Ten Commandments Controversy Moves West

[Annie]

Are you perhaps speaking from experience? I doubt a true Christian would bite anyone on the butt. Certainly doesn't seem very Christian to me.

couldn't help myself here Certainly under most circumstances.

 

[NewGuy]

I don't see your point. I'm an agnostic living in 2004.

Then don't be stupid enough to criticize Christians for making you follow Jewish law from ancient times when there is no such phenomenon.

Thankfully that repressive attitude about imposing religious behavior on people has changed.

Athiesm and socialism are religions too. So is vegitarianism, isolationism, racism, and darwinism.

Just about any belief or action done repeatedly and believed in is called a religion by definition. Your statement is absurd.

I think that the "Blue Laws" (restricting the purchase of items on Sunday) was repealed a few years ago. Yet citizens today often have those "10 Commandments" practically shoved in their faces every once in a while.

Um, mat?

Quote me the freedom of speech bit in the Constitution.

 

[Moi]

Then don't be stupid enough to criticize Christians for making you follow Jewish law from ancient times when there is no such phenomenon.




Athiesm and socialism are religions too. So is vegitarianism, isolationism, racism, and darwinism.

Just about any belief or action done repeatedly and believed in is called a religion by definition. Your statement is absurd.



Um, mat?

Quote me the freedom of speech bit in the Constitution.

Relax, he was being humorous.

 

[NewGuy]

Relax, he was being humorous.

Having been through this with him more than twice before, he wasn't being humorous.

 

[ScreamingEagle]

I don't see your point. I'm an agnostic living in 2004. Thankfully that repressive attitude about imposing religious behavior on people has changed. I think that the "Blue Laws" (restricting the purchase of items on Sunday) was repealed a few years ago. Yet citizens today often have those "10 Commandments" practically shoved in their faces every once in a while.

I, for one, am tired of having this secularism shoved in MY face.

 

[mattskramer]

Then don't be stupid enough to criticize Christians for making you follow Jewish law from ancient times when there is no such phenomenon.

Then what is the point in shoving this old relic (the 10 Commandments) in our faces?!? What the hell are you trying to prove?

Athiesm and socialism are religions too. So is vegitarianism, isolationism, racism, and darwinism. Just about any belief or action done repeatedly and believed in is called a religion by definition.

You are correct if you apply the definition of religion as "A cause, principle, or activity pursued with zeal or conscientious devotion" and not the common definition: "A belief in and reverence for a supernatural power or powers regarded as creator and governor of the universe." The Blue Laws ended only a few years ago. The Salem Witch Trials ended only a couple of centuries ago. We must be watchful of attempts to return to the days of persecution, if not prosecution, of those who don't follow expected behavior of the popular religions of America. With the ever present displays of the "10 Commandments" these subtle attempts are easily seen.

Last Sunday a rather forward acquaintance asked me if I had attended church. I was thinking about telling her that I find such a question personal and none of her business. I politely said "No". She tilted her head back and looked down at me in a manner as if to say "Shame on you". I think that she was going to try to get into a discussion of why I had not attended church, but I quickly said that I have things to do and walked away.

These busybody, self-righteous "Christians" can certainly be a nuisance. Yet, thankfully, I know that not all Christians are like that (I have met one Christian who does hot "thump you with the Bible" if you don't do "what you should". Unfortunately, I met several more that can ironically really turn people off of their religion.


Quote me the freedom of speech bit in the Constitution.

I have read and understand the freedom of speech bit in the constitution. I also know the "anti establishment" bit in the constitution. You are free to discuss your religion as you see fit in your own way and with your own mouth and money. You should not have the right to force government to use my money, directly or indirectly, to promote your "10 Commandments". There are even laws that place reasonable limits on free speech. Have you heard of laws prohibiting public nuisances and disturbances of the peace. Let me get right next your home with a megaphone and scream my views through your bedroom window at 3:00 in the morning and see how long you tolerate my freedom of speech.

 

[mattskramer]

I, for one, am tired of having this secularism shoved in MY face.

Oh Please. How is secularism being shoved in your face?

 

[NewGuy]

Then don't be stupid enough to criticize Christians for making you follow Jewish law from ancient times when there is no such phenomenon.

Then what is the point in shoving this old relic (the 10 Commandments) in our faces?!? What the hell are you trying to prove?

Somehow a public display of our foundation is shoving something in your face? Hey mat, why do you run? Could it be guilt? Could it be the light of truth? Could it be that you want to rewrite history?

Methinks all the above.

Athiesm and socialism are religions too. So is vegitarianism, isolationism, racism, and darwinism. Just about any belief or action done repeatedly and believed in is called a religion by definition.

You are correct if you apply the definition of religion as "A cause, principle, or activity pursued with zeal or conscientious devotion" and not the common definition: "A belief in and reverence for a supernatural power or powers regarded as creator and governor of the universe." The Blue Laws ended only a few years ago. The Salem Witch Trials ended only a couple of centuries ago. We must be watchful of attempts to return to the days of persecution, if not prosecution, of those who don't follow expected behavior of the popular religions of America. With the ever present displays of the "10 Commandments" these subtle attempts are easily seen.

Again, you run. It is HISTORY. -AND FACT. You can't run from God nor history. -No matter how hard you persecute, rewrite, brainwash and sabotage.

Last Sunday a rather forward acquaintance asked me if I had attended church. I was thinking about telling her that I find such a question personal and none of her business. I politely said "No". She tilted her head back and looked down at me in a manner as if to say "Shame on you". I think that she was going to try to get into a discussion of why I had not attended church, but I quickly said that I have things to do and walked away.

So? If she asked if you were homosexual would you have been as scared?

If she asked you what color your underwear was, would you be as offended?

The reality is you are immoral and afraid of God so you think you can run and hide. You think your ego can shield you by attacking morality, Christians, and history at every turn. It doesn't work that way.

These busybody, self-righteous "Christians" can certainly be a nuisance. Yet, thankfully, I know that not all Christians are like that (I have met one Christian who does hot "thump you with the Bible" if you don't do "what you should". Unfortunately, I met several more that can ironically really turn people off of their religion.

So? I don't like busybody athiests who thump me in the head with darwin and their stupid darwin fishes on their cars who then yell "Oh, GOD!" every chance they can when something doesn't go their selfish way.

Grow a spine mat, you preach tolerance, have tolerance for history and ethics if you cannot tolerate reality.

Quote me the freedom of speech bit in the Constitution.[/B}

I have read and understand the freedom of speech bit in the constitution. I also know the "anti establishment" bit in the constitution. You are free to discuss your religion as you see fit in your own way and with your own mouth and money. You should not have the right to force government to use my money, directly or indirectly, to promote your "10 Commandments".

Agreed. -But they are not mine, they belong to all of us.

There are even laws that place reasonable limits on free speech.

By Constitution and your own statements, they are illegal.

Have you heard of laws prohibiting public nuisances and disturbances of the peace. Let me get right next your home with a megaphone and scream my views through your bedroom window at 3:00 in the morning and see how long you tolerate my freedom of speech.

Big deal. Limiting said speech is UNCONSTITUTIONAL. I notice you made an excuse for it, though, when it suited your need.

The reality is that the law should be against a person causing you harm with their speech, not the speech its self. -In which case you would be duct-taped, and I would not.

Here is a quote for you mat:

The Farewell Address of
President George Washington Sept. 17, 1796

Of all the dispositions and habits, which lead to political prosperity, Religion and Morality are indispensable supports. In vain would that man claim the tribute of Patriotism, who should labor to subvert these great pillars of human happiness, these firmest props of the duties of Men and Citizens. The mere Politician, equally with the pious man, ought to respect and to cherish them. A volume could not trace all their connexions with private and public felicity. Let it simply be asked, Where is the security for property, for reputation, for life, if the sense of religious obligation desert the oaths, which are the instruments of investigation in Courts of Justice? And let us with caution indulge the supposition, that morality can be maintained without religion. Whatever may be conceded to the influence of refined education on minds of peculiar structure, reason and experience both forbid us to expect, that national morality can prevail in exclusion of religious principle.

You are the weakest link.

Have a good day.

 

[ScreamingEagle]

Oh Please. How is secularism being shoved in your face?

Everything you are saying and more. Let's take an easy example:

Secularists are trying to rename Christmas to become a "Winter Holiday".

I find that extremely offensive.

 

[mattskramer]

Somehow a public display of our foundation is shoving something in your face? Hey mat, why do you run? Could it be guilt? Could it be the light of truth? Could it be that you want to rewrite history?

The US was founded on more than just the thought that God exists. It was founded on land practically stolen from the American Indian and built on the backs of slaves. I don't run. I simply find it annoying that my tax money is being used to push this Judeo-Christian symbol.

Again, you run. It is HISTORY. -AND FACT. You can't run from God nor history. -No matter how hard you persecute, rewrite, brainwash and sabotage.

Uh. Let's get it straight. This thing is a display based on belief in God. To the degree that it is history, keep it in the history books along with the other things of history.

So? If she asked if you were homosexual would you have been as scared? If she asked you what color your underwear was, would you be as offended?

I was not scared. I was annoyed at her arrogant and self-righteous demeanor. I wanted her to buzz off. Someone did ask me once, long ago, if I was a homosexual. I said "No" and we walked away. No. I would not be as offended if she had asked me the color of my underwear unless she were to get in my face and continue to pry.

The reality is you are immoral and afraid of God so you think you can run and hide. You think your ego can shield you by attacking morality, Christians, and history at every turn. It doesn't work that way.

Morality is subjective and relative. I am not afraid of God. I am annoyed by busybody "Christians" who consider it their right and duty to involve themselves in my life.

So? I don't like busybody atheists who thump me in the head with darwin and their stupid darwin fishes on their cars who then yell "Oh, GOD!" every chance they can when something doesn't go their selfish way.

Oh please. They are not doing it nearly to the extent that "Christian" are imposing their message. On what currency or on what national pledge is written "In Secularism we Trust"? How did the people get the "Darwin fish" on their cars - Was it through your tax money? I doubt it.

But they are not mine, they belong to all of us.

No. They are not my "10 Commandments".

There are even laws that place reasonable limits on free speech. - By Constitution and your own statements, they are illegal.

 

[dilloduck]

couldn't help myself here Certainly under most circumstances.

got the scars to prove it huh? :teeth:

 

[OCA]

Forgive me for seeming ignorant but what the fuck is wrong with something that has 10 good friggin rules on it that should be a guidepost to anyone's life? Last I remember the Ten Commandments don't say thou shalt be a Christian or thou shalt be thrown in jail. This country is not going to be torn apart by terrorists but will be torn asunder by the citizens socially, mark my words as it is already well under way.

Matts, I feel sorry for you, I will light a thousand candles for your troubled soul.

 

[dilloduck]

I think the left sees Christian symbols as an easy way to begin attacking the power of the right. It's an attempt by groups like the ACLU to use the constitution and activist judges to subvert the power of the right which has strong support among Christians. It has more to do with trying to shift the balance of power than individual freedoms.

 

[Moi]

Forgive me for seeming ignorant but what the fuck is wrong with something that has 10 good friggin rules on it that should be a guidepost to anyone's life? Last I remember the Ten Commandments don't say thou shalt be a Christian or thou shalt be thrown in jail. This country is not going to be torn apart by terrorists but will be torn asunder by the citizens socially, mark my words as it is already well under way.

Matts, I feel sorry for you, I will light a thousand candles for your troubled soul.

Although I believe that morality is not religious in nature and that laws are based on morality in general, the 10 commandments are certainly advocating a certain deity, that's for sure.

I) THOU SHALT HAVE NO OTHER GOD'S BEFORE ME.
***
II) 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;
***
III) 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.
***
IV) REMEMBER THE SABETH 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 MANSERVENT, NOR THY MAIDSERVENT, THY CATTLE, NOR THY STRANGER THAT IS WITNIN THY GATES:
***
V) HONOUR THY FATHER AND THY MOTHER: THAT THY DAYS MANY BE LONG UPON THE LAND, WHICH THE LORD THEY GOD GIVETH THEE.
***
VI) THOU SHALT NOT KILL.
***
VII) THOU SHALT NOT COMMIT ADULTERY.
***
VIII) THOU SHALT NOT STEAL.
***
IX) THOU SHALT NOT BEAR FALSE WITNESS AGAINST THEY NEIGHBOUR.
***
X) THOU SHALT NOT COVET THY NEIGHBOUR'S HOUSE, THOU SHALT NOT COVET THEY NEIGHBOUR'S WIFE, NOR HIS MANSERVANT, NOR HIS MAIDSERVENT, NOR HIS OX, NOR HIS ASS, NOR ANY THING THAT IS THY NEIGHBOUR'S.

 

[DKSuddeth]

the ten commandments do advocate a single religion.

 

[UsaPride]

If you're an athiest (the guy in the article), then you don't believe any of it. Why would you be offended enough to have it removed?
I don't know, I'm seriously asking.

 

[Moi]

If you're an athiest (the guy in the article), then you don't believe any of it. Why would you be offended enough to have it removed?
I don't know, I'm seriously asking.

Seems to me most of the arguments about removing preexisting religious expression from public domain are about MONEY and INFLUENCE. People claim that they don't want public money spent on religion (because of that amendment issue) and that they don't think the public venue should be advocating for a certain religion (as in, if it's Christian that implies that all other religions are unworthy of support).

On the first matter, I have little sympathy. Money already spent is spent. You can't get it back by spending more public money trying to or actually removing it.

On the second, I understand the issue. Just as I feel it is not the school's place to dish out "rules" about sexuality because it seems not all sides are accounted for, I have some sympathy for someone who doesn't believe in a judeo-christian god not having his religion given fair due.

I do not think, however, the answer to either conundrum is removing all christian symbols from this country.

 

[OCA]

Although I believe that morality is not religious in nature and that laws are based on morality in general, the 10 commandments are certainly advocating a certain deity, that's for sure.

I) THOU SHALT HAVE NO OTHER GOD'S BEFORE ME.
***
II) 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;
***
III) 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.
***
IV) REMEMBER THE SABETH 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 MANSERVENT, NOR THY MAIDSERVENT, THY CATTLE, NOR THY STRANGER THAT IS WITNIN THY GATES:
***
V) HONOUR THY FATHER AND THY MOTHER: THAT THY DAYS MANY BE LONG UPON THE LAND, WHICH THE LORD THEY GOD GIVETH THEE.
***
VI) THOU SHALT NOT KILL.
***
VII) THOU SHALT NOT COMMIT ADULTERY.
***
VIII) THOU SHALT NOT STEAL.
***
IX) THOU SHALT NOT BEAR FALSE WITNESS AGAINST THEY NEIGHBOUR.
***
X) THOU SHALT NOT COVET THY NEIGHBOUR'S HOUSE, THOU SHALT NOT COVET THEY NEIGHBOUR'S WIFE, NOR HIS MANSERVANT, NOR HIS MAIDSERVENT, NOR HIS OX, NOR HIS ASS, NOR ANY THING THAT IS THY NEIGHBOUR'S.

Ok lets take this 1 by one:

1. Yes that is advocating just Christianity, although I agree with it I see where that is controversial.

2. Can also be controversial.

3. Good idea, don't go around saying goddammit and holy fucken Christ all the time.

4. I don't like to work on Sundays either, another good idea.

5. The MOST IMPORTANT 1 of them all in my opinion. How many kids do we know nowadays who basically piss all over their parents?

6. Common sense although there are many situations in life where it is neccessary and justified.

7. Don't fuck around on your spouse, many have tried, few have gotten away with it, excellent rule.

8. Thieves, are there anything lower?

9. Don't talk shit about your neighbor or friends or whoever behind their backs, good rule.

10. Don't bang your neighbor's wife or covet his John Deere riding mower etc. etc., another excellent rule.

Lets see i'll give you 8 out of 10 although I think the 10 out of 10 are good. Don't see a reason for removal based on that percentage.

 

[Moi]

The secular laws about not lying, stealing, killing are good. The others are completely irrelevant and serve only those people who follow that path.

I get angry because my country is spending millions of dollars translating stuff to foreign languages (mostly spanish though) and that's not even unconstitutional.

There is nothing wrong with not allowing the 10 commandments on public property or from public funds. I'm still not sure that I would know what to do for those already in place though.

 

[UsaPride]

Seems to me most of the arguments about removing preexisting religious expression from public domain are about MONEY and INFLUENCE. People claim that they don't want public money spent on religion (because of that amendment issue) and that they don't think the public venue should be advocating for a certain religion (as in, if it's Christian that implies that all other religions are unworthy of support).

On the first matter, I have little sympathy. Money already spent is spent. You can't get it back by spending more public money trying to or actually removing it.

On the second, I understand the issue. Just as I feel it is not the school's place to dish out "rules" about sexuality because it seems not all sides are accounted for, I have some sympathy for someone who doesn't believe in a judeo-christian god not having his religion given fair due.

I do not think, however, the answer to either conundrum is removing all christian symbols from this country.

Thanks Moi!!!
But the police department isn't dishing out Religious pamplets or Preaching or anything. It's a statue in the yard that's been there for how many years. Grant it, there isn't any other Religions statues out there, then let those Religions donate something of theirs instead of removing one that's already in place.
This guy (in the article) is an athiest, he can't be upset because his religion isn't out there too, he doesn't have one. If the police department was out their Preaching the Commandments to passer-bys, then I'd understand. As it is, if this guy doesn't like it, DON'T look at it, just like I'm going to be told to do if I start complaining about the gay channel I just read about on the other thread. If I complain, I'll be told, "Don't watch it". Shouldn't the same go for this guy, or am I totally missing the point, lol.