OT: The Ten comandments.

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

  1. Re: The Ten comandments.

    Da Parrot-chick <just@sk.me> wrote:
    > Yeah, you are right. Get the
    >> SWAT team and throw their asses in jail! :)


    > You'd get someone else to handle it? You couldn't take care of it yourself?
    > Hm.



    DAMN! I'm so ashamed! I must be getting old! Gosh it's getting so
    bad. I've got a bunch of new gun toys I haven't even bothered
    to take out of the cosmoline yet! SHAME ON ME! :)

    Benj
    (I am the state! (tm Louis IVX))

    PS. You are correct. The mythical "state" is a bad choice of words.
    More correct would be "government" which is the actual apparatus
    set up by the contract of the Constitution to deal with the limited
    powers "we the people" have delegated to them.

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

    George Lawrence <drumguru@ameritech.net> wrote:
    > The law allows the government to
    > acknowledge the concept of a god and mentions "God" in several major
    > documents but not to favor any one religion. That Christians want to think
    > that the founding fathers were only concerned about Christians is ok with me
    > as long as they keep it to themselves. I think many of these acknowlegements
    > like the coins, swearing on the bible, are sentimental traditions that are
    > innocuous. They don't bother me.


    I totally agree. The beliefs of the Founding Fathers or the fact that
    they owned slaves and slept with them is of no importance to the core
    issue of what the final documents they produced are all about.

    Even if they were all 100 Christian (which they were not) the final
    document not only does not make this a "christian" country but
    rather forbids that from occuring!!! But what is guaranteed is for
    chrisians and everyone else to freely practice what they believe
    without government interference.

    The key I think to things like the motto and the pledge is that
    in those the word "God" has to be viewed as a sort of placeholder
    meaning, "the sayer substitutes in here his personal view of higher
    authority" So while people say "God" to one it is a Christian concept,
    and other Islamic and a third would be substituting the word "nature"
    or "physics" in their mind. One might argue a better "placeholder"
    word might be found, but courts have ruled that the "placeholder" word
    does not represent any particular religious view. It legally could not.

    > It's the actions of those like this judge
    > who try to get the government to condone a particular religion that is
    > harmful not only to government but to religions as well.


    I totally agree. Basically government cannot either endorse a particualar
    religion nor forbid anyone from practicing theirs. So it's one thing
    for this judge to say, "This is MY monument and it represents what *I*
    believe so I'm putting it here in the lobby of my "office". It's quite
    another to install it there such that vistors coming in are left
    with the impression that this particular religion is endorsed by
    the state.

    Benj
  3. Glenn Dowdy

    Glenn Dowdy Guest

    Re: The Ten comandments.

    <bjacoby@users.iwaynet.net> wrote in message
    news:bilb1s$l7p$1@tribune.oar.net...

    >
    > The point you are missing is that Atheism, Secular Humanism etc.
    > are ALSO religions! They deal with viewpoints of higher powers.


    I'd like to see some objective opinions on this statement. I know that I
    don't agree with it, but that in itself isn't enough for me to dismiss it. I
    don't know (of) any atheists who consider their lack of belief a religion.

    > Therefore when the state adopts the symbols of those religions
    > and establishes them by LAW they are establishing a STATE religion.


    What symbols? I would think that there are many "real" religions that would
    object to having the Judeo-Christian symbolism displayed in a court of law
    in the same way that J-Cs might object to a big statue of Ganesh sitting in
    the same halls.

    > The fact that the symbols of these religions is the ABSENCE of
    > religious symbols doesn't change the argument.


    So everywhere that there are no symbols of religion means that there is a de
    facto display of atheism? I guess from a square footage basis we're winning
    then, and I guess we get to count all that wilderness that the Lord created.
    Since He didn't see it necessary to include His Brand, He must be ceding the
    point.
    >
    > We went through all this here when the Klan decided to put up a
    > "Christmas" cross on the statehouse lawn. (No, they didn't burn
    > it. :)


    The Klukkers don't burn crosses; they 'light' them. Burning doesn't seem
    very Christian, does it? But lighting, well, that's different.

    > Everyone argued like you. That there should be no "religious"
    > displays allowed at all. But happily this court discision followed the
    > law and determined that the state could NOT interfere with anyone's
    > religious displays no matter who they were. So now the Klan cross
    > goes up. Some Jewish group always puts up a menorah some other groups
    > put up some of their symbols too.


    I've never seen a poster of Ganesh, and he's my favorite Hindu deity.
    Something about the ears...

    > The Atheists find the whole thing
    > TOTALLY offensive and are still demanding that their symbols (none)
    > be made official by the state, but the issue has been pretty much
    > settled. The state stays ABOVE the fray!
    >

    FYI, at the last world-wide atheists convention, we voted to change our
    symbol from nothing to " ". We call it The Symbol Formerly Known As
    Nothing. tm.

    Look, when you can understand why you don't believe in all the other gods
    like Ganesh, Kane, and Zeus, you'll understand why I don't believe in yours.
    I'm just a better atheist than you are.

    And another thing: God hears prayer, right? He knows all, so He can make a
    pretty informed decision, and He doesn't forget what He's been asked to do.
    So if all those fellow Montgomerians pray once to keep the tablet in place,
    then either God says okay, or He says no. To keep praying seems to send the
    message that God should change His mind (in effect, He was wrong) or that
    perhaps He needs reminding. I don't get repeat prayer at all, even if I
    believed in the efficacy of the same.

    Glenn D.
  4. Re: The Ten comandments.

    Joey Furr <joeyfurr@yahoo.com> wrote:

    > "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal,
    > that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that
    > among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness." - Declaration
    > of Indepenance


    Note the cleverness of the writers of the Declaration. They say it's
    obvious that all men get rights from their "creator"! Ok. This means
    that just by being born you have rights! It means that "rights" are
    NEVER priviledges granted by those in power! Rights can be "guaranteed"
    by those in power but never (contrary to what you always hear in the
    media) "granted" by them!

    BUT, (and this is the clever part) they do not define what "the creator"
    is! Under the idea of freedom of religion, THAT task is left up to
    the individual. So one might argue that the "creator" is some religious
    "God" concept. But another might argue that "nature" is the "creator"
    and that even animals born into the world come with the natural right
    of Life (self-defense), liberty (in the wild) and the pursuit of (animal)
    happiness. Again the word "creator" is a placeholder allowing the
    individual to put in there their personal views. What does not
    change is that Rights are granted by being born, not by rulers.

    benj
  5. Glenn Dowdy

    Glenn Dowdy Guest

    Re: The Ten comandments.

    "Joey Furr" <joeyfurr@yahoo.com> wrote in message
    news:9JGdnRne6fGstNOiXTWJhg@comcast.com...
    > "Domestic slavery is repugnant to the principles of Christianity... It is
    > rebellion against the authority of a common Father. It is a practical

    denial
    > of the extent and efficacy of the death of a common Savior. It is an
    > usurpation of the prerogative of the great Sovereign of the universe who

    has
    > solemnly claimed an exclusive property in the souls of men."
    > -Benjamin Rush, Signer of the Declaration of Independence.
    >
    > "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal,
    > that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights,

    that
    > among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness." - Declaration
    > of Indepenance
    >

    Not necessarily a Christian or even Theist view, especially considering that
    the author was a Deist. Nice Calvininst typo in the last word.

    Here are some other viewpoints by that same author (Thomas Jefferson)

    "
    "I have examined all the known superstitions of the word, and I do not
    find in our particular superstition of Christianity one redeeming feature.
    They are all alike founded on fables and mythology. Millions of innocent
    men, women and children, since the introduction of Christianity, have been
    burnt, tortured, fined and imprisoned. What has been the effect of this
    coercion? To make one half the world fools and the other half hypocrites; to
    support roguery and error all over the earth."


    "The clergy converted the simple teachings of Jesus into an engine for
    enslaving mankind and adulterated by artificial constructions into a
    contrivance to filch wealth and power to themselves...these clergy, in fact,
    constitute the real Anti-Christ"


    > "The general principles, on which the Fathers achieved independence, were
    > the only Principles in which that beautiful Assembly of young Gentlemen
    > could Unite....And what were these general Principles? I answer, the

    general
    > Principles of Christianity, in which all these Sects were United: . . .

    Now
    > I will avow, that I then believe, and now believe, that those general
    > Principles of Christianity, are as eternal and immutable, as the Existence
    > and Attributes of God; and that those Principles of Liberty, are as
    > unalterable as human Nature and our terrestrial, mundane System." - John
    > Adams in a letter to Thomas Jefferson
    >

    And from John Adams:

    "Where do we find a precept in the Bible for Creeds, Confessions, Doctrines
    and Oaths, and whole carloads of other trumpery that we find religion
    encumbered with in these days?"

    and

    "The doctrine of the divinity of Jesus is made a convenient cover for
    absurdity."

    and:
    Adams signed the Treaty of Tripoli. Article 11 states: "The Government of
    the United States is not in any sense founded on the Christian religion"

    Thomas Paine:

    In The Age of Reason:

    "I do not believe in the creed professed by the Jewish church, by the Roman
    church, by the Greek church, by the Turkish church, by the Protestant
    church, nor by any church that I know of...Each of those churches accuse the
    other of unbelief; and for my own part, I disbelieve them all."

    "I would not dare to so dishonor my Creator God by attaching His name to
    that book (the Bible).
    Among the most detestable villains in history, you could not find one worse
    than Moses. Here is an order, attributed to 'God' to butcher the boys, to
    massacre the mothers and to debauch and rape the daughters. I would not dare
    so dishonor my Creator's name by (attaching) it to this filthy book (the
    Bible).
    It is the duty of every true Deist to vindicate the moral justice of God
    against the evils of the Bible.
    Accustom a people to believe that priests and clergy can forgive sins...and
    you will have sins in abundance.
    The Christian church has set up a religion of pomp and revenue in pretended
    imitation of a person (Jesus) who lived a life of poverty."

    James Madison:

    "What influence in fact have Christian ecclesiastical establishments had on
    civil society? In many instances they have been upholding the thrones of
    political tyranny. In no instance have they been seen as the guardians of
    the liberties of the people. Rulers who wished to subvert the public liberty
    have found in the clergy convenient auxiliaries. A just government,
    instituted to secure and perpetuate liberty, does not need the clerg"

    and

    "Religion and government will both exist in greater purity, the less they
    are mixed together."

    > That's the whole concept of the Constitution, that your rights come from
    > God, so men cannot take them away. "All men are *created* equal".


    Creation does not necessarily imply the Christian God.
    >
    > You're techically correct, where Christianity is mentioned by the founding
    > fathers it is outside a legal document, and where faith is mentioned in

    the
    > legal documents, the specific word 'Christianity' is not used...but put

    two
    > and two together and you still get four.
    >

    Poor analogy aside, I have degrees in Mathematics and Accounting. I do not
    believe that 2+2 always equals 4.

    Glenn D.
  6. Glenn Dowdy

    Glenn Dowdy Guest

    Re: The Ten comandments.

    <bjacoby@users.iwaynet.net> wrote in message
    news:bilboa$l7p$2@tribune.oar.net...
    >
    > Of course times change
    > slowly and I can imagine some courts in the boonies where the
    > bible thing is still enforced.
    >

    Like in my hometown of Montgomery. ;)

    Glenn D.
  7. Glenn Dowdy

    Glenn Dowdy Guest

    Re: The Ten comandments.

    "Sean Conolly" <sjconolly_98@yaaho.com> wrote in message
    news:aXn3b.76560$zz3.57767@fe05.atl2.webusenet.com...
    > ">
    > However, the Ten Commandments are fundamental to Christians, Jews, and
    > Muslims. The same is true of "God" in the phrase "In God We Trust". I

    don't
    > believe it promotes any single religion as much as it recognizes that
    > historically America was founded and built by mostly God-fearing people.


    And the Constitution was written and ratified by rich white slave-owning
    landowners who didn't allow women or poor folks to vote. Maybe some of their
    views don't withstand scrutiny.

    Glenn D.
  8. Glenn Dowdy

    Glenn Dowdy Guest

    Re: The Ten comandments.

    "George Lawrence" <drumguru@ameritech.net> wrote in message
    news:aAp3b.16269$Ih1.5723093@newssrv26.news.prodigy.com...
    > I am an agnostic and I do not fear religions but I do fear religious
    > fundamentalism; 9/11


    Hear, hear.

    Glenn D.
  9. morris

    morris Guest

    Re: The Ten comandments.

    "George Lawrence" <drumguru@ameritech.net> wrote in message news:<aAp3b.16269$Ih1.5723093@newssrv26.news.prodigy.com>...
    > I am an agnostic and I do not fear religions but I do fear religious
    > fundamentalism; 9/11
    > Any encroachment on the separation of church and state could lead to a hole
    > in the dike that leads to state religions and their fanatics like those of
    > the Middle East.
    >

    hey, i plugged a hole in a dike from the east village one night !!
  10. Robert Schuh

    Robert Schuh Guest

    Re: The Ten comandments.

    Doug Fuller wrote:

    > "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."


    Doug,
    In all seriousness, you need to ignore Tom. To this day, I do not understand why
    ANYONE reads any of his posts. The guy has the education level of most 6 year
    olds. His commenting on the Constitution is laughable. No matter how sound your
    arguments are to counter, it is a tremendous waste of time.


    --
    Robert Schuh
    "Everything that elevates an individual above the herd and
    intimidates the neighbour is henceforth called evil; and
    the fair, modest, submissive and conforming mentality,
    the mediocrity of desires attains moral designations and honors"
    - Nietzsche

    "The meek shall inherit nothing" - Zappa
  11. Robert Schuh

    Robert Schuh Guest

    Re: The Ten comandments.

    bjacoby@users.iwaynet.net wrote:

    > 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!


    Ben,
    You need help. Why not stop with all the name calling and at least TRY to stop
    being a Lard Ass Limbaugh clone.


    --
    Robert Schuh
    "Everything that elevates an individual above the herd and
    intimidates the neighbour is henceforth called evil; and
    the fair, modest, submissive and conforming mentality,
    the mediocrity of desires attains moral designations and honors"
    - Nietzsche

    "The meek shall inherit nothing" - Zappa
  12. Robert Schuh

    Robert Schuh Guest

    Re: The Ten comandments.

    bjacoby@users.iwaynet.net wrote:

    > David Crigger <dc@davidcrigger.com> wrote:
    >
    > > No Ben - the point is the law of the land is that there shall be NO STATE
    > > RELIGION.

    >
    > Exactly!
    >
    > > 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.

    >
    > The point you are missing is that Atheism, Secular Humanism etc.
    > are ALSO religions! They deal with viewpoints of higher powers.
    > Therefore when the state adopts the symbols of those religions
    > and establishes them by LAW they are establishing a STATE religion.
    > The fact that the symbols of these religions is the ABSENCE of
    > religious symbols doesn't change the argument.


    This is pure unadulterated bullshit. Do you have ANYTHING to say but bad Rush
    parroting?

    >
    >
    > We went through all this here when the Klan decided to put up a
    > "Christmas" cross on the statehouse lawn. (No, they didn't burn
    > it. :) Everyone argued like you. That there should be no "religious"
    > displays allowed at all. But happily this court discision followed the
    > law and determined that the state could NOT interfere with anyone's
    > religious displays no matter who they were. So now the Klan cross
    > goes up. Some Jewish group always puts up a menorah some other groups
    > put up some of their symbols too. The Atheists find the whole thing
    > TOTALLY offensive and are still demanding that their symbols (none)
    > be made official by the state, but the issue has been pretty much
    > settled. The state stays ABOVE the fray!
    >
    > Benj


    Are you taking your meds?



    --
    Robert Schuh
    "Everything that elevates an individual above the herd and
    intimidates the neighbour is henceforth called evil; and
    the fair, modest, submissive and conforming mentality,
    the mediocrity of desires attains moral designations and honors"
    - Nietzsche

    "The meek shall inherit nothing" - Zappa
  13. Re: The Ten comandments.

    The "atheism is a religion" is typical fuundamentalist propaganda. Atheists
    are not very organized. I was an atheist for a while and it was very hard to
    find atheist material or orginizations. A basic requirement of a religion is
    a faith in and dogma about an existing God, afterlife or higher
    spirituality.

    Atheism means "lack of belief" in a god. So an atheist is without belief or,
    in other words, without religion. Most atheists would tell you personally
    that they do not have an agenda to further separate church and state. But
    there are some misguided atheists who think it is their purpose in life to
    prove religion wrong. this particular battle is not one between atheists and
    Christians. It is between judges doing their job and one who isn't.

    I am now an agnostic. An agnostic is one who is not committed to believing
    in either the existence or the nonexistence of God or a god. My personal
    philosophy is "You don't know, I don't know and neither does anybody else
    and all religions are just guessing".

    Another myth is that the ACLU is an atheist organiziation which is a bunch
    of hogwash. Most of those who work for the ACLU are actually Christians.

    --
    George Lawrence
    George's Drum Shop
    1351 S. Cleveland-Massillon Road #21
    Copley, Ohio 44321
    http://www.GeorgesDrumShop.com
    http://www.Drumguru.com
    330 670 0800
    toll free 866 970 0800

    "If thine enemy wrong thee,
    buy each of his children a drum."
    -Chinese proverb




    "Glenn Dowdy" <glenn.dowdy@nospam.com> wrote in message
    news:%Rt3b.3610$EF6.686@news.cpqcorp.net...
    >
    > <bjacoby@users.iwaynet.net> wrote in message
    > news:bilb1s$l7p$1@tribune.oar.net...
    >
    > >
    > > The point you are missing is that Atheism, Secular Humanism etc.
    > > are ALSO religions! They deal with viewpoints of higher powers.

    >
    > I'd like to see some objective opinions on this statement. I know that I
    > don't agree with it, but that in itself isn't enough for me to dismiss it.

    I
    > don't know (of) any atheists who consider their lack of belief a religion.
    >
    > > Therefore when the state adopts the symbols of those religions
    > > and establishes them by LAW they are establishing a STATE religion.

    >
    > What symbols? I would think that there are many "real" religions that

    would
    > object to having the Judeo-Christian symbolism displayed in a court of law
    > in the same way that J-Cs might object to a big statue of Ganesh sitting

    in
    > the same halls.
    >
    > > The fact that the symbols of these religions is the ABSENCE of
    > > religious symbols doesn't change the argument.

    >
    > So everywhere that there are no symbols of religion means that there is a

    de
    > facto display of atheism? I guess from a square footage basis we're

    winning
    > then, and I guess we get to count all that wilderness that the Lord

    created.
    > Since He didn't see it necessary to include His Brand, He must be ceding

    the
    > point.
    > >
    > > We went through all this here when the Klan decided to put up a
    > > "Christmas" cross on the statehouse lawn. (No, they didn't burn
    > > it. :)

    >
    > The Klukkers don't burn crosses; they 'light' them. Burning doesn't seem
    > very Christian, does it? But lighting, well, that's different.
    >
    > > Everyone argued like you. That there should be no "religious"
    > > displays allowed at all. But happily this court discision followed the
    > > law and determined that the state could NOT interfere with anyone's
    > > religious displays no matter who they were. So now the Klan cross
    > > goes up. Some Jewish group always puts up a menorah some other groups
    > > put up some of their symbols too.

    >
    > I've never seen a poster of Ganesh, and he's my favorite Hindu deity.
    > Something about the ears...
    >
    > > The Atheists find the whole thing
    > > TOTALLY offensive and are still demanding that their symbols (none)
    > > be made official by the state, but the issue has been pretty much
    > > settled. The state stays ABOVE the fray!
    > >

    > FYI, at the last world-wide atheists convention, we voted to change our
    > symbol from nothing to " ". We call it The Symbol Formerly Known As
    > Nothing. tm.
    >
    > Look, when you can understand why you don't believe in all the other gods
    > like Ganesh, Kane, and Zeus, you'll understand why I don't believe in

    yours.
    > I'm just a better atheist than you are.
    >
    > And another thing: God hears prayer, right? He knows all, so He can make a
    > pretty informed decision, and He doesn't forget what He's been asked to

    do.
    > So if all those fellow Montgomerians pray once to keep the tablet in

    place,
    > then either God says okay, or He says no. To keep praying seems to send

    the
    > message that God should change His mind (in effect, He was wrong) or that
    > perhaps He needs reminding. I don't get repeat prayer at all, even if I
    > believed in the efficacy of the same.
    >
    > Glenn D.
    >
    >
  14. Re: The Ten comandments.

    I think the purpose that Christianity was not mentioned was because the
    founding fathers wanted to avoid the stranglehold that the Catholic church
    had on Europe. They were very aware that if any Protestant sect were to have
    any sanction that they could achieve political power. The FF were primarily
    protestants very involved in the liberal movement which guided the writing
    of the constitution. They put their personal religous denominations' dogma
    aside and did not include any of it in the constitution but worded it so
    that references to God were inclusive of all religions. There were many
    different nationalities and religions pouring into these Eastern seaboard
    cities and they were well aware of the diversity of religion that they were
    allowing with the founding of this new country that did not discriminate
    against or give credence to any religions. They acknowledged only "God", not
    the religions that pray to a god.

    --
    George Lawrence
    George's Drum Shop
    1351 S. Cleveland-Massillon Road #21
    Copley, Ohio 44321
    http://www.GeorgesDrumShop.com
    http://www.Drumguru.com
    330 670 0800
    toll free 866 970 0800

    "If thine enemy wrong thee,
    buy each of his children a drum."
    -Chinese proverb




    "Joey Furr" <joeyfurr@yahoo.com> wrote in message
    news:9JGdnRne6fGstNOiXTWJhg@comcast.com...
    > "Domestic slavery is repugnant to the principles of Christianity... It is
    > rebellion against the authority of a common Father. It is a practical

    denial
    > of the extent and efficacy of the death of a common Savior. It is an
    > usurpation of the prerogative of the great Sovereign of the universe who

    has
    > solemnly claimed an exclusive property in the souls of men."
    > -Benjamin Rush, Signer of the Declaration of Independence.
    >
    > "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal,
    > that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights,

    that
    > among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness." - Declaration
    > of Indepenance
    >
    > "The general principles, on which the Fathers achieved independence, were
    > the only Principles in which that beautiful Assembly of young Gentlemen
    > could Unite....And what were these general Principles? I answer, the

    general
    > Principles of Christianity, in which all these Sects were United: . . .

    Now
    > I will avow, that I then believe, and now believe, that those general
    > Principles of Christianity, are as eternal and immutable, as the Existence
    > and Attributes of God; and that those Principles of Liberty, are as
    > unalterable as human Nature and our terrestrial, mundane System." - John
    > Adams in a letter to Thomas Jefferson
    >
    > That's the whole concept of the Constitution, that your rights come from
    > God, so men cannot take them away. "All men are *created* equal".
    >
    > You're techically correct, where Christianity is mentioned by the founding
    > fathers it is outside a legal document, and where faith is mentioned in

    the
    > legal documents, the specific word 'Christianity' is not used...but put

    two
    > and two together and you still get four.
    >
    > Your thoughts?
    > --
    > ...Joey
    > "...so hold the mustard on those flames, y'all." - Aaron Draper
    >
    > "George Lawrence" <drumguru@ameritech.net> wrote in message
    > news:dbp3b.16259$Ih1.5718978@newssrv26.news.prodigy.com...
    > >
    > > Joey wrote:
    > > -- The United States was founded by Christians, for Christians, and of
    > > Christians...
    > >
    > > I respect your right to free speech but Christianity is not mentioned in

    > the
    > > Constitution or any of the legal documents of this country. Also. many

    of
    > > the authors of the constitution were Deists, not Christians.
    > >
    > > George Lawrence
    > > George's Drum Shop
    > > 1351 S. Cleveland-Massillon Road #21
    > > Copley, Ohio 44321
    > > http://www.GeorgesDrumShop.com
    > > http://www.Drumguru.com
    > > 330 670 0800
    > > toll free 866 970 0800
    > >
    > > "If thine enemy wrong thee,
    > > buy each of his children a drum."
    > > -Chinese proverb
    > >
    > >
    > >
    > >
    > > "Joey Furr" <joeyfurr@yahoo.com> wrote in message
    > > news:CKydnfpeAaQQltOiU-KYuA@comcast.com...
    > > > 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."
    > > > >
    > > > >
    > > >
    > > >

    > >
    > >

    >
    >
    >
  15. Re: The Ten comandments.

    I swear by gid and put my hand on a KISS record!

    --
    George Lawrence
    George's Drum Shop
    1351 S. Cleveland-Massillon Road #21
    Copley, Ohio 44321
    http://www.GeorgesDrumShop.com
    http://www.Drumguru.com
    330 670 0800
    toll free 866 970 0800

    "If thine enemy wrong thee,
    buy each of his children a drum."
    -Chinese proverb




    <bjacoby@users.iwaynet.net> wrote in message
    news:bilboa$l7p$2@tribune.oar.net...
    > George Lawrence <drumguru@ameritech.net> wrote:
    >
    > > I imagine the next thing to go will be the swearing on the Bible in the
    > > courtroom which is, of course, just a tradition and not a legal act.

    >
    > As far as I know, this is already long gone. Generally speaking,
    > only Christians are asked to swear on a bible. Those of other
    > religions with other holy books are asked to swear on their
    > own book and those following beliefs without holy books are
    > simple asked to "promise and affirm" (or something like that)
    > that what they say will be the truth. Of course times change
    > slowly and I can imagine some courts in the boonies where the
    > bible thing is still enforced.
    >
    > Benj
    > --
    > SPAM-Guard! Remove .users (if present) to email me!
  16. Howard Hess

    Howard Hess Guest

    Re: The Ten comandments.

    On Thu, 28 Aug 2003 10:05:06 -0600, "Mark Rance" <mrr@pcisys.network>
    wrote:

    >
    >"Jim" <mesaz00@cableaz.com> wrote in message news:3f4c3f05_1@newsfeed...
    >> 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.

    >
    >Why on earth would someone standing up for what they believe, offend you?
    >
    >-Mark
    >

    I can't speak for Jim, but I take issue with a judge refusing to obey
    a law that conflicts with his personal beliefs.

    If you're a judge, your duty in professional life is to the law. If
    your personal beliefs prevent you from doing that duty, you should
    resign.

    Perhaps I could grant a judge a bit more leeway if a tangible issue
    were involved, where an argument might be made weighing the
    abstractions of the law against human suffering. But this was all
    about symbolism.

    It doesn't matter whether the justice was completely sincere or the
    most cynical person on the planet. He made his case, and the higher
    courts ruled against him.

    Mark, about 40 years ago George Wallace stood up for what he believed
    in, in defiance of a federal order to integrate the University of
    Alabama. Do you find that offensive?
  17. Re: The Ten comandments.

    I don't know if i would have admitted to that, Mo ! :)

    --
    George Lawrence
    George's Drum Shop
    1351 S. Cleveland-Massillon Road #21
    Copley, Ohio 44321
    http://www.GeorgesDrumShop.com
    http://www.Drumguru.com
    330 670 0800
    toll free 866 970 0800

    "If thine enemy wrong thee,
    buy each of his children a drum."
    -Chinese proverb




    "morris" <onedropper@earthlink.net> wrote in message
    news:c153605b.0308281318.37a646c8@posting.google.com...
    > "George Lawrence" <drumguru@ameritech.net> wrote in message

    news:<aAp3b.16269$Ih1.5723093@newssrv26.news.prodigy.com>...
    > > I am an agnostic and I do not fear religions but I do fear religious
    > > fundamentalism; 9/11
    > > Any encroachment on the separation of church and state could lead to a

    hole
    > > in the dike that leads to state religions and their fanatics like those

    of
    > > the Middle East.
    > >

    > hey, i plugged a hole in a dike from the east village one night !!
  18. Glenn Dowdy

    Glenn Dowdy Guest

    Re: The Ten comandments.

    "Mark Rance" <mrr@pcisys.network> wrote in message
    news:vksa1kn6163v14@corp.supernews.com...
    >
    > "Jim" <mesaz00@cableaz.com> wrote in message news:3f4c3f05_1@newsfeed...
    > > 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.

    >
    > Why on earth would someone standing up for what they believe, offend you?
    >

    I can certainly admire that. I can't see allowing judges to blatantly
    disregard the law based on those beliefs.

    Glenn D.
  19. Glenn Dowdy

    Glenn Dowdy Guest

    Re: The Ten comandments.

    <bjacoby@users.iwaynet.net> wrote in message
    news:biloi8$ss2$1@tribune.oar.net...
    > PS. You are correct. The mythical "state" is a bad choice of words.
    > More correct would be "government" which is the actual apparatus
    > set up by the contract of the Constitution to deal with the limited
    > powers "we the people" have delegated to them.
    >

    Ben, this is Alabama we're talking about. That's "gummint" and "we'uns".
    HTH.

    Gle-yahn D.
  20. Glenn Dowdy

    Glenn Dowdy Guest

    Re: The Ten comandments.

    <bjacoby@users.iwaynet.net> wrote in message
    news:bilpch$12u$1@tribune.oar.net...
    > George Lawrence <drumguru@ameritech.net> wrote:
    > > The law allows the government to
    > > acknowledge the concept of a god and mentions "God" in several major
    > > documents but not to favor any one religion. That Christians want to

    think
    > > that the founding fathers were only concerned about Christians is ok

    with me
    > > as long as they keep it to themselves. I think many of these

    acknowlegements
    > > like the coins, swearing on the bible, are sentimental traditions that

    are
    > > innocuous. They don't bother me.

    >
    > I totally agree. The beliefs of the Founding Fathers or the fact that
    > they owned slaves and slept with them is of no importance to the core
    > issue of what the final documents they produced are all about.
    >
    > Even if they were all 100 Christian (which they were not) the final
    > document not only does not make this a "christian" country but
    > rather forbids that from occuring!!! But what is guaranteed is for
    > chrisians and everyone else to freely practice what they believe
    > without government interference.


    Unless the law is violated. Can't be traipsing all over the Law.
    >
    > The key I think to things like the motto and the pledge is that
    > in those the word "God" has to be viewed as a sort of placeholder
    > meaning, "the sayer substitutes in here his personal view of higher
    > authority" So while people say "God" to one it is a Christian concept,
    > and other Islamic and a third would be substituting the word "nature"
    > or "physics" in their mind. One might argue a better "placeholder"
    > word might be found, but courts have ruled that the "placeholder" word
    > does not represent any particular religious view. It legally could not.


    We draw ever so closer to common ground. This is the type of discussion here
    that I just love.
    >
    > > It's the actions of those like this judge
    > > who try to get the government to condone a particular religion that is
    > > harmful not only to government but to religions as well.

    >
    > I totally agree. Basically government cannot either endorse a particualar
    > religion nor forbid anyone from practicing theirs. So it's one thing
    > for this judge to say, "This is MY monument and it represents what *I*
    > believe so I'm putting it here in the lobby of my "office". It's quite
    > another to install it there such that vistors coming in are left
    > with the impression that this particular religion is endorsed by
    > the state.
    >

    Not to deny that if they could, the state of Alabama would endorse/condemn
    quite a few religions/acts/beliefs/creeds. Besides, the State Religion of
    Alabama is already divided into the "Roll Tide" and "War Eagle" sects, and
    it's a good things them good ol' boys are too dumb to build explosive
    devices.

    Glenn D.

Share This Page