Should the 10 commandments be allowed in gov't buildings?

elder999 said:
Lighten up, Francis.No where in my post did I suggest that you did. I'll add, though, that I prayed in school the entire time I attended, at least to say a blessing over my lunch, and-while it was a long time ago, and it's hard to imagine anyone who noticed taking offense-no one ever knew.
I didn't say that you specifically made such a suggestion. I can only speak for myself and my feelings, unless I am quoting others. The personal pronoun only indicated that I have not made such a suggestion, others may have.

I also prayed in school. Noone knew. Noone was offended. If I had prayed openly, I also don't think that anyone would have been offended, and if they were- tough. Be offended. As long as I am not disrupting class and I do not represent the state and tell others to pray, then there should be no issue.

One of my favorite teachers was my 5th grade teacher- Mrs. Wilson. Before lunch everyday, she would have us bow our heads and say grace before going to the lunch room. I was just a kid, and I loved that woman as my teacher and a role model. I never felt offended because I was living in the Bible Belt at the time and thought that this was sort of normal. I also never mentioned it to my parents. I wasn't trying to hide it, it just didn't occur to me.

Now as an adult, I understand that what she had nothing but good intentions- as I said, she was one of the sweetest ladies I have ever known- but it was wrong. She was a Baptist, I was (at the time) Catholic. Prayer and traditions are different and it was not her place to require us to do things her way.

Did it make me a bad person? Did it harm me? Of course not. But that should not be the argument to endorse one faith over another. "Well, it didn't hurt you- so it's ok."

The 10 Commandments, or any other religous icon or tradition, falls into the same catagory. Just because it does not harm me for it to hang on a state wall or sit on the state lawn does not make it right. If I donated Ba'Hai laws or Budhist icons to the courthouse for display, I am sure that I would be shot down.

Government and the business of government should be secular. Government is an entity onto itself. Let it run it's own business without the interference of the masses.
 
BTW, I did convince a bunch of Jahova's Witnesses that I worshipped the devil and practiced black magic...
they never came knocking on my door again- even though they hit my neighborhood about once a month.

hehhehheh.....
 
Tgace said:
We still place our hands on bibles when taking the oath in this country.....

That is equally as non-sequitur as holding up the right hand when making that oath. Doing so is to show the court that the moon of our thumb has not been branded with letter to signify conviction of a past crime.

Anyone even half conversant with the works of James Madison, author of the US Constitution, would not be disposed to think that he meant any show of preference, however small, for one religious point of view over another. Same again for Jefferson, Franklin, Paine and Adams. And Washington himself publicly refused to participate in communion through all his life.

These are historical facts which anyone may verify at their public library if they so choose.

On the other hand, if they care to display the Ten Commandments together with the Eightfold Path and all of the similar credos of ethical living, then it is not showing preference of one faith above others.

This is important because at its most basic, Government is men with guns who take your money. If any disagree with this, let them whithold their taxes and count the days until men with guns show up at their doorstep. Men with guns should not decide religious affairs. Ethical argument and moral example alone should suffice.
 
aplonis said:
On the other hand, if they care to display the Ten Commandments together with the Eightfold Path and all of the similar credos of ethical living, then it is not showing preference of one faith above others.

Personally, I think it'd be pretty damn hilarious if they displayed "Judge Not Lest Ye Be Judged" in front of a state courthouse. :D

Laterz.
 
heretic888 said:
Personally, I think it'd be pretty damn hilarious if they displayed "Judge Not Lest Ye Be Judged" in front of a state courthouse. :D

Laterz.

Now THAT's funny...
 
aplonis said:
This is important because at its most basic, Government is men with guns who take your money. If any disagree with this, let them whithold their taxes and count the days until men with guns show up at their doorstep. Men with guns should not decide religious affairs. Ethical argument and moral example alone should suffice.
A most simple and elegant point.
 
hardheadjarhead said:
I would agree that no government employee ought to be deprived of their right to religious expression in the form of wearing a yarmulke, a crucifix, a star of David, a veil, or a pentagram...provided the item was within the rules of decorum as prescribed by the job.

An example of a violation of rules of decorum...a city clerk wears a t-shirt that has a gory/graphic representation of the crucifixion (a la "The Passion of the Christ") or is printed with acidulous Hellfire and Brimstone admonitions towards repentance. That goes beyond the limits of religious observance and enters into the realm of evangelism...and rather tasteless evangelism at that.

The compromise article I linked to above stated that government ought not sponsor displays such as the ten commandments. Indeed, our tax dollars ought not pay for any religious expression, whether Jewish, Hindu, Buddhist, Christian, Muslim, or Rastafarian. If, however, we expand the right to public expression and avoid tax subsidization for this expression, we avoid walking the fine line the courts are now forced to walk.

Downside: People don't want competition in the marketplace of ideas. If we allow the Ten Commandments on the courthouse lawn...we must allow the Muslims to have chosen suras posted. The Jews might want to post the wisdom of Hillel. The lawn might be very crowded after a bit...with each group trying to raise their own money to have a more ostentatious public display. The government, owning the property, might alot a certain dimension to each group.

This "all or nothing" approach has some appeal.


Regards,



Steve

You do have a good point and I agree that put the 10 commandments on public buildings is not something we should do. If we do this for Christians then we would probably have to do the same for Muslims, Jews, ect. Not only does it promote a particular religion in a secular country, it would definitely cost tax money for this. And if we do this for Christians then we would probably have to do the same for Muslims, Jews, ect.

However, what's done is done. I personally don't want to spend tax money on taking out a decoration. It really doesn't make too much difference, just as long as the courts call it a decoration and nothing more.
 
elder999 said:
We also have the option not to......

One Judge drew some heat not too long ago for saying "They can swear on a ham sandwich for all I care as long as they swear."
 
Jesus Christ said that there will come a time in History where EVERYTHING dealing with Him, God, God's Law, the Ten Commandments, Christians, etc... will be Hated.

We're There Now.
 
Josh said:
Jesus Christ said that there will come a time in History where EVERYTHING dealing with Him, God, God's Law, the Ten Commandments, Christians, etc... will be Hated.

We're There Now.

Oh, Please!
 
That's right Michael.


You're denying it only makes me Believe it Even More.
 
Well, Josh, if you ever want to join us in the 'Reality Based Community', you will notice the hundreds of millions of dollars raised by Christian ministries every year.

Please reconcile that amount of fundraising to support the idea of Jesus Christ being equivalent to EVERYTHING is hated?


Oh, and by the way, did you know the '10 Commandments' belong to the Jews, first?
 
Josh said:
That's right Michael.


You're denying it only makes me Believe it Even More.

Well, isn't this a little silly?

I mean, yes, the fundamentalist muslims hate everything about christianity, but the Born-Agains seem pretty damn happy about it. Now, most people seem to fall somewhere in between. So really, your statement is pretty pointless cause you can refer to the haters and I can refer to the lovers.
 
Josh said:
Are ya'll Offended?
Don't you realize what ya'll are doing is EXACTLY what i said about in my earlier post?
Ya'll think the Idea that there is a God is a bad thing. The Bible says we Everyone already has a knowledge of God but choose to do evil anyway.
Everything Jesus said is coming true, if you wanna know what i'm talking about, PM me.

No, I am not offended. I just think that your opinions are not very carefully thought out.

How are we doing exactly what you said. I hold no animosity to Jesus (or Joshua ben Joseph). He is an excellent teacher.

If you want to talk about his actions and teaching being hated ... I suggest you look back about 1900 years. When believers had their faith tested, not by knuckleheads with computers, but by gladiator and beast in the Coliseum.

Josh, trust me, I know what you are talking about. And I have used my evolutionary developed brain to reason my way past the ideological belief structure you propose.

Thanks, but no thanks.

If you draw strength and support from your fellowship in a church, good for you.
 
Josh said:
Are ya'll Offended?


Don't you realize what ya'll are doing is EXACTLY what i said about in my earlier post?


Ya'll think the Idea that there is a God is a bad thing. The Bible says we Everyone already has a knowledge of God but choose to do evil anyway.


Everything Jesus said is coming true, if you wanna know what i'm talking about, PM me.

I'm not bothered by it, neither is Michael. Given that we are on the opposite sides of just about every other issue, that's saying something. How does that fit in with your theory?
 
Back
Top