power of the state to force pregnant women to surrender control over their own lives. ... If you like the Supreme Court that put George W. Bush in the White House, you will swoon over what's coming. And if you like God in government, get ready for the Rapture ..." — Bill Moyers' commentary on PBS' "Now"

— "Kiss it." — governor of Arkansas to state employee

— "For most Americans ... (war with Japan) was a war of vengeance. For most Japanese, it was a war to defend their unique culture against Western imperialism. ... Some have argued that the United States would never have dropped the bomb on the Germans, because Americans were more reluctant to bomb 'white people' than Asians." — Smithsonian exhibit to commemorate the 50th anniversary of VJ Day, later modified due to protests

— "Anglos consolidated their control of New Mexico, acquiring huge holdings from the original owners through fraud and manipulation." — Smithsonian exhibit

— "Ignored were the less honorable aspects of California history — the profiteering, revolts against Mexican authority and Indian massacres." — Smithsonian exhibit, comment on the painting "The Promised Land — The Grayson Family"

— "This predominance of negative and violent views was a manifestation of Indian hating, a largely manufactured, calculated reversal of the basic facts of white encroachment and deceit." — Smithsonian exhibit

— "In the Americas, sugar meant slavery." — Smithsonian exhibit

— Close-up photos of women's vaginas plastered all over a portrait of the Virgin Mary (which The New York Times will still not mention when it describes the "art"). — Brooklyn Museum of Art

— A photo of a woman breastfeeding an infant, titled "Jesus Sucks." — NEA-funded performance

— A photo of a newborn infant with its mouth open titled to suggest the infant was available for oral sex. — NEA-funded performance

— "F—- a Fetus" poster showing an unborn baby with the caption: "For all you folks who consider a fetus more valuable than a woman, have a fetus cook for you, have a fetus affair, go to a fetus' house to ease your sexual frustration." — NEA-funded performance

— Performance of giant bloody tampons, satanic bunnies, three-foot feces and vibrators. — NEA-funded performance

— A novel depicting the sexual molestation of a group of 10 children in a pedophile's garage, including acts of bestiality, with the children commenting on how much they enjoyed the pedophilia. — NEA-funded publisher

— Christ submerged in a jar of urine. — NEA-funded exhibit

— A female performer inserting a speculum into her vagina and inviting audience members on stage to view her cervix with a flashlight. — NEA-funded performance

— A performance of large, sexually explicit props covered with Bibles performing a wide variety of sex acts and concluding with a mass Bible-burning. — NEA-funded performance (canceled by the venue in response to citizen protests)

— A show titled "DEGENERATE WITH A CAPITAL D" featuring a display of the remains of the artist's own aborted baby. — NEA-funded exhibit

— A play titled "Sincerity Forever," depicting Christ using obscenities and endorsing any and all types of sexual activities as consistent with Biblical teaching. — NEA-funded exhibit

— Essay describing then-New York Cardinal John O'Connor as a "fat cannibal from that house of walking swastikas up on Fifth Avenue." Also photographs of men performing oral sex, anal sex, oral-anal sex and masturbation. — NEA-funded

That's the America you live in! A country founded on a compact with God, forged from the idea that all men are endowed by their Creator with certain inalienable rights is now a country where taxpayers can be forced to subsidize "artistic" exhibits of aborted fetuses. But don't start thinking about putting up a Ten Commandments display. That's offensive!

I don't want to hear any jabberwocky from the Court TV amateurs about "the establishment of religion." (1) A Ten Commandments monument does not establish a religion. (2) The First Amendment prohibits Congress from making any law "respecting" an establishment of religion — meaning Congress cannot make a law establishing a religion, nor can it make a law prohibiting the states from establishing a religion. We've been through this a million times.

Now the Supreme Court is itching to ban the Pledge of Allegiance because of its offensive reference to one nation "under God." (Perhaps that "God" stuff could be replaced with a vulgar sexual reference.) But with the court looking like a geriatric ward these days, they don't want to alarm Americans right before a battle over the next Supreme Court nominee. Be alarmed. This is what it's about."

http://www.anncoulter.org/cgi-local/welcome.cgi

 

[MissileMan]

To put the Supreme Court's recent ban on the Ten Commandments display in perspective, here is a small sampling of other speech that has been funded in whole or in part by taxpayers:

To put it in the perspective of reality, it is not banned from public view, merely from the courthouse. If you want to put up a Ten Commandments statue on the front lawn of your house, or on the front lawn of your church, knock yourself out. Frankly, I fail to get the maniacal compulsion to display religious symbols in government buildings except as a way to rub everyone's noses in your religion.

"That's the America you live in! A country founded on a compact with God, forged from the idea that all men are endowed by their Creator with certain inalienable rights is now a country where taxpayers can be forced to subsidize "artistic" exhibits of aborted fetuses. But don't start thinking about putting up a Ten Commandments display. That's offensive!

I don't believe anyone has called the display offensive, just inappropriate. But why stop at decorating courthouses with Ten Commandment statues? Let's take down the blindfolded lady with the scales and put up a statue of The Blessed Mary...she's not offensive. And while we're at it, we can wallpaper the entire courthouse with the pages of the bible. There's no way someone could find that offensive. And just for giggles, we can hand out crosses to everyone who enters the courthouse too...nothing offensive about that. Exactly how much would it take to get you to quit whining?

 

[Bonnie]

MissileMan

I don't believe anyone has called the display offensive, just inappropriate. But why stop at decorating courthouses with Ten Commandment statues? Let's take down the blindfolded lady with the scales and put up a statue of The Blessed Mary...she's not offensive. And while we're at it, we can wallpaper the entire courthouse with the pages of the bible. There's no way someone could find that offensive. And just for giggles, we can hand out crosses to everyone who enters the courthouse too...nothing offensive about that. Exactly how much would it take to get you to quit whining?

What would it take for you to stop whining?? Seriously you act as though if you see something religious on anything other than hidden from your view your head will explode.
How far is the left going to take this crusade????

The examples posted were very offensive to a lot of people yet all of those people are forced to fund it, please tell me if that's not a form of tierney then what is?? Why is it only religious items are looked down upon by many Liberals yet obvious attempts at being vulgar are applauded and funded??
And if someone were to put up the ten commandments on their lawn how long do you think it would be before the ACLU dredges up some ass hole to go to court and say they find the monument offensive and the home owner winds up being sued to take it down???

 

[dilloduck]

To put it in the perspective of reality, it is not banned from public view, merely from the courthouse. If you want to put up a Ten Commandments statue on the front lawn of your house, or on the front lawn of your church, knock yourself out. Frankly, I fail to get the maniacal compulsion to display religious symbols in government buildings except as a way to rub everyone's noses in your religion.





I don't believe anyone has called the display offensive, just inappropriate. But why stop at decorating courthouses with Ten Commandment statues? Let's take down the blindfolded lady with the scales and put up a statue of The Blessed Mary...she's not offensive. And while we're at it, we can wallpaper the entire courthouse with the pages of the bible. There's no way someone could find that offensive. And just for giggles, we can hand out crosses to everyone who enters the courthouse too...nothing offensive about that. Exactly how much would it take to get you to quit whining?

Secularism is everywhere that religion isn't and they whine because of one "religious" display that has existed in the US for over 200 years?-----you've got the issue around here don't you?

 

[Annie]

Bonnie and Dillo. I am personally religious. To call Merlin a liberal is kind of nonsensical. He may be a secularist, which I am not, though I'm against the current trend on the Right to call any that don't fall in line with their terminology/calls for reform some sort of name.

I call myself a libertarian, most would call me a neo-con. Yet here, I think I'm close to being considered a liberal. Why? Because I thought taking Shaivo to the federal level was wrong. I think that ID may be off base as far as science classes go, but am open to the arguements, which have to go further than "evolution has holes..."

Merlin, while outspoken on the 'religion take' is far from a liberal. My concern is that the tone of this board may very well be the tone of the Republican mainstream. Guess what? If that is the case, the Left loses their Dean nuts and the Right loses in all liklihood a whole lot more.

 

[Bonnie]

Bonnie and Dillo. I am personally religious. To call Merlin a liberal is kind of nonsensical. He may be a secularist, which I am not, though I'm against the current trend on the Right to call any that don't fall in line with their terminology/calls for reform some sort of name.

I call myself a libertarian, most would call me a neo-con. Yet here, I think I'm close to being considered a liberal. Why? Because I thought taking Shaivo to the federal level was wrong. I think that ID may be off base as far as science classes go, but am open to the arguements, which have to go further than "evolution has holes..."

Merlin, while outspoken on the 'religion take' is far from a liberal. My concern is that the tone of this board may very well be the tone of the Republican mainstream. Guess what? If that is the case, the Left loses their Dean nuts and the Right loses in all liklihood a whole lot more.

Which Merlin are you referring to?? I don't recall referring to anyone specifically as a liberal, at least not tonight??

 

[dilloduck]

Bonnie and Dillo. I am personally religious. To call Merlin a liberal is kind of nonsensical. He may be a secularist, which I am not, though I'm against the current trend on the Right to call any that don't fall in line with their terminology/calls for reform some sort of name.

I call myself a libertarian, most would call me a neo-con. Yet here, I think I'm close to being considered a liberal. Why? Because I thought taking Shaivo to the federal level was wrong. I think that ID may be off base as far as science classes go, but am open to the arguements, which have to go further than "evolution has holes..."

Merlin, while outspoken on the 'religion take' is far from a liberal. My concern is that the tone of this board may very well be the tone of the Republican mainstream. Guess what? If that is the case, the Left loses their Dean nuts and the Right loses in all liklihood a whole lot more.

I was responding to missleman, not Merlin (unless there is some name situation that I am unaware of). Names and labels are necessary to speak of things and I'm personally not concerned if my personal opinion falls into some kind of unsavory category. Like anyone who reads my post is going to call the New York Times or anything.

 

[Annie]

I was responding to missleman, not Merlin (unless there is some name situation that I am unaware of). Names and labels are necessary to speak of things and I'm personaly not concerned if my personal opinion falls into some kind of unsavory category. Like anyone who reads my post is going to call the New York Times or anything.

Sorry, to both of you. Right you are, Missleman. Wrong name, right meaning. Bonnie didn't mean to say you called him a liberal, I was too generalizing. Trying to keep from posting more than once, since some for some weird reason, think I try to drive up my posts.

 

[Bonnie]

Sorry, to both of you. Right you are, Missleman. Wrong name, right meaning. Bonnie didn't mean to say you called him a liberal, I was too generalizing. Trying to keep from posting more than once, since some for some weird reason, think I try to drive up my posts.

That's okay I figured you meant Missileman, anyway kind of silly to worry about number of posts when you have left us all in the dust anyway, even with your temporary exile........

 

[Annie]

That's okay I figured you meant Missileman, anyway kind of silly to worry about number of posts when you have left us all in the dust anyway, even with your temporary exile........

What can I say? I read a lot and like to share! Not too mention that I sometimes have my own opinions. Get the difference, Gabby and others? Share/opinion?

 

[dilloduck]

What can I say? I read a lot and like to share! Not too mention that I sometimes have my own opinions. Get the difference, Gabby and others? Share/opinion?

Not really--what are you trying to say here?

 

[HorhayAtAMD]

I would say that there was a big difference between religous displays in a court house and offensive displays in a museum. I can choose to go to a museum, or not, depending on what I think of the exhibit but if I'm arrested, or I want to sue someone, I have no choice but to go into a courthouse.

Personally, if I wanted to make the case for keeping the 10 Commandments in the courthouse, I would go with "although supportive of all major religions, the US is a predominantly Christian country founded by Christians and if you don't like it, tough" argument because I think that list by Coulter isn't terribly relevant to the argument at hand.

 

[dilloduck]

I would say that there was a big difference between religous displays in a court house and offensive displays in a museum. I can choose to go to a museum, or not, depending on what I think of the exhibit but if I'm arrested, or I want to sue someone, I have no choice but to go into a courthouse.

Personally, if I wanted to make the case for keeping the 10 Commandments in the courthouse, I would go with "although supportive of all major religions, the US is a predominantly Christian country founded by Christians and if you don't like it, tough" argument because I think that list by Coulter isn't terribly relevant to the argument at hand.

And I have no choice what kind of "art" is supported by my tax money.

 

[HorhayAtAMD]

And I have no choice what kind of "art" is supported by my tax money.

You have as much choice as to what kind of "art" is supported by your tax money as you do with what kind of asphalt is used in your roads and what kind of wars your country participates in. So the answer is yes, you do have a choice, exactly 1 vote's worth. There are advantages and disadvantages to living in a democracy and one of the disadvantages is that sometimes, other people get you to pay for things they want. It usually works out well though because I'm sure you benefit from some things that other people don't really want their tax dollars supporting.

 

[dilloduck]

You have as much choice as to what kind of "art" is supported by your tax money as you do with what kind of asphalt is used in your roads and what kind of wars your country participates in. So the answer is yes, you do have a choice, exactly 1 vote's worth. There are advantages and disadvantages to living in a democracy and one of the disadvantages is that sometimes, other people get you to pay for things they want. It usually works out well though because I'm sure you benefit from some things that other people don't really want their tax dollars supporting.

I'll have to agree---It's time you realize how much religious people and ideas benefit you.

 

[theim]

I would say that there was a big difference between religous displays in a court house and offensive displays in a museum. I can choose to go to a museum, or not, depending on what I think of the exhibit but if I'm arrested, or I want to sue someone, I have no choice but to go into a courthouse.

Personally, if I wanted to make the case for keeping the 10 Commandments in the courthouse, I would go with "although supportive of all major religions, the US is a predominantly Christian country founded by Christians and if you don't like it, tough" argument because I think that list by Coulter isn't terribly relevant to the argument at hand.

Find me the Consitutional Clause where you have a freedom from being offended.

 

[HorhayAtAMD]

Find me the Consitutional Clause where you have a freedom from being offended.

I don't need to, I don't think the 10 Commandments should be removed from a courthouse. I just think that list by Coulter is a very poor argument for defending the 10 Commandments. In fact, your question is the exact reason why that argument is so weak. You do not have the freedom from being offended so to bring up a bunch of offensive art projects as justification for keeping the 10 Commandments proves nothing at all.

However, putting myself in the shoes of someone who might want the 10 Commandments taken down, I would say that the objection is likely a religious one and not one of "taste". If I was a Christian being tried for a crime in Saudi Arabia and plastered all over the walls of the court house were quotes from the koran about how non-muslims are lesser people, I think I would feel nervous about it. I can understand how a muslim in the US might feel nervous about that. If he raised that concern to me though, I wouldn't start bringing up offensive art displays, I would say "tough, this is a Christian country, deal with it".

 

[Eightball]

It's just that the liberals can force the most offensive things on folks in the name of free speech, yet, 10 very wise commandments, just hit's them like someone has asked them to step into Auschwitz for a shower.

What is wrong with the 10 commandments. They all seem like common sense.......in fact wonder if they were displayed in a court house and called the, "Ten Common Sense Rules of Human Life and Living", by John Steinbeck.

1. "Thou shalt have no other gods before me."..Makes sense to worship or venerate only the true creator.

2. "Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image, or any likeness of any thing that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth. Thou shalt not bow down thyself to them, nor serve them: for I the LORD thy God am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children unto the third and fourth generation of them that hate me. And shewing mercy unto thousands of them that love me, and keep my commandments." Boy does man really violate this one. Graven images....how about money, job status, homes, material things, pride in one's self and one's accomplishments without an ounce of thankfulness for the one that truly created that person, and endowed them with the brain, and innate biological gifts.

3. "Thou shalt not take the name of the LORD thy God in vain; for the LORD will not hold him guiltless that taketh his name in vain." Basic lecture on respect for whom provided you with all that you have or were given. i.e. talent, mental capacity, spouse, children, wealth, etc..

4. "Remember the sabbath day, to keep it holy. Six days shalt thou labour, and do all thy work: But the seventh day is the sabbath of the LORD thy God: in it thou shalt not do any work, thou, nor thy son, nor thy daughter, thy manservant, nor thy maidservant, nor thy cattle, nor thy stranger that is within thy gates: For in six days the LORD made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that in them is, and rested the seventh day: wherefore the LORD blessed the sabbath day, and hallowed it." The Sabaath is every day of a thankful man or woman's life.

5. "Remember the sabbath day, to keep it holy. Six days shalt thou labour, and do all thy work: But the seventh day is the sabbath of the LORD thy God: in it thou shalt not do any work, thou, nor thy son, nor thy daughter, thy manservant, nor thy maidservant, nor thy cattle, nor thy stranger that is within thy gates: For in six days the LORD made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that in them is, and rested the seventh day: wherefore the LORD blessed the sabbath day, and hallowed it." There is a rest given to us by our maker that is a constant Sabaath rest, even though we labor physically.

6. "Thou shalt not kill." Makes sense to even agnostics and atheists too.

7. "Thou shalt not commit adultery." It's a family, home, and marriage wrecker.

8. "Thou shalt not steal." Should make sense, as it's common sense. You didn't earn it, why should you have it, unless it's a gift.

9. "Thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbour." Basic lieing folks...Usually indicates a lack of moral or conscious fiber.

10. "Thou shalt not covet thy neighbour's house, thou shalt not covet thy neighbour's wife, nor his manservant, nor his maidservant, nor his ox, nor his ass, nor any thing that is thy neighbour's." Boils down to basically being satisfied with what you've been given, earned, etc. Self-centedness, that's prevalent in the U.S. and E.U. cultures, seems to side-step this issue with frivoluos law-suits.

 

[dilloduck]

It's just that the liberals can force the most offensive things on folks in the name of free speech, yet, 10 very wise commandments, just hit's them like someone has asked them to step into Auschwitz for a shower.

What is wrong with the 10 commandments. They all seem like common sense.......in fact wonder if they were displayed in a court house and called the, "Ten Common Sense Rules of Human Life and Living", by John Steinbeck.

1. "Thou shalt have no other gods before me."..Makes sense to worship or venerate only the true creator.

2. "Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image, or any likeness of any thing that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth. Thou shalt not bow down thyself to them, nor serve them: for I the LORD thy God am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children unto the third and fourth generation of them that hate me. And shewing mercy unto thousands of them that love me, and keep my commandments." Boy does man really violate this one. Graven images....how about money, job status, homes, material things, pride in one's self and one's accomplishments without an ounce of thankfulness for the one that truly created that person, and endowed them with the brain, and innate biological gifts.

3. "Thou shalt not take the name of the LORD thy God in vain; for the LORD will not hold him guiltless that taketh his name in vain." Basic lecture on respect for whom provided you with all that you have or were given. i.e. talent, mental capacity, spouse, children, wealth, etc..

4. "Remember the sabbath day, to keep it holy. Six days shalt thou labour, and do all thy work: But the seventh day is the sabbath of the LORD thy God: in it thou shalt not do any work, thou, nor thy son, nor thy daughter, thy manservant, nor thy maidservant, nor thy cattle, nor thy stranger that is within thy gates: For in six days the LORD made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that in them is, and rested the seventh day: wherefore the LORD blessed the sabbath day, and hallowed it." The Sabaath is every day of a thankful man or woman's life.

5. "Remember the sabbath day, to keep it holy. Six days shalt thou labour, and do all thy work: But the seventh day is the sabbath of the LORD thy God: in it thou shalt not do any work, thou, nor thy son, nor thy daughter, thy manservant, nor thy maidservant, nor thy cattle, nor thy stranger that is within thy gates: For in six days the LORD made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that in them is, and rested the seventh day: wherefore the LORD blessed the sabbath day, and hallowed it." There is a rest given to us by our maker that is a constant Sabaath rest, even though we labor physically.

6. "Thou shalt not kill." Makes sense to even agnostics and atheists too.

7. "Thou shalt not commit adultery." It's a family, home, and marriage wrecker.

8. "Thou shalt not steal." Should make sense, as it's common sense. You didn't earn it, why should you have it, unless it's a gift.

9. "Thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbour." Basic lieing folks...Usually indicates a lack of moral or conscious fiber.

10. "Thou shalt not covet thy neighbour's house, thou shalt not covet thy neighbour's wife, nor his manservant, nor his maidservant, nor his ox, nor his ass, nor any thing that is thy neighbour's." Boils down to basically being satisfied with what you've been given, earned, etc. Self-centedness, that's prevalent in the U.S. and E.U. cultures, seems to side-step this issue with frivoluos law-suits.

can't rep ya so you just get a

 

[Hobbit]

I think I can cut down the commandments to the point that the Supreme Court will leave them alone. (paraphrased from the Glenn Beck program)

1. Thou shalt have no other Gods before me.
Ok, this one's out completely, because who are you to tell me who I'm going to worship. That's my own private business. I'll worship this squirrel if I want, you religion zealot.

2. Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image, etc
This one's gone, too. I'll make whatever I want. You don't have to look at it.

3. Thou shalt not take the name of the Lord thy God in vain.
Very out. It infringes on my right to free speech.

4. Remember the sabbath day, to keep it holy.
What if I wanna go fishing on Sunday. There's good fishing to be had. This one's out.

5. Honor they father and thy mother. (y'all missed this one)
What if my parents are jerks. This one goes.

6. Thou shalt not murder.
This one, I'm ok with.

7. Thou shalt not commit adultery.
What I do in the privacy of my own...or their own...bedroom is my own business and nobody else's. This one goes.

8. Thou shalt not steal.
This one's fine as is.

9. Thou shalt not covet.
Oh, so now you're policing my thoughts? I think all the implications of this commandment can be covered in number 8. Dismissed.

10.Thou shalt not commit false witness against thy neighbor.
This one needs a couple of provisos. Let's call it, "Thou shalt not commit perjury against thy neighbor unless it involves sex.

Ok, now we have the 2 1/2 commandments. Actually, commandment is too judgemental. Let's call them tips. The 2 1/2 tips.