OT: The Ten comandments.

Discussion in 'rec.music.percussion' started by NoSheeples, Aug 28, 2003.

  1. NoSheeples

    NoSheeples Guest

    What is this society coming to? Are people really that weak minded that they
    are afraid an artifact of our nations history with some simple rules that are
    good to adhere by, will influence them? I have come to the conclusion that
    these busy bodies who fight to have this stuff removed are evil. The
    commandments likely remind them of their own shortcomings, and they can't deal
    with it. Just having a plaque there does not violate the constitution, nor
    does it impose any religion. There are plenty of things that offend me that are
    secular which by the way is a religion in it's self.

    The term separation of church and state is no were mentioned in the
    constitution, it's a made up term used to bastardize the meaning of the law
    congress passed that says they shall make no laws regarding religion. The
    court ruling was wrong, but because this is a nation of laws we must respect
    the decision.
    The expo-facto law coming from the bench by activist Judges is ten times more
    scary then the ten commandments. How much do you want to bet that our currency
    is next? The word God is slowly trying to be removed from our society.
    Is this really a good thing? Does this make us better people?
    Saying that having the ten commandments in a court room is unconstitutional is
    a stretch by anyone's imagination. It's not so much the fact that the plauqe
    was removed that bothers me, it's the insane activisim behind it that is the
    threat. It's not the like Judge made people read it. The way I always looked at
    these things, if something offends you then you don't have to look at it. Maybe
    im just odd, but having to stand in a elevator with a a 500 pound smelly
    lardass is way more offense then the ten commandments. If it were leagle I
    would take pleasure in shooting people that are so called offended by everyting
    today. This includes everything from names of baseball teams to people wearing
    a cross on their neck at work.
    I thought of a way to fight back, and that would be telling the jew at work who
    displays his beilives to remove the stuff, but then it occured to me that I
    would just be another low life like the ones who go around doing this stuff.
    Why can't people just go about their daily lives and ignore something they
    don't like?
    The answer is because they have none. Im not going to follow up on this, and
    im not trolling, ok I have some swamp land to. ;o) No really, I was just
    curious what others thought even if you're athiest, because the athiest I have
    talked to are not bothered by displays of the ten comandments. I look at this
    as no different then a nude bar down the street that local judge makes up law
    to have it removed. That is essentially what was done here.

    "Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what is for lunch. Liberty is
    a well armed lamb protesting the vote."
  2. Doug Fuller

    Doug Fuller Guest

    Re: The Ten comandments.

    "NoSheeples" <n2new@aol.comNsheep> wrote:
    >
    > What is this society coming to? Are people really that weak minded that

    they
    > are afraid an artifact of our nations history with some simple rules that

    are
    > good to adhere by, will influence them?


    I don't think that's the case at all.

    > I have come to the conclusion that
    > these busy bodies who fight to have this stuff removed are evil. The
    > commandments likely remind them of their own shortcomings, and they can't

    deal
    > with it.


    Objection. Speculative.

    > Just having a plaque there does not violate the constitution, nor
    > does it impose any religion.


    It may not violate the constitution verbatim but it violates the spirit of
    the constitution.

    > There are plenty of things that offend me that are
    > secular which by the way is a religion in it's self.


    Things that offend you and government sponsored valueless opinions are two
    different things. Secular means not religious or religiously neutral. Do
    you mean athesism?

    > The term separation of church and state is no were mentioned in the
    > constitution, it's a made up term used to bastardize the meaning of the

    law
    > congress passed that says they shall make no laws regarding religion.


    True, but the spirit is what's important. Plus, freedom of religion also
    means freedom FROM religion.

    > The
    > court ruling was wrong, but because this is a nation of laws we must

    respect
    > the decision.


    The court ruling was right.

    > The expo-facto law coming from the bench by activist Judges is ten times

    more
    > scary then the ten commandments. How much do you want to bet that our

    currency
    > is next? The word God is slowly trying to be removed from our society.


    > Is this really a good thing?


    Yes.

    > Does this make us better people?


    I don't know. Does having it make us good people?

    > Saying that having the ten commandments in a court room is

    unconstitutional is
    > a stretch by anyone's imagination.


    Then I guess we should go ahead and place quotes from every other religious
    doctrine in the world in every courtroom in the country. That's just silly.

    > It's not so much the fact that the plauqe
    > was removed that bothers me, it's the insane activisim behind it that is

    the
    > threat.


    Insane activism put it there in the first place.

    > It's not the like Judge made people read it.


    If he didn't want people to read it then nobody should have a problem with
    it not being there.

    > The way I always looked at
    > these things, if something offends you then you don't have to look at it.


    Except in the case where MY tax money is involved.

    > Maybe
    > im just odd, but having to stand in a elevator with a a 500 pound smelly
    > lardass is way more offense then the ten commandments.


    Ditto above.

    > If it were leagle I
    > would take pleasure in shooting people that are so called offended by

    everyting
    > today. This includes everything from names of baseball teams to people

    wearing
    > a cross on their neck at work.
    > I thought of a way to fight back, and that would be telling the jew at

    work who
    > displays his beilives to remove the stuff, but then it occured to me that

    I
    > would just be another low life like the ones who go around doing this

    stuff.
    > Why can't people just go about their daily lives and ignore something they
    > don't like?


    Why can't people just go about their daily lives and keep their silly
    opinions to themselves?

    > The answer is because they have none. Im not going to follow up on this,

    and
    > im not trolling, ok I have some swamp land to. ;o) No really, I was just
    > curious what others thought even if you're athiest, because the athiest I

    have
    > talked to are not bothered by displays of the ten comandments. I look at

    this
    > as no different then a nude bar down the street that local judge makes up

    law
    > to have it removed. That is essentially what was done here.


    > "Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what is for lunch. Liberty

    is
    > a well armed lamb protesting the vote."


    This I like however ;-)

    --
    Cheers,
    Doug Fuller
    Boston
    doug_fuller_62@earthlink.net (remove all underscores)
    "It's all in the mama-daddies."
  3. Doug Crooks

    Doug Crooks Guest

    IMHO, you have to give the judge props for beining an elected official,
    proving that he stands by his campaing promises/platform he was elected
    on, and having the balls to stand up on said convictions no matter what
    the pressure. I don't know if I agree or disagree with his argument,
    but I respect and admire the way he stoof up for his beliefs.
    --
    doug


    NoSheeples wrote:
    > What is this society coming to? Are people really that weak minded that they
    > are afraid an artifact of our nations history with some simple rules that are
    > good to adhere by, will influence them? I have come to the conclusion that
    > these busy bodies who fight to have this stuff removed are evil. The
    > commandments likely remind them of their own shortcomings, and they can't deal
    > with it. Just having a plaque there does not violate the constitution, nor
    > does it impose any religion. There are plenty of things that offend me that are
    > secular which by the way is a religion in it's self.
    >
    > The term separation of church and state is no were mentioned in the
    > constitution, it's a made up term used to bastardize the meaning of the law
    > congress passed that says they shall make no laws regarding religion. The
    > court ruling was wrong, but because this is a nation of laws we must respect
    > the decision.
    > The expo-facto law coming from the bench by activist Judges is ten times more
    > scary then the ten commandments. How much do you want to bet that our currency
    > is next? The word God is slowly trying to be removed from our society.
    > Is this really a good thing? Does this make us better people?
    > Saying that having the ten commandments in a court room is unconstitutional is
    > a stretch by anyone's imagination. It's not so much the fact that the plauqe
    > was removed that bothers me, it's the insane activisim behind it that is the
    > threat. It's not the like Judge made people read it. The way I always looked at
    > these things, if something offends you then you don't have to look at it. Maybe
    > im just odd, but having to stand in a elevator with a a 500 pound smelly
    > lardass is way more offense then the ten commandments. If it were leagle I
    > would take pleasure in shooting people that are so called offended by everyting
    > today. This includes everything from names of baseball teams to people wearing
    > a cross on their neck at work.
    > I thought of a way to fight back, and that would be telling the jew at work who
    > displays his beilives to remove the stuff, but then it occured to me that I
    > would just be another low life like the ones who go around doing this stuff.
    > Why can't people just go about their daily lives and ignore something they
    > don't like?
    > The answer is because they have none. Im not going to follow up on this, and
    > im not trolling, ok I have some swamp land to. ;o) No really, I was just
    > curious what others thought even if you're athiest, because the athiest I have
    > talked to are not bothered by displays of the ten comandments. I look at this
    > as no different then a nude bar down the street that local judge makes up law
    > to have it removed. That is essentially what was done here.
    >
    > "Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what is for lunch. Liberty is
    > a well armed lamb protesting the vote."
    >
  4. joem

    joem Guest

    NoSheeples wanted everyone in rec.music.makers.percussion to know that
    > The answer is because they have none. Im not going to follow up on this, and
    > im not trolling, ok I have some swamp land to. ;o) No really, I was just
    > curious what others thought even if you're athiest, because the athiest I have
    > talked to are not bothered by displays of the ten comandments. I look at this
    > as no different then a nude bar down the street that local judge makes up law
    > to have it removed. That is essentially what was done here.


    well, you asked nicely so I'll give my $.02 :)

    really, in regards to religious articles/statements/references in public
    places, it comes down to this for me:
    the US, like it or not, has many different people living in it and
    they're all part of the nation; for those that don't believe in the
    religion behind such things (the article/statement/reference in
    question), I think the problem lies more with feeling alienated and
    apart of something you're supposed to be *a part of*; and citizens of
    a country shouldn't feel that way about their country

    --
    Joe.

    "you're an electronic girl...i'm a rock guy...i don't think we have a
    chance." - storm&stress
  5. NoSheeples

    NoSheeples Guest

    Re: The Ten comandments.

    >True, but the spirit is what's important. Plus, freedom of religion also
    >means freedom FROM religion.


    I know I said wouldn't follow up, but you appear to have a brain and have
    challenged my intellect. To this I have a simple response. Anyone who enters
    the court room is 100% free from religion, it's crystal clear in what the
    constitution meant when they said freedom from religion, and that is congress
    shall pass no laws. Again I say that it's a stretch to say this violates that.


    >The court ruling was right.


    You think it was right because you agree with it, but acording the the law it
    was not wrong. Law was made up here, and that it the main point of argument.
    You are not suppose to make up law becase you don't like something. What if
    judges start making up laws that say fat people can't offend me in a elevator?
    ;o)




    >> Is this really a good thing?

    >


    >Yes.
    >


    Opinion.

    >
    >I don't know. Does having it make us good people?


    I think most people would say we would not be who we are without it, no matter
    what religion.

    >
    >Then I guess we should go ahead and place quotes from every other religious
    >doctrine in the world in every courtroom in the country. That's just silly.


    Well I guess we should remove In god we trust from our currnecy then, right?
    After all, one dollar bills could start rearing the face of Saddam right?
    It's not fair that Washington is on there. ;o)


    >Insane activism put it there in the first place.
    >


    Wrong, the plauqe was sitting there minding it's own buisness. The Judge did
    not sue to make people read it.
    Is wearing a cross at work activism?
    See what has happened here? If it is then so is the Jew wearing his benie.



    >
    >If he didn't want people to read it then nobody should have a problem with
    >it not being there.


    That's not my problem, it's the busy bodie low life who let the plaques
    presence consume his miserable life. Im sure he sleeps better now know that
    something dear to a sitting judge, is no longer there.

    >Except in the case where MY tax money is involved.
    >


    Once again, a stretch. My tax money is invloved with transvestines having sex
    changes, and people having abortions.
    This directly violates my beilifes, because my money pays for it, yet I can do
    nothing about it, proving that secularism is just another form of religion.

    >Why can't people just go about their daily lives and keep their silly
    >opinions to themselves?


    Opinions don't hurt anyone activism is a tool used for the minority to get
    what they want even though the majority don't agree.



    "Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what is for lunch. Liberty is
    a well armed lamb protesting the vote."
  6. Jim

    Jim Guest

    Re: The Ten comandments.

    No really, I was just
    > curious what others thought even if you're athiest, because the athiest I

    have
    > talked to are not bothered by displays of the ten comandments. I look at

    this
    > as no different then a nude bar down the street that local judge makes up

    law
    > to have it removed. That is essentially what was done here.
    >
    > "Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what is for lunch. Liberty

    is
    > a well armed lamb protesting the vote."
    >


    I am not a xtian and am not offended by the concept of the 10 commandments
    or displays of it. but I am offended by a judge who acted on his own
    without the cooperation or consent of his fellow justices. Was this proper
    behaviour? No. In any city open a phone book you will find an abundant
    supply of houses of worship to practice your own personal mythology. There
    should be no need for it in public schools and government buildings. Do you
    think having gods name on currency makes us more moral? No it is kind of
    hypocritical extolling godliness on the tool of the greedy. Remember xtians
    also added god to the Pledge of Allegiance even though the original version
    (written by a baptist minister) contained no such reference. We live in a
    diverse society where not all people look at xtianity as a good thing. It
    has been the source of a lot of persecution, hate and death for hundreds of
    years. so if this offends you GREAT. the fact that you wish could kill
    people who feel differently then you shows that maybe you need to look
    inward for where the problen truly is.
  7. joem

    joem Guest

    joem wanted everyone in rec.music.makers.percussion to know that
    > apart of something you're supposed to be *a part of*;


    that should read "apart FROM something you're..."

    --
    Joe.

    "you're an electronic girl...i'm a rock guy...i don't think we have a
    chance." - storm&stress
  8. riddim

    riddim Guest

    Re: The Ten comandments.

    Re this:

    > > Just having a plaque there does not violate the constitution, nor
    > > does it impose any religion.

    >


    I believe this statement is in error. Here's why:

    This says state laws will support the Constitution:

    "Article VI, from
    http://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution/constitution.articlevi.html


    This Constitution, and the laws of the United States which shall be made in
    pursuance thereof; and all treaties made, or which shall be made, under the
    authority of the United States, shall be the supreme law of the land; and
    the judges in every state shall be bound thereby, anything in the
    Constitution or laws of any State to the contrary notwithstanding.


    The Senators and Representatives before mentioned, and the members of the
    several state legislatures, and all executive and judicial officers, both of
    the United States and of the several states, shall be bound by oath or
    affirmation, to support this Constitution; but no religious test shall ever
    be required as a qualification to any office or public trust under the
    United States."


    Now check this out:

    Amendment I, from
    http://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution/constitution.billofrights.html#amendmenti

    "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or
    prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech,
    or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to
    petition the government for a redress of grievances."

    This means no state sponsored religion. Putting the 10 Commandments in a
    state or federal facility in a place of prominenence can creates the
    impression that this is government sanctioned policy. If you do that for
    one religion, you have to do it for all, which opens a mighty big can of
    worms. We'd never have enough room, some group would feel slighted, and
    the government would be mired in related lawsuits forever. I'm not sure we
    want to go there.

    I believe this is why the Alabama and US Supreme courts have not ruled in
    favor of those who are not familiar with the law of the land.

    As the President has said, the decision can be appealed. However, it'll
    take some very creative lawyering to get around this.
  9. NoSheeples

    NoSheeples Guest

    Re: The Ten comandments.

    >
    >I am not a xtian and am not offended by the concept of the 10 commandments
    >or displays of it. but I am offended by a judge who acted on his own
    >without the cooperation or consent of his fellow justices. Was this proper
    >behaviour? No. In any city open a phone book you will find an abundant
    >supply of houses of worship to practice your own personal mythology. There
    >should be no need for it in public schools and government buildings. Do you
    >think having gods name on currency makes us more moral? No it is kind of
    >hypocritical extolling godliness on the tool of the greedy. Remember xtians
    >also added god to the Pledge of Allegiance even though the original version
    >(written by a baptist minister) contained no such reference. We live in a
    >diverse society where not all people look at xtianity as a good thing. It
    >has been the source of a lot of persecution, hate and death for hundreds of
    >years. so if this offends you GREAT. the fact that you wish could kill
    >people who feel differently then you shows that maybe you need to look
    >inward for where the problen truly is.
    >
    >
    >
    >
    >
    >
    >
    >


    I tend to agree with much of what you say, however, I would just like to see
    consistancy in the law, for example, if the ten commandemtns signifys a
    specific religion IE in this case Chritianinty, then the word GOD also does.
    this is found on our currency, this in my mind is inconsistant with the ruling.
    Having the word GOD on our currency is promoting Christianity and religion is
    it not? What about this, often you will here people say in a court room that
    they swear to tell the truth so help me god. According to this new ruling,
    this activity must stop at once. Again I fond that this ruling was nothing
    more than the result of someone being offended. If I am wrong then why are
    these same people not calling for removal of the word god from all public
    documents?
    Think about what I am saying here. Every single day we pull money out of our
    pockets, that bear the words in GOD we trust. Do you mean to tell me that no
    one is offended? Where is the public out cry?
    I guess what I am trying to argue is that behind every activist agenda there is
    a hidden one IE the real reason certain parties pursued the removal of the
    plaque.
    Thisn is what concerns me more than the removal of the plauqe it's self. Let's
    be real here. If we all decided to get up tomarrow and go seek out offensive
    things, we could find a huge assortment, there would be no short supply. Is
    this how we are becomming now? Do we really have to get up in the morning and
    worry about offending that muslim at work becase maybe you have a cross on your
    neck? I guess what I am trying to say is these same people are the ones who
    are allready trying to have jesus removed from your front lawn. Is this what
    you want? Having religious displays on your lawn is not using the taxpayers
    money, and you're not the gummit, so what's the problem? We all sit here
    thinking a good deed was done not realzing that this is how satan works. He is
    sneeky. Who ever bothered to make the issue of getting the plauqe out of the
    court room is comming after you next, in fact they allready are.

    That's my .002.

    "Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what is for lunch. Liberty is
    a well armed lamb protesting the vote."
  10. Re: The Ten comandments.

    Doug Fuller <doug_fuller_62@earthlink.net(remove_underscores)> wrote:

    > True, but the spirit is what's important. Plus, freedom of religion also
    > means freedom FROM religion.


    Lessee. What exactly is the "spirit" of the Constitution? Oh I know.
    It's whatever you CHOOSE to say it is? This is liberal-leftist-atheist
    talk! We hear it all the time in the media. The Consititution is
    a "living" document. Horse manure. If a document means only what those
    in power SAY it means at the time, then it has NO meaning! Contrary
    to the liberal view. Words actually have real meanings that don't shift
    rapidly with the will of the speaker.

    Bottom line: "spirit of the Constitution" is pure bullsh!t.

    And furthermore freedom OF religion NEVER means freedom FROM
    religion. That would be because freedom FROM religion means
    that no other religion, but secular humanism is to be allowed.
    Therefore, when a government demands that all religious symbols
    be removed from sight, it is actually banning certain religions
    and establishing secular humanism (or atheism...the religion
    favored by commies and the rest of the left) as the state
    religion. In other words following the policies of the late
    Soviet Union and its minions. But in America the establishment
    of ANY religion as a state religion is expressly prohibited
    as is the state denying anyone the practice of their faith.

    But the atheists are so hot to make their religion the state
    religion, the one finds the constitutional prohibition
    violated at every turn. People arrested in public buildings
    for SILENT prayer. Religious symbols removed from the offices
    of the faithful who work for the state. Even historical objects
    such as the 10 commandments monument are hauled off. Never mind
    that the same 10 commandments are carved into the frieze of the
    U.S. Supreme court building.

    Freedom OF religion is for the state to allow ANYONE to follow
    the practice of their religion as they see fit without interference
    of the state. Freedom FROM religion means establishing YOUR
    religion as the state religion in violation of our Bill of Rights.

    Are you so insecure in your faith that you cannot allow others
    of a different faith to follow their own ideas without trembling
    in fear that somehow if you ever happen see their practices it will
    pollute you?

    Benj

    --
    SPAM-Guard! Remove .users (if present) to email me!
  11. Re: The Ten comandments.

    "NoSheeples" <n2new@aol.comNsheep> wrote in message
    news:20030827232529.18419.00000037@mb-m13.aol.com...

    Just having a plaque there does not violate the constitution, nor
    > does it impose any religion. There are plenty of things that offend me

    that are
    > secular which by the way is a religion in it's self.


    A two and a half ton chunk of elaboarte;y-carved granit, sitting smack in
    the middle of the rotunda (nothing else there but tile, walls, and air)?
    I'd call that an imposition.

    > The term separation of church and state is no were mentioned in the
    > constitution, it's a made up term used to bastardize the meaning of the

    law
    > congress passed that says they shall make no laws regarding religion. The
    > court ruling was wrong, but because this is a nation of laws we must

    respect
    > the decision.


    The courts were exactly right. There can be no laws favoring one religion
    over another. If this judge had placed similar tenets from the Koran,
    Talmud, Upanishads and Rig-Veda, the same type statue, there may well have
    been no problem.

    > The expo-facto law coming from the bench by activist Judges is ten times

    more
    > scary then the ten commandments.


    How did they construct any laws? They called him on exactly what the law
    said the day before he put that thing in a public space.

    > Saying that having the ten commandments in a court room is

    unconstitutional is
    > a stretch by anyone's imagination. It's not so much the fact that the

    plauqe
    > was removed that bothers me, it's the insane activisim behind it that is

    the
    > threat. It's not the like Judge made people read it.


    That plaque was on the wall right behind the judge. How could anybody other
    than a blind person miss it? He knew what he was doing and he deliberately
    broke the law.

    The way I always looked at
    > these things, if something offends you then you don't have to look at it.

    Maybe
    > im just odd, but having to stand in a elevator with a a 500 pound smelly
    > lardass is way more offense then the ten commandments.


    You can get off the elevator and take another one. But everybody seeks
    refuge in the law at some point. We shouldn't be beaten over the head with
    Christian dogma when we go in expecting an impartial ruling based on state,
    municipal, county, or federal law. What if the parties of action aren't
    Christian? They might take offense at the obvious pro-Christian bias, don't
    you think?

    If it were leagle I
    > would take pleasure in shooting people that are so called offended by

    everyting
    > today. This includes everything from names of baseball teams to people

    wearing
    > a cross on their neck at work.


    So you would kill people who did things you don't like. Hm.

    > I thought of a way to fight back, and that would be telling the jew at

    work who
    > displays his beilives to remove the stuff, but then it occured to me that

    I
    > would just be another low life like the ones who go around doing this

    stuff.

    It's Jew. You wouldn't like it if they spelled it christian or jesus or
    god, would you? You want respect, show respect and earn theirs. Jew.
    Muslim. Christian. Hindu.

    > Why can't people just go about their daily lives and ignore something they
    > don't like?
    > The answer is because they have none.


    Actually, the answer is the things they don't like include all manner of
    atrocities, including: slavery, adulterated medicine, industrial pollution,
    child porn, securities fraud, slander, libel, and religious paranoiac
    jurists with bias against non-Christian beliefs. You believe we should
    ignore these things too?

    Im not going to follow up on this, and
    > im not trolling, ok I have some swamp land to. ;o) No really, I was just
    > curious what others thought even if you're athiest, because the athiest I

    have
    > talked to are not bothered by displays of the ten comandments. I look at

    this
    > as no different then a nude bar down the street that local judge makes up

    law
    > to have it removed. That is essentially what was done here.


    If that nudie bar were in the middle of the rotunda, it'd be the same thing.
    If that nudie bar were selling Bibles along with their watered-down drinks,
    there'd be no problem.

    Well, you did ask :)
  12. Chris Whealy

    Chris Whealy Guest

    Re: The Ten comandments.

    Well said, Ben.

    Chris

    --
    The voice of ignorance speaks loud and long,
    but the words of the wise are quiet and few.
    --
  13. Re: The Ten comandments.

    <bjacoby@users.iwaynet.net> wrote in message
    news:bikala$i2$1@tribune.oar.net...

    > And furthermore freedom OF religion NEVER means freedom FROM
    > religion. That would be because freedom FROM religion means
    > that no other religion, but secular humanism is to be allowed.


    Secular humanism...I haven't heard that term in maybe 15 years. Didn't it
    spring up when the religious paranoiacs were trying to affix creationism as
    the method by which the Grand Canyon was carved?

    > Therefore, when a government demands that all religious symbols
    > be removed from sight, it is actually banning certain religions
    > and establishing secular humanism (or atheism...the religion
    > favored by commies and the rest of the left) as the state
    > religion. In other words following the policies of the late
    > Soviet Union and its minions. But in America the establishment
    > of ANY religion as a state religion is expressly prohibited
    > as is the state denying anyone the practice of their faith.


    You cab practice whatever faith you want, but you can't force it on others
    who don't want it. That's what the issue was.

    > But the atheists are so hot to make their religion the state
    > religion, the one finds the constitutional prohibition
    > violated at every turn. People arrested in public buildings
    > for SILENT prayer.


    I'd bet this was a large group blocking the way for others.

    Religious symbols removed from the offices
    > of the faithful who work for the state.


    Not from private offices or cubicles. Just public areas.

    Even historical objects
    > such as the 10 commandments monument are hauled off. Never mind
    > that the same 10 commandments are carved into the frieze of the
    > U.S. Supreme court building.


    The justices who approved that did so openly, not unilaterally and certainly
    not under cover of darkness and without telling anybody.

    > Freedom OF religion is for the state to allow ANYONE to follow
    > the practice of their religion as they see fit without interference
    > of the state. Freedom FROM religion means establishing YOUR
    > religion as the state religion in violation of our Bill of Rights.


    Horse hockey. Freedom from religion means no one can force upon you the
    tenets of their faith.

    > Are you so insecure in your faith that you cannot allow others
    > of a different faith to follow their own ideas without trembling
    > in fear that somehow if you ever happen see their practices it will
    > pollute you?


    Oh, so you wouldn't mind a group of Hare Krishnas setting up shop on the
    sidewalk in front of your house or hallway of your apartment building and
    chanting all day? Let 'em know, Ben. They'd appreciate you not being so
    insecure as to have a problem with their free expression.
  14. TJ Hertz

    TJ Hertz Guest

    Re: The Ten comandments.

    NoSheeples wrote:
    > What is this society coming to? Are people really that weak minded
    > that they are afraid an artifact of our nations history with some
    > simple rules that are good to adhere by, will influence them? I have
    > come to the conclusion that these busy bodies who fight to have this
    > stuff removed are evil. The commandments likely remind them of their
    > own shortcomings, and they can't deal with it. Just having a plaque
    > there does not violate the constitution, nor does it impose any
    > religion. There are plenty of things that offend me that are secular
    > which by the way is a religion in it's self.
    >
    > The term separation of church and state is no were mentioned in the
    > constitution, it's a made up term used to bastardize the meaning of
    > the law congress passed that says they shall make no laws regarding
    > religion. The court ruling was wrong, but because this is a nation
    > of laws we must respect the decision.
    > The expo-facto law coming from the bench by activist Judges is ten
    > times more scary then the ten commandments. How much do you want to
    > bet that our currency is next? The word God is slowly trying to be
    > removed from our society.
    > Is this really a good thing? Does this make us better people?
    > Saying that having the ten commandments in a court room is
    > unconstitutional is a stretch by anyone's imagination. It's not so
    > much the fact that the plauqe was removed that bothers me, it's the
    > insane activisim behind it that is the threat. It's not the like
    > Judge made people read it. The way I always looked at these things,
    > if something offends you then you don't have to look at it. Maybe im
    > just odd, but having to stand in a elevator with a a 500 pound
    > smelly lardass is way more offense then the ten commandments. If it
    > were leagle I would take pleasure in shooting people that are so
    > called offended by everyting today. This includes everything from
    > names of baseball teams to people wearing a cross on their neck at
    > work.
    > I thought of a way to fight back, and that would be telling the jew
    > at work who displays his beilives to remove the stuff, but then it
    > occured to me that I would just be another low life like the ones who
    > go around doing this stuff. Why can't people just go about their
    > daily lives and ignore something they don't like?
    > The answer is because they have none. Im not going to follow up on
    > this, and im not trolling, ok I have some swamp land to. ;o) No
    > really, I was just curious what others thought even if you're
    > athiest, because the athiest I have talked to are not bothered by
    > displays of the ten comandments. I look at this as no different then
    > a nude bar down the street that local judge makes up law to have it
    > removed. That is essentially what was done here.
    >
    > "Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what is for lunch.
    > Liberty is
    > a well armed lamb protesting the vote."


    If people have nothing better to worry about than the presence of religious
    symbols (symbols, indeed, of a religion upon which the USA was based - not
    some fringe pro-anarchy cult FFS) and their potential detriment to American
    society, then American society really has gone down the drain. Tearing down
    religious monuments to promote equality and tolerance between religions (and
    between the religious and non-) is like banning wheels to reduce vehicle
    pollution. Independence of religion and government will not be achieved by
    systematically removing religion from America.

    The separation between God and State is wholly unnecessary - IMHO it will
    eventually prove to be impossible, too. In a society in which religion plays
    such an integral part (albeit perhaps not so much as other countries), there
    must be enough people with the sense to stop pedantry ruling over
    intelligence when the government decide that cross-shaped gravestones are an
    abomination and must be replaced.

    For the record, I'm agnostic, leaning towards atheist. I don't really have
    any deep-set religious views. But come, on, honestly.

    It's a fucking statue, not an Iraqi WMD.

    --
    TJ Hertz
    http://www.whatyourenot.com
  15. TJ Hertz

    TJ Hertz Guest

    Re: The Ten comandments.

    TJ Hertz wrote:
    > NoSheeples wrote:
    >> What is this society coming to? Are people really that weak minded
    >> that they are afraid an artifact of our nations history with some
    >> simple rules that are good to adhere by, will influence them? I have
    >> come to the conclusion that these busy bodies who fight to have this
    >> stuff removed are evil. The commandments likely remind them of their
    >> own shortcomings, and they can't deal with it. Just having a plaque
    >> there does not violate the constitution, nor does it impose any
    >> religion. There are plenty of things that offend me that are secular
    >> which by the way is a religion in it's self.
    >>
    >> The term separation of church and state is no were mentioned in the
    >> constitution, it's a made up term used to bastardize the meaning of
    >> the law congress passed that says they shall make no laws regarding
    >> religion. The court ruling was wrong, but because this is a nation
    >> of laws we must respect the decision.
    >> The expo-facto law coming from the bench by activist Judges is ten
    >> times more scary then the ten commandments. How much do you want to
    >> bet that our currency is next? The word God is slowly trying to be
    >> removed from our society.
    >> Is this really a good thing? Does this make us better people?
    >> Saying that having the ten commandments in a court room is
    >> unconstitutional is a stretch by anyone's imagination. It's not so
    >> much the fact that the plauqe was removed that bothers me, it's the
    >> insane activisim behind it that is the threat. It's not the like
    >> Judge made people read it. The way I always looked at these things,
    >> if something offends you then you don't have to look at it. Maybe im
    >> just odd, but having to stand in a elevator with a a 500 pound
    >> smelly lardass is way more offense then the ten commandments. If it
    >> were leagle I would take pleasure in shooting people that are so
    >> called offended by everyting today. This includes everything from
    >> names of baseball teams to people wearing a cross on their neck at
    >> work.
    >> I thought of a way to fight back, and that would be telling the jew
    >> at work who displays his beilives to remove the stuff, but then it
    >> occured to me that I would just be another low life like the ones who
    >> go around doing this stuff. Why can't people just go about their
    >> daily lives and ignore something they don't like?
    >> The answer is because they have none. Im not going to follow up on
    >> this, and im not trolling, ok I have some swamp land to. ;o) No
    >> really, I was just curious what others thought even if you're
    >> athiest, because the athiest I have talked to are not bothered by
    >> displays of the ten comandments. I look at this as no different then
    >> a nude bar down the street that local judge makes up law to have it
    >> removed. That is essentially what was done here.
    >>
    >> "Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what is for lunch.
    >> Liberty is
    >> a well armed lamb protesting the vote."

    >
    > If people have nothing better to worry about than the presence of
    > religious symbols (symbols, indeed, of a religion upon which the USA
    > was based - not some fringe pro-anarchy cult FFS) and their potential
    > detriment to American society, then American society really has gone
    > down the drain. Tearing down religious monuments to promote equality
    > and tolerance between religions (and between the religious and non-)
    > is like banning wheels to reduce vehicle pollution. Independence of
    > religion and government will not be achieved by systematically
    > removing religion from America.
    >
    > The separation between God and State is wholly unnecessary - IMHO it
    > will eventually prove to be impossible, too. In a society in which
    > religion plays such an integral part (albeit perhaps not so much as
    > other countries), there must be enough people with the sense to stop
    > pedantry ruling over intelligence when the government decide that
    > cross-shaped gravestones are an abomination and must be replaced.
    >
    > For the record, I'm agnostic, leaning towards atheist. I don't really
    > have any deep-set religious views. But come, on, honestly.
    >
    > It's a fucking statue, not an Iraqi WMD.


    Latter statement refers to the monument. Same sentiment applies to the
    plaque.

    --
    TJ Hertz
    http://www.whatyourenot.com
  16. Re: The Ten comandments.

    in article bikala$i2$1@tribune.oar.net, bjacoby@users.iwaynet.net at
    bjacoby@users.iwaynet.net wrote on 8/28/03 12:23 AM:

    > But the atheists are so hot to make their religion the state
    > religion,



    No Ben - the point is the law of the land is that there shall be NO STATE
    RELIGION.

    Forbidding religious artifacts from court rooms, police stations, - places
    where individuals are by definition dealing directly with the STATE is
    essential to the basic premise of Freedom of Religion. The STATE is not only
    not to show favorites - it is not to involve itself AT ALL. "Congress shall
    make no law respecting an establishment of religion" - directly from the
    Bill of Rights.

    Have we done this cleanly over the years? Certainly not. For years the vast
    majority of this country have been one sort of Christian or another. So we
    have long standing traditions like swearing on the Bible, phrases on our
    money like "In God We Trust", etc. Horrible inconsistencies considering the
    language used in the Constitution and the Bill of Rights. So I'm not
    surprised when so many are confused by how these issues are sometimes
    handled.

    But I do know people who shouldn't be confused, and that is sitting judges -
    people sworn to uphold the law of the land as absolutely sacred. And this
    judge obviously feels the law of the land somehow does not apply to him and
    the religion of his choosing, and that IMO is disgraceful. I personally hope
    the man is never allowed to sit in judgement of his fellow American citizens
    ever again - because he has certainly broke every oath he ever swore to
    become a judge with his recent actions. (And these actions were not
    necessary to reconcile being both a judge of the land and at the same a
    Christian as there scores of fine Christians who are judges that make it
    work just fine.)

    David
  17. creux

    creux Guest

    Re: The Ten comandments.

    i see the prophesy of johann galtung fullfilling itself ;)
  18. NoSheeples

    NoSheeples Guest

    Re: The Ten comandments.

    > We shouldn't be beaten over the head with

    Who is we, and how in the hallis a plauqe beating you over the head? This is
    funny stuff.

    "Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what is for lunch. Liberty is
    a well armed lamb protesting the vote."
  19. Joey Furr

    Joey Furr Guest

    Re: The Ten comandments.

    My 2ยข
    The United States was founded by Christians, for Christians, and of
    Christians...with the provision that if you are not Christian you are
    welcome to practice whatever religion you chose, or none at all, freely and
    without reprisal from the gub'ment.

    The same goes for the English language. We speak English here, it's what we
    do, it's who we are. You're welcome to come over and speak any language you
    like, knowing that it's your right to do so...but coming here you should
    know ahead of time that you will be hearing English everywhere you go
    because it's what we do as a people.

    Likewise I apply this to Christianity. We were founded a Christian nation,
    it's what we do, it's who we are. Anyone is welcome to practice any religion
    they like, knowing that it's their right to do so...but being in this
    country you should know that you will be experiencing Christianity
    everywhere you go because it's what we do as a people, it's why we founded
    this nation.

    The whole idea of 'political correctness', or the attempt to discontinue any
    and all actions that could potentially offend someone is ridiculous. When
    was the constitution amended to provide for a right not to be offended? What
    kind of nation of over-sensitive wimps have we become?

    P.S. - if the goverment makes a ruling that the monument must go...it's
    gotta go, no matter what my feelings on the subject.

    Keep in mind that I'm not telling you that this is what you should believe,
    this is simply what I believe and I welcome opposing/supporting opinions.

    Wow...my sig certainly applies to this post! :)
    --

    ....Joey

    "...so hold the mustard on those flames, y'all." - Aaron Draper

    "Doug Fuller" <doug_fuller_62@earthlink.net(remove_underscores)> wrote in
    message news:lWe3b.19061$8i2.12613@newsread2.news.atl.earthlink.net...
    > "NoSheeples" <n2new@aol.comNsheep> wrote:
    > >
    > > What is this society coming to? Are people really that weak minded that

    > they
    > > are afraid an artifact of our nations history with some simple rules

    that
    > are
    > > good to adhere by, will influence them?

    >
    > I don't think that's the case at all.
    >
    > > I have come to the conclusion that
    > > these busy bodies who fight to have this stuff removed are evil. The
    > > commandments likely remind them of their own shortcomings, and they

    can't
    > deal
    > > with it.

    >
    > Objection. Speculative.
    >
    > > Just having a plaque there does not violate the constitution, nor
    > > does it impose any religion.

    >
    > It may not violate the constitution verbatim but it violates the spirit of
    > the constitution.
    >
    > > There are plenty of things that offend me that are
    > > secular which by the way is a religion in it's self.

    >
    > Things that offend you and government sponsored valueless opinions are two
    > different things. Secular means not religious or religiously neutral. Do
    > you mean athesism?
    >
    > > The term separation of church and state is no were mentioned in the
    > > constitution, it's a made up term used to bastardize the meaning of the

    > law
    > > congress passed that says they shall make no laws regarding religion.

    >
    > True, but the spirit is what's important. Plus, freedom of religion also
    > means freedom FROM religion.
    >
    > > The
    > > court ruling was wrong, but because this is a nation of laws we must

    > respect
    > > the decision.

    >
    > The court ruling was right.
    >
    > > The expo-facto law coming from the bench by activist Judges is ten times

    > more
    > > scary then the ten commandments. How much do you want to bet that our

    > currency
    > > is next? The word God is slowly trying to be removed from our society.

    >
    > > Is this really a good thing?

    >
    > Yes.
    >
    > > Does this make us better people?

    >
    > I don't know. Does having it make us good people?
    >
    > > Saying that having the ten commandments in a court room is

    > unconstitutional is
    > > a stretch by anyone's imagination.

    >
    > Then I guess we should go ahead and place quotes from every other

    religious
    > doctrine in the world in every courtroom in the country. That's just

    silly.
    >
    > > It's not so much the fact that the plauqe
    > > was removed that bothers me, it's the insane activisim behind it that is

    > the
    > > threat.

    >
    > Insane activism put it there in the first place.
    >
    > > It's not the like Judge made people read it.

    >
    > If he didn't want people to read it then nobody should have a problem with
    > it not being there.
    >
    > > The way I always looked at
    > > these things, if something offends you then you don't have to look at

    it.
    >
    > Except in the case where MY tax money is involved.
    >
    > > Maybe
    > > im just odd, but having to stand in a elevator with a a 500 pound

    smelly
    > > lardass is way more offense then the ten commandments.

    >
    > Ditto above.
    >
    > > If it were leagle I
    > > would take pleasure in shooting people that are so called offended by

    > everyting
    > > today. This includes everything from names of baseball teams to people

    > wearing
    > > a cross on their neck at work.
    > > I thought of a way to fight back, and that would be telling the jew at

    > work who
    > > displays his beilives to remove the stuff, but then it occured to me

    that
    > I
    > > would just be another low life like the ones who go around doing this

    > stuff.
    > > Why can't people just go about their daily lives and ignore something

    they
    > > don't like?

    >
    > Why can't people just go about their daily lives and keep their silly
    > opinions to themselves?
    >
    > > The answer is because they have none. Im not going to follow up on

    this,
    > and
    > > im not trolling, ok I have some swamp land to. ;o) No really, I was

    just
    > > curious what others thought even if you're athiest, because the athiest

    I
    > have
    > > talked to are not bothered by displays of the ten comandments. I look

    at
    > this
    > > as no different then a nude bar down the street that local judge makes

    up
    > law
    > > to have it removed. That is essentially what was done here.

    >
    > > "Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what is for lunch. Liberty

    > is
    > > a well armed lamb protesting the vote."

    >
    > This I like however ;-)
    >
    > --
    > Cheers,
    > Doug Fuller
    > Boston
    > doug_fuller_62@earthlink.net (remove all underscores)
    > "It's all in the mama-daddies."
    >
    >
  20. jmt

    jmt Guest

    Re: The Ten comandments.

    Dear TommyGBombadildo;
    Goddam that's beatiful...

    Finnegan's Original WakeupCaller;
    jmt

    NoSheeples wrote:

    >>We shouldn't be beaten over the head with

    >
    >
    > Who is we, and how in the hallis a plauqe beating you over the head? This is
    > funny stuff.
    >
    > "Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what is for lunch. Liberty is
    > a well armed lamb protesting the vote."
    >

Share This Page