" Should Ten Commandments Lithograph Injected Into Public Education As An Artifact From History Be Excluded From Science Classrooms ? "

[Seymour Flops]

Can you read that from 30 feet away?

Nope.

You are misinterpreting the law. It specifies at least 16 x 20 inches and that it is legible anywhere in the classroom. The reason for the specificity is to prevent teachers who think they are clever from using an unreadable font, or putting the poster behind a filing cabinet.

Obviously some giant font is not required when the poster is 16 x 20 inches.

 

[Zincwarrior]

To the specific topic, I don't see the relationship between the Ten Commandments and science classrooms. They are not oppositional, just not related to the Commandments.

 

[SweetSue92]

That's all we ask, that kids are exposed to what the Bible actually says, not what others say it says.

The minute you say "kids should be exposed to the Bible" with no curricular content, you openly invite every other religion to "expose kids" to THEIR sacred books. You okay with that? The Koran, say?

 

[postman]

To the specific topic, I don't see the relationship between the Ten Commandments and science classrooms. They are not oppositional, just not related to the Commandments.

There are 10 commandments.
They should have claimed it was a MATH lesson.

 

[PeterPilot]

I'm sorry, but this is just dumb. I've said it before and I'll say it again. The Ten Commandments was written for God's people. Why are we posting about, say, adultery in school buildings? For pity's sake, we have bigger fish to fry, and I hope the SC will weigh in honorably on this. There is no educational content in posting these in schools, and no curricular reason for doing so.

And I say this as a Christian.

Why is it that the US Government cannot remain neutral in religious matters? State governments too, I guess.

Zionist partisans successfully lobbied for incorporation of Talmudic teachings into the US legal system, and we ended up with the Noahide laws. Christian partisans want the 10 commandments incorporated. The pledge of allegiance incorporates reference to a christian god, apparently blocking others.

Why do they play this religious game?

 

[Woodznutz]

The minute you say "kids should be exposed to the Bible" with no curricular content, you openly invite every other religion to "expose kids" to THEIR sacred books. You okay with that? The Koran, say?

Sure. Kids will immediately see the superiority of the Bible.

 

[Woodznutz]

I'm sorry, but this is just dumb. I've said it before and I'll say it again. The Ten Commandments was written for God's people. Why are we posting about, say, adultery in school buildings? For pity's sake, we have bigger fish to fry, and I hope the SC will weigh in honorably on this. There is no educational content in posting these in schools, and no curricular reason for doing so.

And I say this as a Christian.

White Anglo-Saxon people are God's people. Study British Israelism.

 

[Woodznutz]

Why is it that the US Government cannot remain neutral in religious matters? State governments too, I guess.

Zionist partisans successfully lobbied for incorporation of Talmudic teachings into the US legal system, and we ended up with the Noahide laws. Christian partisans want the 10 commandments incorporated. The pledge of allegiance incorporates reference to a christian god, apparently blocking others.

Why do they play this religious game?

God gave us this nation along with its freedoms. Why turn our backs on Him.

 

[PeterPilot]

God gave us this nation along with its freedoms. Why turn our backs on Him.

I wonder why that thought was not expressed in the founding document?

Instead we have the First Amendment and the last sentence of Article VI : "...but no religious test shall ever be required as a qualification to any Office or Public Trust under the United States."

 

[Seymour Flops]

To the specific topic, I don't see the relationship between the Ten Commandments and science classrooms. They are not oppositional, just not related to the Commandments.

Yes but there's nothing counter-scientific about them.

The phrase"settled science" for example or admonishing people who "question the science" is very counter-scientific. Yet I would guess that both are used unironically by some science teachers.

Even in classes with posters that prohibit bearing false witness.

 

[Woodznutz]

I wonder why that thought was not expressed in the founding document?

Instead we have the First Amendment and the last sentence of Article VI : "...but no religious test shall ever be required as a qualification to any Office or Public Trust under the United States."

That's because of the abuses of certain denominations mainly the history of abuses by the RCC and the Church of England. Note that freedom of religion was also written into the Constitution.

 

[PeterPilot]

That's because of the abuses of certain denominations mainly the history of abuses by the RCC and the Church of England.

Did you learn that in bible study?

 

[Woodznutz]

Did you learn that in bible study?

European history class. The Bible is pretty cryptic about it, but historians flesh it out pretty well. However, the Bible and the historians are in general agreement about the subject.

 

[Woodznutz]

Yes but there's nothing counter-scientific about them.

The phrase"settled science" for example or admonishing people who "question the science" is very counter-scientific. Yet I would guess that both are used unironically by some science teachers.

Even in classes with posters that prohibit bearing false witness.

It's probably the "false witness" commandment that scientists object to the most, especially when teaching the ToE.

 

[rightwinger]

God gave us this nation along with its freedoms. Why turn our backs on Him.

Why would God give us a nation with a million slaves?

 

[Woodznutz]

Why would God give us a nation with a million slaves?

I believe we corrected that. The British had their fingerprints all over American black slavery.

 

[Seymour Flops]

Why would God give us a nation with a million slaves?

Your question is "why would God give a great nation to an imperfect people?"

If we are speaking of the Christian God, then we know that imperfection of man on earth is a central tenet of christianity.

The bigger question or the overarching question is, why did a perfect God create an imperfect world?

The answer, of course, is that I don't know. If I were perfect I would know - unless there were some perfect reason for me not to know.

 

[Zincwarrior]

Did you learn that in bible study?

Look up Thirty Years War. Its a doosey.

 

[Woodznutz]

Your question is "why would God give a great nation to an imperfect people?"

If we are speaking of the Christian God, then we know that imperfection of man on earth is a central tenet of christianity.

The bigger question or the overarching question is, why did a perfect God create an imperfect world?

The answer, of course, is that I don't know. If I were perfect I would know - unless there were some perfect reason for me not to know.

God gave America to the descendants of Manasseh because it was an unconditional birthright.

 

[rightwinger]

Your question is "why would God give a great nation to an imperfect people?"

If we are speaking of the Christian God, then we know that imperfection of man on earth is a central tenet of christianity.

The bigger question or the overarching question is, why did a perfect God create an imperfect world?

The answer, of course, is that I don't know. If I were perfect I would know - unless there were some perfect reason for me not to know.

If God gave us this nation, why would he allow a million of its members to live in chains?

Doesn’t seem a perfect God would do that
A God of the whites