Please with the 10 commandments already - Page 31 - Political Fever

malrenalds · #**301** (**permalink**) 06-09-2008, 05:08 PM

Quote:

The only valid purpose the 10 Commandments would have on or in public (government) buildings is in the context of historic legal codes - and even then it would have to be displayed with other historic legal codes.

I would agree with that if the laws were not religious in nature. I am the lord they go... ect. ect.

now the book of Deuteronomy is chalk full of laws that are abhorrent to all America stands for should we post those too?

The Government Doesn't need to be giving any religion more of a recognized status then any other. and by putting the 10 commandments in a government building we offer it legitimacy we don't offer others.

Robert Ingersoll · #**302** (**permalink**) 06-09-2008, 05:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Oregon Elephant

Really? Has anyone become christain because their money has "God" written on it? How many people have been forced to the religion that way? That "force" is so impotent that it can't be called "force."

It forces me to acknowledge that there is a favored class in this country, and that this class is those who believe in god. Even though the Constitution contains a "no religious test for elective office" clause, I think we both know that I wouldn't stand much of a chance in an election because I am not of the favored class, at least not in the traditional sense. Even a minor violation of Constitutional principles such as endorsing even a deistic acknowledgement of religion is still a violation. There are not degrees to which violations are acceptable.

Southern Man · #**303** (**permalink**) 06-09-2008, 05:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Robert Ingersoll

Some religionists say man has free will. Others say everything is pre-ordained. I'm happy to leave theology to the theologians; I'm just pointing out how confused they all must be. In fact, I'd be happy to leave it entirely to them, except that they keep thrusting it into the public sphere & trying to effect my day-to-day life. Keep it in your home & church where it belongs & I'll never have to comment again, ever.

Some are wrong. Jesus told me to "shine my light", so you'll have to wear shades. Just be glad I'm not Muslim. :azn:

Oregon Elephant · #**304** (**permalink**) 06-09-2008, 05:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Robert Ingersoll

Actually, many churches have used the courts & the legislative process to try to force religion on people. Surely you've heard of the Christian amendment to the Constitution that gets dragged out about every generation or so since the Civil War. It is but one example. A good overview: Wikimedia Error

Let's go with the most recent one that they give any evidence to. One senetor, in 1954, proposed the amendment, which never made it to vote, because it had no support. even the source that wiki points to, is not an article about this, but mentions it with one sentence and an asteriks at the bottom, saying

Quote:

* The Flanders amendment text: " This Nation devoutly recognizes the authority and law of Jesus Christ, Saviour and Ruler of nations, through whom are bestowed the blessings of Almighty God.

" This amendment should not be interpreted so as to result in the establishment of any particular ecclesiastical organization, or in the abridgement of the rights of religious freedom, or freedom of speech and press, or of peaceful assemblage.

" Congress shall have power, in such cases as it may deem proper, to provide a suitable oath or affirmation for citizens whose religious scruples prevent them from giving unqualified allegiance to the Constitution as herein amended."

I'm well aware of random people putting something stupid forth, and religious movements 150 years ago in this country. But the reigious people in this country (by any decent %) have not tried to pass any laws or amendments to make everyone believe in their religion.

Southern Man · #**305** (**permalink**) 06-09-2008, 05:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Robert Ingersoll

History is to ascribe the American Revolution to Thomas Paine. - John Adams, 1776

Without the pen of Paine, the sword of Washington would have been wielded in vain. - John Adams

I know not whether any man in the world has had more influence on its inhabitants or affairs for the last thirty years than Tom Paine. There can be no severer satyr on the age. For such a mongrel between pig and puppy, begotten by a wild boar on a bitch wolf, never before in any age of the world was suffered by the poltroonery of mankind, to run through such a career of mischief. Call it then the Age of Paine. - John Adams, 29 October 1805

I never tire of reading Tom Paine. - Abraham Lincoln

I consider Paine our greatest political thinker. - Thomas Edison

Just because you religionists wanna write this "dirty little atheist" out of American history doesn't downplay his importance as the most important of all the Founding Fathers. I know it's real inconvenient to your half-baked notion that this is a Christian nation with Christian Founding Fathers. I also note, bemusedly so, your refusal thus far to deal with any other of the Founders I cited aside from Paine, just because I rightfully put him at the top of the list. He was & remains the greatest American ever. Without him, there'd be no United States of America. And that, my son, is a fact.

Call it the "Age of Paine."

You’re entitled to your opinion, but that’s all it is, an opinion. Why should I bother responding about the other names when you’ve got your #1 so messed up?

Oregon Elephant · #**306** (**permalink**) 06-09-2008, 05:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Robert Ingersoll

It forces me to acknowledge that there is a favored class in this country, and that this class is those who believe in god. Even though the Constitution contains a "no religious test for elective office" clause, I think we both know that I wouldn't stand much of a chance in an election because I am not of the favored class, at least not in the traditional sense. Even a minor violation of Constitutional principles such as endorsing even a deistic acknowledgement of religion is still a violation. There are not degrees to which violations are acceptable.

It does not force you to do anything, nor does it suggest that they are somehow the "favorite." I never said that it wasn't a violation, only challenged the wording of "force." The reason that a non-christian would have a hard time winning is not because of our government, but because of the people voting. It would be much harder for a muslim to win than for an agnostic to win.

Southern Man · #**307** (**permalink**) 06-09-2008, 05:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Michael

I hope they find Pat Robertson under a leg press of one ton someday and they need the Fire Department and the "Jaws of Life" to get him out!!!

My, so much hate!

LogicallyYours · #**308** (**permalink**) 06-09-2008, 05:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Michael

I hope they find Pat Robertson under a leg press of one ton someday and they need the Fire Department and the "Jaws of Life" to get him out!!!

Plus, Leg Presses are for pussies!...Real men Squat!

Oregon Elephant · #**309** (**permalink**) 06-09-2008, 05:36 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by LogicallyYours

Plus, Leg Presses are for pussies!...Real men Squat!

I avoid "squating" unless I absolutely have to. I leg press 800 lb and have taken out people on the wrestling team, as well as the entire baseball team (though to be honest, it was the freshmen team, but as seeing as I was a freshman at the time, it still was against people my size).

Chan · #**310** (**permalink**) 06-09-2008, 05:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Robert Ingersoll

From your last sentence, I now understand what you're saying. It's plain now to see that you've got it all wrong. It is clear from Madison's & Jefferson's writing that the government is not to endorse religion by allowing only one sect access to the public square.

We agree on this point.

Quote:

You act as if blocking religionists from exclusive rights to the public square is somehow showing preference against religion, when in fact, as Madison wrote, it is simply keeping government neutral.

No, not exclusive rights, equal rights. It is you and your kind that would keep certain views out of the public square. The public square must be for all citizens or it ceases to be public!

Quote:

As has been demonstrated over & over again, religious displays in proper historical context are allowable. Placing a 2-ton monument of the 10 commandments in a courtroom at the exclusion of all other religious displays are not.

We agree on this point, too.

Quote:

Misusing a church's 501(c)3 status to campaign for a candidate is not allowed.

Agreed.

Quote:

Forcing students to pray to Jesus is not allowed.

Agreed but a government official expressing to his students his animus toward religion is also not allowed.

Quote:

I have nothing but the utmost contempt for people who do not understand basic 1st amendment principles. Please, Chan, if you insist on participating in threads such as this, at least know what you're on about before you put fingers to keyboard.

Maybe you should try reading what I posted instead of reading INTO what I posted.

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)

User Name		Remember Me?
Password