Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

What was really "bad" with the ten commandments?

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (Through 2005) Donate to DU
 
Kamika Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-27-03 11:38 AM
Original message
What was really "bad" with the ten commandments?
Edited on Wed Aug-27-03 11:56 AM by Kamika
Well they are gone now. But im wondering someting.

First off im a christian but i could not care less whether they would be there or not.

Now thats out of the way.

Are people even aware of where we got our current laws? where the western worlds laws came from? they all originated from those ten commandments.

Those ten commandments were the basis for our laws, from a pure historical point of view.. why not let them stay there as a sign of our laws origin. If nothing else as a pure homage.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
molly Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-27-03 11:40 AM
Response to Original message
1. That was not the point - the point is separation of church
and state. Everyone is equal under the law - Hindus, Muslims, Aetheists, etc. The 10 are a Judeo-Christian thing.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Blue_Chill Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-27-03 01:03 PM
Response to Reply #1
70. I disagree
Edited on Wed Aug-27-03 01:05 PM by Blue_Chill
Seperation of church and state was intended to stop the goverment from forcing you to worship a national religion or force churches to change their faiths. It was not intended to keep mention of religion out of public buildings.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Brian Sweat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-27-03 01:25 PM
Response to Reply #70
78. It was intended to prevent the establishment of a defacto state religion.
Displaying the 10 commandments in such a conspicuous manner establishes a defacto state religion. It says, "this is the religion of the state. If you don't like it, tought." That is the intention of Judge Moore and his supporters.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Blue_Chill Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-27-03 01:34 PM
Response to Reply #78
82. Oh and what is the defacto religion established by the 10?
Edited on Wed Aug-27-03 01:36 PM by Blue_Chill
Catholic? Jewish? Maybe Baptist? They all differ you know some of them greatly.

Also how is a display forcing anyone to do anything. Does a display mean all Muslim temples have to close up and leave? When will a display send a message to the national gaurd to force everyone into a church on sundays?

I'm sorry but it's crap. The seperation of church and state is being taken to far. IMHO It was not meant to impose secularism on us all.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
reprobate Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-27-03 02:58 PM
Response to Reply #82
98. "not meant to impose secularism "

Sorry, B_C. Your wrong. It WAS intended to impose secularism on us, in our public political discourse. The founding fathers knew that the quickest way to political anarchy is to allow religious beliefs to impinge on our public political debate.

Their simple, and very workable solution was to worship in any way you felt you needed to, but don't try to impose that method on anyone else. To display YOUR decalog on public property is to put it above all other beliefs, and THAT will bring the destruction of the whole system. There is nothing more devisive than to tell everyone that YOUR religion is the TRUE religion, and their's is false. That is unamerican.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Blue_Chill Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-27-03 03:25 PM
Response to Reply #98
102. I disagree
If that is what they wanted that is what they would have said. From reading it, and knowing the history of this nation it seems to me to have been placed in the constitution to avoid what many came to america to avoid. They certainly didn't come here for secularism.

This notion of all public areas must be clear of religion has very far reaching effects. For example should church soccer teams be allowed to play on public land? By your logic, no.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
edward Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-27-03 03:37 PM
Response to Reply #102
107. No connection.
Anyone can play on public land.
The point is not keeping religion out of the public, it is keeping endorsement out of official government institutions.
It is consistent with the teaching of Jesus not to pray in public.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Blue_Chill Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-27-03 04:03 PM
Response to Reply #107
118. Not so fast
We can't out a cross on tax funded areas right? Well then why can a priest show up with a fleet of minivans spewing children in cross uniforms to use public land freely?

Isn't that endorsing religion? I mean can't they play on church land?

You see the logic used against monuments and artwork can be used for anything. And I preidict we will see such arguments made within the next decade.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sujan Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-27-03 04:09 PM
Response to Reply #118
121. lol
so did the government pay the priest to come to the public land?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Blue_Chill Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-27-03 04:12 PM
Response to Reply #121
124. The use of land does come at public expense
It has to be kept in playable order which means more care is required to stop it from becoming a giant patch of dirt.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sujan Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-27-03 04:16 PM
Response to Reply #124
128. so
Edited on Wed Aug-27-03 04:16 PM by sujan
why not declare this country a christian nation because majority of the public follow 'christianity'? I mean they are the ones contributing the most (if not all) to develop infratructure, social services etc....
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Blue_Chill Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-27-03 04:18 PM
Response to Reply #128
132. Where did that come from?
You still having visions of popes invading the US?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sujan Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-27-03 04:20 PM
Response to Reply #132
135. I am just peeking thru your pipe dream
Edited on Wed Aug-27-03 04:20 PM by sujan
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Blue_Chill Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-27-03 04:28 PM
Response to Reply #135
146. Well then pass the pipe
becuase whatever you're on seems pretty bad ass.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sujan Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-27-03 04:31 PM
Response to Reply #146
148. I'd like to see you react
Edited on Wed Aug-27-03 04:31 PM by sujan
when they strike down the 'under god' from the 'pledge of allegiance'

:D
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Blue_Chill Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-27-03 04:32 PM
Response to Reply #148
151. The entire pledge is stupid
Inserting God into is an insult to me.

:D
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Walt Starr Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-27-03 03:52 PM
Response to Reply #102
114. There is a difference between private sponsorship using public
property and public sponsorship of religion.

Judge Moore was directly attemptint to establish official religion. He even admits it.

If a courthouse allows the public to place displays on its lawn, then by all rights you can put up the Ten Commandments and right next to it I can put up a statue of The Goddess and the God explicitly engaged in the sexual act and both must be allowed and kept up or neither can be allowed and kept up.

If you can place your religious monument on public property, you must by exptension allow ALL religious monuments on public property. Judge Moore and the State of Alabam not only publically endorsed a single specific religious monument, they refused to allow monuments for any other source.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Blue_Chill Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-27-03 04:05 PM
Response to Reply #114
119. Don't get me wrong Walt
I think moore is a jackass and his monument should be dropped off a cliff and his monument should be used to rebuild coral reefs in hawaii.

I'm worried because I see a trend.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Walt Starr Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-27-03 04:11 PM
Response to Reply #119
123. Just so long as you agree
If there is to be a Jewish, Christian, or Islamic religious display on public land, you have no problem with my display of The Goddess and God explicitly engaged in the sexual act with insertion fully visible.

That's the only way you can have it be fair. ALL RELIGOUS AND EVEN NON-RELIGOUS DISPLAYS must be treated fairly and equitably.

Furthermore, you would have to allow a 2.6 ton granite monument stating THE BIBLE IS NOTHING MORE THAN A FAIRY TALE. To do otherwise would be a violation of the first amendment.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Blue_Chill Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-27-03 04:15 PM
Response to Reply #123
127. I don't agree with all of that
I wouldn't like a "THE BIBLE IS NOTHING MORE THAN A FAIRY TALE" because that's an out and out insult. I wouldn't mind a "THERE IS NOT GOD" monument.

I would also not mind Your suggested display of the love making gods. NOW THAT's ART! lol

I'm all for art, I hit the DC mudeums as often as I can and spend hours walking around them sipping coffee. I don't get offended by over cultures I enjoy the diverse enviroment their displays create.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Walt Starr Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-27-03 04:18 PM
Response to Reply #127
133. Sorry, but you have to take it
If you want yours, you have to allow theirs.

See, your ten commandment artwork is as offensive to the person who wants his "the Bible is nothing but a fairy tale" manument as his is to you.

So if you want yours, you must tolerate his. There's no getting around it. You don't have to look at it, you know.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Blue_Chill Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-27-03 04:30 PM
Response to Reply #133
147. I disagree
Theirs is "there is no God" not "You're and idiot for believing in fairy tales"

There is a differnce between celebrating your beliefs and shitting on everyone elses.

It would be no different then putting up a sign that said "Anti-theist are insane fools"
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Walt Starr Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-27-03 04:34 PM
Response to Reply #147
153. You still don't get it
THOU SHALT HAVE NO OTHER GODS BEFORE ME is JUST AS OFFENSIVE to this person as THE BIBLE IS NOTHING MORE THAN A FAIRY TALE is to you.

If you would have yours, you must allow theirs plain and simple. These people consider their statement no differently than you consider the first commandment.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Blue_Chill Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-27-03 04:39 PM
Response to Reply #153
160. I wouldn't display that
I stated religious art. Not a bible transcript. Big difference in my eyes.

For example moses on the supreme court building = art.
A giant stone bible = giant stone billboard.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Walt Starr Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-27-03 04:41 PM
Response to Reply #160
162. We could do a statue of oral sex
Call it the Big Giant Head.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Blue_Chill Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-27-03 05:29 PM
Response to Reply #162
176. What religion is that?
I would love the statue but I am curious.

w00t to oral sex!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
KinkyDem Donating Member (748 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-27-03 04:07 PM
Response to Reply #102
120. church soccer
If the feild is a pay to play field and they pay just like everyone else than I have no problem.

If it is a free field and the church and team is primarily made up of memebers of the community I have no problem.

I the team came and placed a 4 ton statue of Jesus in the middle of the field I would object.

Do you see where this is going?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Blue_Chill Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-27-03 04:17 PM
Response to Reply #120
130. 4 ton statue would get in the way
But a soccer team representing a church, like the St. Leo's Lions, wearing blue shirts with crosses on them in a puiblic park is no different then a monument being their for a few hours every weekend.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Walt Starr Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-27-03 04:22 PM
Response to Reply #130
138. So long as a monument with "The Bible is nothing but a fairy tale"
can sit right beside it, you're cool.

You have to allow both to have one.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
KinkyDem Donating Member (748 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-27-03 04:50 PM
Response to Reply #130
168. Right...
A few hours every weekend...not there all the time in a court house.

I fear you have missed the point of all of this.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DarkPhenyx Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-27-03 03:23 PM
Response to Reply #82
100. The big difference between...
...the monument in the courthouse, and the chruches you mentioned, is that teh courthouse is a public building of the government and the churches are a private building, despite them being "open to everyone".

Let's not forget one other important issue in all of this "seperation"/"freedom of religion" discussion. That part of the 1st is also the part that helps keep churches tax free. Taxation of the church was perceived as an attempt by the state to control religion. Thereby affecting teh free exercise and establishment thereof. Personally I think most mainstream religions should be taxed, particularly when they take such a heavy hand in the activities of the government. However the FF's, in their infinate wisdom, decided otherwise. Ours is not to question that wisdom. Unless, of course, you are willing to have your church taxed.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Blue_Chill Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-27-03 03:28 PM
Response to Reply #100
104. I'm not questioning the wisdom
I'm questioning the bias interpretation.

BTW - some chruches should be taxed. If you go out of your way to promote a specific politician or party you should lose your tax status. This would not stop churches from preaching what they believed, but if you stated that your congregation should vote GOP then bye bye exemption.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Interrobang Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-27-03 03:33 PM
Response to Reply #82
105. You're awfully narrow in your interpretation!
What about the hundreds of other religions in the world (and the US) which do NOT come from the Judeo-Christian background? What if you're a Jain? A Shintoist? A Sikh? A pagan? Let's not forget the poor atheists and agnostics, who wind up holding the short and dirty end of the religious stick in *any* discussion.

Since there's no way to be "fair" to all religions while still embracing one religion -- and believe me, it sucks to be in the religious minority in a country which *does* establish a state religion -- the best alternative IS to keep public functions separate from religious functions. If that means you have to be secular in your courthouse, well, go pray in your church. No one's stopping you. On the other hand, I (and Surinder, and Akira, and Nalini, and Stewart, for example) don't want to walk into the courthouse and feel as though we're not going to get a fair trial from Minute One because we're having Christianity shoved down our throats.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Blue_Chill Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-27-03 03:35 PM
Response to Reply #105
106. I don't buy it
I am a Catholic, I drive by a Muslim temple EVERY DAY. I love it. I drive slow and look at it and admire it's design. That my friend is called tolerance.

I don't want my laws created to help those over sensative intolerants that can't stand the sight of anything they disagree with. Period.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
edward Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-27-03 03:41 PM
Response to Reply #106
109. You conflate tolerance with law.
Very distinct here.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Not a robought Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-27-03 04:44 PM
Response to Reply #106
164. Then you have an issue
with the Jews who started the fuss in the first place. They didn't care for that particular Protestant version of the 10 C's. It wasn't secularists.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Blue_Chill Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-27-03 05:47 PM
Response to Reply #164
184. I have an issue with all intolerant poeple that want the law
to force their intolerance on me.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Sophree Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-27-03 03:49 PM
Response to Reply #82
113. It endorses a particular kind of religion
Which is unconstitutional. You cannot argue that the 10 Commandments are not monotheistic. Guess what? Not all Americans believe in monotheism.

"I'm sorry but it's crap. The seperation of church and state is being taken to far. IMHO It was not meant to impose secularism on us all."

Gee, I thought separation of church and state was pretty cut and dry. No endorsement of a religion by the state, no meddling within the church by the state.

Imposing secularism? Come on, that's the weekest argument I think I've heard.


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Blue_Chill Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-27-03 04:11 PM
Response to Reply #113
122. I disagree
I don't think that a piece of art endorses anything. It may acknowledge it but it's a stretch to call it an endorsement. In fact it's more then a stretch it's a spin job done with a specific intent.

And I too thought the seperation of church and state which is really "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof" was cut and dry. Don't declare a national religion and don't stop anyone from worshipping what they wish. It seems that monuments that belong to no single religion are now being seen as establishing a religion which is of course insane.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Walt Starr Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-27-03 04:13 PM
Response to Reply #122
125. It not only endorses a specific religion, it establishes it as official
Moore admitted this was his reason for putting it up in the first place.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Blue_Chill Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-27-03 04:20 PM
Response to Reply #125
136. That's different
Moore's monument was a disgrace and the "judge" said we should acknowledge the existence of one god. He went further and said God's law is more important then US law. He and his monument need to be placed in a jail cell.

Those he ruled against that weren't Christian should be granted a appeal.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Walt Starr Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-27-03 04:24 PM
Response to Reply #136
143. Nope, allow one and you must allow them all
Edited on Wed Aug-27-03 04:28 PM by Walt Starr
There really isn't enough room in the rotunda for a monument from every religion. The only recourse we're left with is to allow none.

Schools are facing the same choices. If a school refuses to allow a homosexual youth group to form as an official extracurricular activity, then by law it acn allow no extra curricular activites including sports.

This has already been decided. I can cite case law if you would like.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Blue_Chill Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-27-03 04:31 PM
Response to Reply #143
150. Step out of the thought box
One rotunda isn't the world. Different religions represented in different rotundas is just as good. Their certainly is enough room, and it also falls on private groups to creat the art.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Walt Starr Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-27-03 04:35 PM
Response to Reply #150
156. Nope, not acceptable
If you allow one on publioc property then you must accomodate all. It's that plain and simple.

So when do we put up the The Bible is a Fairy Tale monument?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Blue_Chill Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-27-03 04:38 PM
Response to Reply #156
158. I already told you
The Bible is a Fairy Tale is NOT their belief. Atheist and Anti-theist's believe their is NO GOD, they do not limit themselves to the bible alone. That statement is more of a specific attack then a belief.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Walt Starr Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-27-03 04:44 PM
Response to Reply #158
163. And I told you
It IS THEIR BELIEF. Check them out, you'll find Atheist web sites all over stating emphatically that the Bible is a Fairy Tale and all gods are myths.

Sorry if you find it offensive, but these people sincerely believe that and if the ten commandments on a 2.6 ton hunk of rock is art, then so is putting The Bible is a Fairy Tale and all Gods are Myths on a 2.6 ton of rock is art too.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Blue_Chill Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-27-03 05:40 PM
Response to Reply #163
182. So then
Atheists believe in other holy books?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Solomon Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-28-03 12:13 AM
Response to Reply #163
192. Its also possible to
believe in God and still believe the Bible is a book of fairy tales.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
KinkyDem Donating Member (748 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-27-03 04:18 PM
Response to Reply #122
131. You know what...
I do not seperate Catholics and Baptists and Protastants from each other. You are all Christain to me and all fall into the same catagory as far as I am concerned.

Don't get me wrong, I have known may christains who I love and respect and even encourage in their faith but from the outside, I see no real difference. You all take some skewed wierd interpritation of the Old Testimant, add some story about Jesus and I cannot tell you the differences in your particular dogma, nor do I care to.

Call me ignorant, call me uninformed what ever. I don't care. Can you tell me the differences between Druids, Dianists and Wiccans?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Walt Starr Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-27-03 04:20 PM
Response to Reply #131
134. There's a finer distinction there
How about the difference between the Alexandrian, Gardnerian, and Feri trads?

:evilgrin:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
KinkyDem Donating Member (748 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-27-03 04:44 PM
Response to Reply #134
165. yeah well...
I didn't list all of the christain faiths either. I'm lazy. Sue me.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Walt Starr Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-27-03 04:46 PM
Response to Reply #165
166. I sort of see your point
Catholic vs. Protestant is not the same distinction to me as Druidism vs. Wicca, but I can see your point.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
KinkyDem Donating Member (748 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-27-03 04:58 PM
Response to Reply #166
169. See when someone says
Pagan, the masses realy don't know the differeance between cloak wearing and sky clad versions. THey don't. I know very little about the differeances between the Christain faiths, I don't. I know a little, maybe more than I let on here but not much. I know Catholics have the Pope, I know Baptists come in two flavors, Southern and something else. I know there's the Church Of England and they hate the Catholics for reasons that escape me. I know there are secular and revised or revisionist or something or other jews. There are those who keep Kosher (something I know a little bit about believe it or not) and those that do not. I also know the differance between a Jew and Zionist, but why split hairs?

Bascily I don't care.

A christain is a christain is a christain. They all think the son of god died on a cross and that to believe in him is the way to ever lasting peace in the after life. What else do I REALY need to know?

I don't go around insisting that articles of my faith be displayed in courthouses and I object when others try to. Especialy a judge sittin gon the bench.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Blue_Chill Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-27-03 04:22 PM
Response to Reply #131
140. You should
because Catholics and Falwell are miles apart. Be careful by lumping us all together.

Besides we all know Catholics are evil mary worshipers. :D
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Solomon Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-28-03 12:16 AM
Response to Reply #140
193. But you are all christians.
You focus on the minor spats as though they make a religion. Christianity is a religion. Catholic or Baptist are sects, or denominations, not religions.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Not a robought Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-27-03 04:39 PM
Response to Reply #131
159. I can tell you the difference between
Druids, Shaman and Wizards.

heheh.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Sophree Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-27-03 04:21 PM
Response to Reply #122
137. HA! Look who's talking.
"I don't think that a piece of art endorses anything. It may acknowledge it but it's a stretch to call it an endorsement. In fact it's more then a stretch it's a spin job done with a specific intent."

:eyes:

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Blue_Chill Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-27-03 04:23 PM
Response to Reply #137
142. Great argument
:eyes:

Maybe next time you'll stick your tongue out and call me a butthead.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Walt Starr Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-27-03 04:27 PM
Response to Reply #142
145. Butthead
Edited on Wed Aug-27-03 04:28 PM by Walt Starr
:P

:evilgrin:

Note: This is a joke
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Blue_Chill Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-27-03 04:32 PM
Response to Reply #145
152. lol
I deserved it :D
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Sophree Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-27-03 04:31 PM
Response to Reply #142
149. I was referring to your "separation of church and state
is imposing secularism on us" argument. Talk about spin.

The fact is, I'm a Christian (as many of you know) and arguments like yours embarass me. You just don't seem to understand the intent of the Constitution or the Establishment Clause. Separation of church and state does not, in any way, impose secularism on me or prevent me from worshipping the way I choose. In fact, it protects my right to do so.

Hopefully someday you will give up these bullshit arguments and realize the importance and significance of the Constitution and the separation of church and state and the role they play in allowing you to worship the way you choose to do. Unless maybe you want the official religion to be the one promoted by Falwell, the Christian Coalition, et al.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Blue_Chill Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-27-03 04:35 PM
Response to Reply #149
155. Well then
Weaklings that can't stand up to their fellow liberals because they think anti-theists have a right to impose thier interpretations on me are embarassing to me.

If you can't see the difference between a open society that encourages the celebration of differences and one that hides them all that's your choice.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Liberal Veteran Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-27-03 05:12 PM
Response to Reply #155
170. Neutrality is the best option....
Edited on Wed Aug-27-03 06:01 PM by liberal_veteran
You have obviously taken the viewpoint that failure to acknowledge your particular mythology is anti-theistic, when nothing could be further from the truth.

The state would be promoting atheism if it stuck a big monument that said "God is great big fairytale and anyone who believes in it is a moron.".

Neutrality is the abscence of recognition of ANY particular faith or belief. Your God, the Holy Trinity, the Goddess, Cthlulu, Satan, Zeus, or no god at all. No recognition.

I want an explanation as why to you believe that YOUR particular God deserves to be recognized in public places when MINE doesn't! What? Your church isn't enough? Your cemetaries aren't enough? Your own damn tv networks aren't enough? A recognized UN country isn't enough?

There are some places that should be neutral and in a country that bases it's very laws on the notion that state and religion be separate, a courthouse in the United States of America should be the one place I do not have to be subjected to symbolism of ANY particular religion. Not your's. Not mine. Not Walt's. Not Osama bin Laden's.

What part of that don't you understand?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Blue_Chill Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-27-03 05:36 PM
Response to Reply #170
179. answers
Edited on Wed Aug-27-03 05:37 PM by Blue_Chill
I want an explanation as why to you believe that YOUR particular God deserves to be recognized in public places when MINE doesn't!

I'll be happy to provide you with one as soon as you can show me where I wrote that I wanted your God excluded.

What?

I don't know, what?!

Your church isn't enough?

My church has nothing to do with this at all.

Your cemetaries aren't enough?

Aren't enough for what? They will have to be expanded eventually. Do you have a problem with how we bury our dead? Perhaps you would like us to eat them?

Your own damn tv networks aren't enough?

I don't have any TV networks. Nor do I associate with religions that do.

A recognized UN country isn't enough?

Do you think we shouldn't have one?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
CO Liberal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-27-03 05:17 PM
Response to Reply #82
171. Your Avatar Image Says It All Blue_Chill
All you can see is your particular Christian perspective, and everyone else is wrong.

Sounds just like Ray Moore..........
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Blue_Chill Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-27-03 05:39 PM
Original message
Please.....
In case you haven't been paying attention, common in your case, I never claimed that only my religion should be allowed to do anything others can't. I like a world that is diverse as opposed to scrubbed of all the oversensative intolerants may find offensive.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Liberal Veteran Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-27-03 05:53 PM
Response to Original message
185. And how would you enforce that?
Equal size and weight and placement restrictions?

With literally hundreds of religious sects in the world, you would be hard pressed to represent them all equally unless the were of equal size and weight and on spinning dias so no particular religion could claim that their icon was getting short shrift or favortism in placement.

And you still haven't addressed the particular issue that this Judge committed an act of vandalism by illegally placing this abomination (as I see it) on public property under the cover of darkness.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Blue_Chill Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-27-03 06:00 PM
Original message
I'm not that petty and you aren't paying attention
Equal size and weight and placement restrictions?

Art isn't about size. It's not a penis competition you know.

With literally hundreds of religious sects in the world, you would be hard pressed to represent them all equally unless the were of equal size and weight and on spinning dias so no particular religion could claim that their icon was getting short shrift or favortism in placement.

I don't care what they claim, it's about having good taste and privately funding their own shit.

And you still haven't addressed the particular issue that this Judge committed an act of vandalism by illegally placing this abomination (as I see it) on public property under the cover of darkness.

I've addressed that over and over again on many threads. I've stated he should be fired and his warped monument should be used to rebuild coral reefs. That enough for you?

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Liberal Veteran Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-27-03 06:12 PM
Response to Original message
188. I agree and they can display it on PRIVATE land.
Not public property.

As far as good taste, who made you the arbiter what is tasteful and worthy of placement?

That is why neutrality is better. It avoids all the hassles of or the appearance of favortism or even the notion.

Is there any particular reason something like this could not have been placed on private church property where it would be appreciated?

Of course there wasn't. Instead, we end up with a stupid fiasco that waste time and money for NO GOOD REASON other than some whack job wanted to break down the wall of separation between church and state.

People who defend stuff like this and wearing their religious beliefs on their sleeves all the time without are the reason I stay away from any particular faith at all. Isn't it enough to just live your faith and not try to push unnecessary symbolism down everyone else's throats? To me, this kind of idiocy is prompted from lack of faith. Jesus spoke about people who like to shove their beliefs out in front of everyone in order to be seen and what he said wasn't very flattering.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Blue_Chill Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-27-03 11:52 PM
Response to Reply #188
191. Why not?
As far as good taste, who made you the arbiter what is tasteful and worthy of placement?

Who the hell said I would be. I'd just hope they would not put something that was intentionally insulting.

That is why neutrality is better. It avoids all the hassles of or the appearance of favortism or even the notion. Is there any particular reason something like this could not have been placed on private church property where it would be appreciated?

Something like what? Are you still ranting about Moore? ..sigh...

The wall you speak of is nonsense. It is a poor interpretation of seperation that goes way to far.

People who defend stuff like this and wearing their religious beliefs on their sleeves all the time without are the reason I stay away from any particular faith at all. Isn't it enough to just live your faith and not try to push unnecessary symbolism down everyone else's throats?

Pushing what? Am I forcing you to go to church? NO! I'm getting sick of people telling me seeing something equals pushing it down their throat.

By your logic gay people are pushing their beliefs on me because i see them. That's moronic.

Jesus spoke about people who like to shove their beliefs out in front of everyone in order to be seen and what he said wasn't very flattering.

Your comments on Jesus mean as much as Rush Limbaughs comments on feminism.




Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Blue_Chill Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-27-03 06:00 PM
Response to Reply #185
186. dupe
Edited on Wed Aug-27-03 06:01 PM by Blue_Chill
...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Blue_Chill Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-27-03 05:39 PM
Response to Reply #171
180. duplicate
Edited on Wed Aug-27-03 05:41 PM by Blue_Chill
...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Blue_Chill Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-27-03 05:39 PM
Response to Reply #171
181. duplicate
Edited on Wed Aug-27-03 05:41 PM by Blue_Chill
...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
noiretextatique Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-27-03 02:12 PM
Response to Reply #70
95. what's the difference?
if it's on a government building frequented by people of all faiths? seems like forcing to me.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Blue_Chill Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-27-03 02:18 PM
Response to Reply #95
96. Forcing to do what?
Please tell me because as far as I know you could flick it off and that would be perfectly legal.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
KinkyDem Donating Member (748 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-27-03 04:22 PM
Response to Reply #96
139. Think about this for a minute BC
How would YOU feel going in front of a judge knowing that he had placed a huge upside down crucifix with an upside down pantacle behind in the loby of the court? How would you feel about standing in front of him pleading your case? Can you see that there are those of us who FEAR for our safety and livlyhoods because of this sort of behavior? Can you at all empathize with the fact that this is frightening to us? To know that the person who will cast judgment on our case has so publicly stated his bias?

Can you see that at all?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Blue_Chill Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-27-03 04:37 PM
Response to Reply #139
157. First off I'm scared shitless in front of any judge
and as a catholic going in front of Moore would be horrible. I see your point. However the art in the lobby would not matter to me in least unless a fanatic put it there that was about to hear my case.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
KinkyDem Donating Member (748 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-27-03 04:41 PM
Response to Reply #157
161. Ypou mean like
Moore?

Anyone who feels it's K tpo put something like that in a court house is a fanatic.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Blue_Chill Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-27-03 05:42 PM
Response to Reply #161
183. Yes like Moore
A person who I have said over and over again the man is a nut.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Einstein Donating Member (10 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Aug-29-03 01:12 AM
Response to Reply #1
200. You Don't Know Crap About Separation of Church and State
The actual founding documents of the United States say nothing about separation of church and state. That is a fiction created by lawyers and judges. What the constitution does prohibit is the establishment of religion by the government, specifically meaning that there should be no state mandated religion, like there is in IRAN !!

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bahrbearian Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-27-03 11:43 AM
Response to Original message
2. Yes from Mesopotania
Edited on Wed Aug-27-03 12:03 PM by bahrbearian

Hammurabi wrote the first laws. Why don"t we put those on court steps. The ten commandments are a copy right infringement!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Solomon Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-28-03 12:21 AM
Response to Reply #2
194. And before that the
Egyptians had the twelve principles of Ma'at. Contains everything in the Ten Commandments.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Clete Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-27-03 11:43 AM
Response to Original message
3. The ten commandments have little to do with our laws.
Our legal system is derived from English Common Law, which was derived from Roman Law.

I think it is much ado about nothing myself, but it does set a bad precedent. What if the population shifts and becomes predominantly non-Christian, should this population also be allowed to put a monument to their religious laws in its place?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
schrodinger_I Donating Member (683 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-27-03 11:48 AM
Response to Reply #3
7. I agree
There is nothing inherently wrong with the 10 commandments. The fact that they are prominent in a court building IS a problem. Taxpayers are many different religions and national origins. It implies that the government supports or sanctions one religion over another. I hate to say it but people need to get over it and realize religion and government need to be separate. Not everyone in the US is a Christian. This is a black/white issue.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TSElliott Donating Member (513 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-27-03 11:49 AM
Response to Reply #3
13. Actually I don't think it was English Common Law
but the English Magna Carta, which is based off the 10 commandments.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dpbrown Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-27-03 12:02 PM
Response to Reply #13
36. The Magna Carta is more like the Bill of Rights
It was forced on King John to extract from him guarantees of habeus corpus and fair taxation. It was a limitation on the powers of English kings, not an underlying thesis of what rules bind society and god together.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Twenty3 Donating Member (361 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-27-03 12:00 PM
Response to Reply #3
29. I find it hard to believe
that such things as murder were all perfectly legal until the 10 commandments came along to straighten things out.

But if they're going to put the 10c out there, why are they presenting the beta? God rewrote them after Moses smashed the originals. So why not present the final version? Now I would not presume to speak for The Almighty or anything, but I know after I've worked hard on a writing, revising it until it's just perfect, I sure don't want the early drafts floating around!

:hi:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Clete Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-27-03 01:00 PM
Response to Reply #29
69. My understanding is the Big Ten were a good fit for
a tribal, nomadic Bronze Age society wandering around in a desert. Much has been said about the Code of Hammurabi, but if they were coming out of Egypt, could there not have been an influence there? I think all societies have taboos against murder and stealing. Quite honestly, I think these are the only two relevant commandments for today. :hi:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
FlaGranny Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-27-03 03:39 PM
Response to Reply #3
108. That's the kicker.
Everyone has to imagine himself or herself as an American walking into an Iranian or Afghani courtroom to be judged by Muslim law. That's the only way to see how the other side feels, i.e., a Muslim (or any other religion) walking into a courtroom with the Old Testament 10 Commandments prominently displayed.

If you want to allow one religion to display images of their religion, then okay, allow them all (including atheists) to do it. Otherwise, it has to be none of them.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
leftofthedial Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-27-03 11:46 AM
Response to Original message
4. public buildings are for everyone
non-Christ worshippers have the right to go to public buildings without being proselytized or made to feel that their beliefs are secondary to Christ Worshippers.

Also, your assertion is factually incorrect. Our laws did not come from the Judeo-Christian commandments, which is beside the point anyway.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
monkeyboy Donating Member (965 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-27-03 11:47 AM
Response to Original message
5. Jehova's Witnesses and Mormons are Christians too
So do you mind if a huge granite copy of the WatchTower is put in a public courthouse, or maybe a gigantic sculpture of the Book of Mormon?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Clete Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-27-03 11:49 AM
Response to Reply #5
9. Or how about one of Ron Hubbard's Scientology tomes?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
monkeyboy Donating Member (965 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-27-03 11:55 AM
Response to Reply #9
23. Or an inflatable Santa Claus...
...or a poster of Daffy Duck, or... ;-)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Kamika Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-27-03 11:54 AM
Response to Reply #5
21. well youre missing my point
Edited on Wed Aug-27-03 11:56 AM by Kamika
My point is that those ten commandments are there from a historical point of view not religious..


Putting up sopme obscure religions laws that has no historical point would be wrong.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
monkeyboy Donating Member (965 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-27-03 11:58 AM
Response to Reply #21
27. No, you're missing MY point
Which is, if you're a typical Xtian, you think that Mormons and Jehovah's Witnesses believe in a lot of nonsense, which is exactly how I view ALL of Christianity. Seperation of church and state is also about my not having to put up with ANY kind of religion.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
XanaDUer Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-27-03 12:10 PM
Response to Reply #21
47. Historical or not, they don't belong in a public building.
There is nothing wrong with them at all.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Az Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-27-03 12:28 PM
Response to Reply #21
55. That was not the intent of the display
In fact it was covered with numerous phrases praising god, the lord, and various other notions making it specifically a religious tribute. Moore himself did not even try that angle. He has been fighting to specifically entangle religion and government. He is not trying to make some sort of side comment. He and his backers wish to remake this nation as a theocracy based on the laws of the bible. This includes many forms of intolerance and hatred that they wish to justify though the bible.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Walt Starr Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-27-03 03:57 PM
Response to Reply #21
116. That's where you're wrong
Moore admitted publically this monument is there strictly for religious purposes. He's the one who snuck the monument there in the middle of the night like a thief.

It's even in the court record. There was no other purpose but to establish offical religious doctrine for the State of Alabama.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
HFishbine Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-27-03 04:25 PM
Response to Reply #21
144. What a leap
"My point is that those ten commandments are there from a historical point of view not religious."

If I accept for the sake of argument that our laws were based on Chrisianity, and that illustrating Christian tenants served some educational purpose, I still have to ask, why the ten commandmants?

Not all of them reflect our laws, some are even contrary to our laws, and furthermore, there are numerous instructions about conduct in the Bible. So why the ten commandments specifically? Why not some of the statutes that express prohibition of wearing clothes made of mixed fibers, or against charging interest on a loan, or against making a profit on the sale of food? Why the ten commandments and not others?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
a_random_joel Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-27-03 11:47 AM
Response to Original message
6. Couple of things
Edited on Wed Aug-27-03 11:49 AM by a_random_joel
1. Our current laws did NOT come from the 10 commandments. There are only 2 laws that are on the books that originate from the commanments - don't steal and don't kill. TO think that we are the only society that has these laws, and that the Jude-Christian ethic is the only creed wise enough to promote these laws is both arrogant and absurd.

2. The Constitution - 1st Amendement
"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof"
This is called the establishment clause. Google it, there are plenty of eloquent documents written about it - some from the framers themselves.

3. As far as I'm concerned the protestors themselves are breaking the "Idol worship" commandment. Bunch of hypocrites. Get a job.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
schrodinger_I Donating Member (683 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-27-03 11:49 AM
Response to Reply #6
12. Well said!!!
<EOM>
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rock Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-27-03 12:16 PM
Response to Reply #6
52. Just a minor point
It's my guess that "Don't steal and don't kill" as law has nothing to do with the Ten Commandments. These rules eminate from the earliest societies that you would call civilized.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
radwriter0555 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-27-03 11:48 AM
Response to Original message
8. Laws of Hammurabi are the origination of civilized law written in 1750 BC,
far, far predating the christian versions. This thing reads like a current municipal code, there are 282 of em!

http://www.yale.edu/lawweb/avalon/medieval/hamframe.htm

(snip)

The Code of Laws

1. If any one ensnare another, putting a ban upon him, but he can not prove it, then he that ensnared him shall be put to death.

2. If any one bring an accusation against a man, and the accused go to the river and leap into the river, if he sink in the river his accuser shall take possession of his house. But if the river prove that the accused is not guilty, and he escape unhurt, then he who had brought the accusation shall be put to death, while he who leaped into the river shall take possession of the house that had belonged to his accuser.

3. If any one bring an accusation of any crime before the elders, and does not prove what he has charged, he shall, if it be a capital offense charged, be put to death.

4. If he satisfy the elders to impose a fine of grain or money, he shall receive the fine that the action produces.

5. If a judge try a case, reach a decision, and present his judgment in writing; if later error shall appear in his decision, and it be through his own fault, then he shall pay twelve times the fine set by him in the case, and he shall be publicly removed from the judge's bench, and never again shall he sit there to render judgement.

6. If any one steal the property of a temple or of the court, he shall be put to death, and also the one who receives the stolen thing from him shall be put to death.

7. If any one buy from the son or the slave of another man, without witnesses or a contract, silver or gold, a male or female slave, an ox or a sheep, an ass or anything, or if he take it in charge, he is considered a thief and shall be put to death.

8. If any one steal cattle or sheep, or an ass, or a pig or a goat, if it belong to a god or to the court, the thief shall pay thirtyfold therefor; if they belonged to a freed man of the king he shall pay tenfold; if the thief has nothing with which to pay he shall be put to death.

9. If any one lose an article, and find it in the possession of another: if the person in whose possession the thing is found say "A merchant sold it to me, I paid for it before witnesses," and if the owner of the thing say, "I will bring witnesses who know my property," then shall the purchaser bring the merchant who sold it to him, and the witnesses before whom he bought it, and the owner shall bring witnesses who can identify his property. The judge shall examine their testimony -- both of the witnesses before whom the price was paid, and of the witnesses who identify the lost article on oath. The merchant is then proved to be a thief and shall be put to death. The owner of the lost article receives his property, and he who bought it receives the money he paid from the estate of the merchant.

10. If the purchaser does not bring the merchant and the witnesses before whom he bought the article, but its owner bring witnesses who identify it, then the buyer is the thief and shall be put to death, and the owner receives the lost article.

The entire set of laws is here, and this site

http://www.lawbuzz.com/ourlaws/hammurabi/hammurabi.htm provides

interesting additional information.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Clete Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-27-03 11:52 AM
Response to Reply #8
18. Well it was their municipal code.
Actually women had a lot more rights under Hammurabi than they did under the Torah.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ComerPerro Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-27-03 11:49 AM
Response to Original message
10. Kill, Steal, Perjury
Thats it

Thou shall not kill
Thou shall steal
Thou shall not bear false witness


But thats it. I noticed its not illegal to worship anything other than the God of Abraham.

By the way, idolotry is a violation of the First commandment. Yet these "Chrisitans" in Alabama were doing just that.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Walt Starr Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-27-03 11:58 AM
Response to Reply #10
28. I don't count lying
It specifically applies to the law only when under oath. Otherwise, it has nothing to do with the law.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ComerPerro Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-27-03 01:21 PM
Response to Reply #28
75. Thats how I meant to refer to it
Its illegal to lie when under oath (as millions of right-wingers will happily point out).

But thats the only time that commandment applies.

My point was, only 25-30% of the commandments were actual laws.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
RobertSeattle Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-27-03 12:01 PM
Response to Reply #10
34. Funny...
I read your post quickly and thought you wrote "God of Alabama"...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ComerPerro Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-27-03 01:18 PM
Response to Reply #34
74. I will have you know that the God of Alablama
despite his seven teeth, shotgun, and banjo, is in fact a very powerful God.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DarkPhenyx Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-27-03 12:49 PM
Response to Reply #10
60. Twice now...
We missed that the 10C and the law of the US prohibits adultry. My 2 cents.

Well, 5 really...here's a fun link on the 10C. George is da man!

http://www.geocities.com/bobmelzer/gc10cx.html
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ComerPerro Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-27-03 01:38 PM
Response to Reply #60
84. I love that George Carlin bit
I remember seeing it. Funny as hell.

Is adultery illegal? Throughout the US?
I didn't think it was a federal law...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DarkPhenyx Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-27-03 01:46 PM
Response to Reply #84
87. I think it is in all 50 states.
Could be wrong though.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ComerPerro Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-27-03 01:59 PM
Response to Reply #87
89. Im not clear on that one
I had always heard that it was a law in some states, but not on the books as a US law.

Oh well.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DarkPhenyx Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-27-03 02:09 PM
Response to Reply #89
93. It's one of those things...
...that was left up to the states. Kinda like drinking age till teh Gov't blackmailed the hold out states like Ohiop by threatening to withhold money for roads. I think that all states do ahve a version of an adultry law on the books though. I know it's against the UCMJ. Unifrom Code of Military Justice, so it can be a federal offense. IN fact, if interpreted literally, adultry in the military can be applied to two single soldiers. It reads roughly as "sex with anyone other than your lawfully wedded spouse."
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Virginian Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-27-03 04:34 PM
Response to Reply #10
154. God doesn't like it when
His people worship graven images. See the protestant version of the ten commandments. It sure looks like those people praying around it are doing just that.

PS: I didn't know there were different versions for different religions, until I did a search.
http://www.positiveatheism.org/crt/whichcom.htm
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
eyesroll Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-27-03 11:49 AM
Response to Original message
11. It would be fine if the 10Cs were in there with
the code of Hammurabi, the Magna Carta, the Constitution, and other historical documents. That would be a good homage, but it wasn't what the judge was after. The use of the 10Cs alone -- a specific version of them -- implies an endorsement, that THESE are humanity's infallible laws.

But in this country, it's legal to have gods before the one mentioned in the tablet. It's legal to covet things, as long as you don't steal them. It's legal to worship idols. It's legal to hate your parents, again, as long as you don't hurt them. It's legal to ignore the Sabbath -- hell, if the * administration gets its way on overtime, there will be plenty of people forced to do so, for no extra pay.

How could someone feel they're getting a fair audience in a religious-discrimination suit, if their religion is expressly condemned by a big granite slab in the lobby of the courthouse? Would a child who fears an abusive parent feel that she was breaking the law because she asked the judge for help?

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DuctapeFatwa Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-27-03 11:50 AM
Response to Original message
14. I'll tell you why thery were bad

A Jewish judge might put up a Torah!

Now that might not sound so bad, but what do you think the good people of Alabama would have done when a Muslim came in with a big ol' Bismilla, in gold on black?

Even though all 3 are versions of the same OS you can imagine the scandal!

And if anybody is going to sue for infringement, it should be the Zoroastrians, who are as we speak rolling their eyes and hissing, "and all 3 stole it all from US, the dorks!"
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
aquart Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-27-03 12:14 PM
Response to Reply #14
50. Sweetie, the ten commandments are part of the Torah.
You're confused because you think of them as being on tablets. But really, who's seen those tablets? We only know about them from the Torah scrolls.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DuctapeFatwa Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-27-03 12:23 PM
Response to Reply #50
54. I know that and you know that, but do Alabama fundies know that?
Edited on Wed Aug-27-03 12:40 PM by DuctapeFatwa
Few Christian fundamentalists who believe that Jesus was a white man who spoke English and shopped at Wal-Mart share your devotion to historical fact.

edit to add the suggestion that you save terms of endearment for those whose gender and age you know, it will be one less little thing to worry about the rest of the day :)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Liberal Veteran Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-27-03 11:50 AM
Response to Original message
15. 1. It was an act of pure vandalism....
This monument was installed in the middle of the night a couple of years back just like a thief or vandal would do and should be treated no differently.

2. The 10 commandments are NOT the basis of all or even most western law.

3. This was a blatant attempt by a right wing fundamentalist nutjob to try to breach the wall of separation between church and state and it cannot be allowed.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
monkeyboy Donating Member (965 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-27-03 12:00 PM
Response to Reply #15
31. Gawd damn right
What he said.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
vi5 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-27-03 11:51 AM
Response to Original message
16. We have laws about worshipping false gods?
Could have fooled me.

The fact is that there is enough in those 10 commandments that is religion specific and christianity specific that it shouldn't be there in a court of law.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
edward Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-27-03 12:10 PM
Response to Reply #16
48. "Thou shall not feed the poor,
lest thine own corporations shall profit also."
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Caution Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-27-03 11:51 AM
Response to Original message
17. Sorry but do some research before saying something patently false
The laws of our land do not derive from the 10 commandments, they derive from the thousands of years of history that predate that particular codification. Do some reading on ancient mesopotamia. Chinese law also codified laws against murder and theft long before the bible was written as well. The belief that our laws are based upon this is nothing more than propaganda of the church. Only quote "history" if you know your history.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Aristus Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-27-03 11:52 AM
Response to Original message
19. When countries are governed by religious law, burnings, hangings
and beheadings result. Civil law is not perfect (and boy, is THAT an understatement!) but it's a vast improvement over the harsh, uncompromising and autocratic nature of religious law.

Jesus softened the rigidity of Mosaic law with his compromises (render unto Caesar and so on) and his forgiveness (Let him among you who is without sin cast the first stone). If we are to live by his example we should live our personal lives by the Commandments, or better still, the Sermon on the Mount, and our civic lives by civil law.

Atheists, I haven't forgotten you. Jesus had a verse for you too. "Do unto others as you would have them do unto you." That's all there is to it.

We are all brothers.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Walt Starr Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-27-03 11:54 AM
Response to Original message
20. BULLSHIT!!!!
How many times does this have to be posted here. The ten commandments HAVE ABSOLUTELY NOTHING TO DO WITH LAWS!!!

Four are specifically religious in nature and have nothing to do with the law.

One is about lying and only has any application to the law when under oath. Lying is not a crime otherwise.

One is about personal sexual morality and has nothing to do with the law.

Coveting is absolutely necessary for a healthy capitalistic society and has absolutely nothing to do with the law.

Honoring your parents is a personal thing and has nothing to do with the law.

What you're left with is stealing and murdering. Both are so universal as to indicate the ten commandments are unnecessary to make these two a part of the law. Every culture worldwide prohibits these regardless of religion.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dpbrown Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-27-03 11:55 AM
Response to Original message
22. Western legal theory owes as much to Hammurabi as to Moses
Hammurabi's Code of Laws, written nearly 2000 years before Jesus was born, provide more detail and structure than the simplified set Moses is said to have been handed down on Mt. Sinai.

So erections to Mesopotamian gods and the Kings of Mesopotamia have just as much basis as a homage as the Commandments. But no one is seriously arguing that other sources of our laws be enshrined.

The rise of the courts of equity as a common sense alternative to the courts of law was one of the results of the Norman conquest of England, and yet we don't hear calls to erect monuments to the Magna Carta, either.

That's because every time someone touts the Ten Commandments he or she is pulling religious one-upmanship over someone else. The Ten Commandments are almost always about "my god is better than your god" and it was classic in the case of Roy Moore.

The reason the Ten Commandments don't belong in a courtroom is that the state is barred from "endorsing" one religion over another as part of the requirement that the activities of the Church and the governing of the State remain separate.

(Hopefully former) Judge Moore broke the law by forcing the endorsement, by the State, of (his particular brand of) Christianity on the people of Alabama. He should lose his license to practice law and be removed permanently from the court.

Dan Brown
Saint Paul, Minnesota
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
HereSince1628 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-27-03 11:56 AM
Response to Original message
24. With all respect for Kamika
This is a good illustration of how a critical thinker must look beyond the obvious.

Sometimes there is a message in what isn't said, including implications...

I am taking this post and its replies for use when I teach rhetoric...thanks.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dsc Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-27-03 11:56 AM
Response to Original message
25. Because the foyer of the Supreme Court
of Alabama isn't a church nor is it Justice Moore's living room. I don't care if he worships Satan in his free time and on his own property. I do care if he trys to use the property and time of the people of Alabama to promote his religion. The vast majority of the Ten Commandments have nothing whatsoever to do with today's legal code. He trashed the temple that is the Supreme Court of Alabama. For that he should be ashamed.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BurtWorm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-27-03 11:57 AM
Response to Original message
26. Where did those 10 commandments come from?
The code of Hammurabai.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Walt Starr Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-27-03 12:00 PM
Response to Reply #26
30. And the Code of Hammurabi is posted in the SCOTUS
Which demonstrates ancient legal code and the fact that the ten commandments being posted there are for historical purposes only.

Posting them alone implies religious connotations.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Ripley Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-27-03 12:01 PM
Response to Original message
32. This is exactly what the people on the steps are saying.
Edited on Wed Aug-27-03 12:02 PM by Ripley
"Are people even aware of where we got our current laws? where the western worlds laws came from? they all originated from those ten commandments."

Why do people with so little knowledge of our laws, our constitution and history insist on demanding that you listen to them because they have the historical facts that Roy Moore told them about.

:eyes:

edit: spelling atrocities
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
hexola Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-27-03 12:01 PM
Response to Original message
33. Weakening of Chritianity?
I don't think we should give one group an exclusive or patent on the morality we base our laws on. It seems like they are seeking to legitimize their faith through some wierd secular legal trademark. I think Christianity would be more powerful by completely disassociating with government. They should be cheering!!! Mixing our legal and moral systems strengthens niether!!!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Uzybone Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-27-03 05:28 PM
Response to Reply #33
175. Well said
the more a religion mixes with government, the more both of them are slimed.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
screembloodymurder Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-28-03 01:08 AM
Response to Reply #33
196. That's a great point.
This isn't about the law. It's about who will set the moral standards for every American. It's about birth control, abortion, abstenence, temperance. These zealots will be arresting our kids for mastrabation. They'll have cameras in our bedrooms. Judge Moore should be held in contempt, not just by the courts, but by all freedom loving Americans.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Liberal Veteran Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-27-03 12:02 PM
Response to Original message
35. Is it okay if I chisel hieroglyphs of Osiris and Isis on public property?
After all....the civilization of the west descended from many of the early, pre-mosaic civilizations, like Egypt.

So just for historical purposes, should I be allowed to go into a public rotunda and start chiseling hierglyphs on the floor to represent the historical significance of those past civilizations in modern law? Just as an homage you understand? And if the hierglyphs say we have to make blood sacrifices to Isis on the dark of the moon to be protected from the evil spirits, then why should anyone get offended?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Mairead Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-27-03 01:39 PM
Response to Reply #35
86. Speaking of Egypt
There's some evidence that Judeo-Xian monotheism itself was nicked from Egypt and Akhenaton.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
aquart Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-27-03 12:02 PM
Response to Original message
37. Our laws did not "originate" from the ten commandments.
What flaming illiterate bunkum.

The Old Testament is simply evidence of an early, written judicial code, but it was hardly the first time humans agreed that murder and theft were wrong.

Fact is, our laws ignore most of the ten commandments. We don't punish people for not honoring their fathers and mothers. We actually encourage "coveting" while jailing for theft.

But we jail for many things never mentioned in the ten. Drugs, for instance, are ignored in Hebrew law. Yet cannabis is one really OLD word.

The ten commandments forbids religious freedom. American justice insists on it. That's because it's guaranteed in our Bill of Rights. Our laws are required to conform to our constitution and the Bill of Rights, NOT the ten commandments.

Our current judicial system is based on English Common Law which is the precedent of endless disputes between neighbors and the difficult solutions reached by human beings attempting to bring peace to the dissenting parties.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Rose Siding Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-27-03 12:02 PM
Response to Original message
38. More pure hypocracy than homage
It is a stone. An object. The laws are to be written on your heart. And what of "If my right eye offends thee..."? Militancy in defense of an object vs a spirit of conciliation and humility?

It is a no brainer, even beyond the obvious wisdom of seperating religion from the State. And I'm a Christian, too.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sujan Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-27-03 12:03 PM
Response to Original message
39. right wing zealots
dont respect the law.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Maddy McCall Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-27-03 12:04 PM
Response to Original message
40. If people didn't covet their neighbors' possessions, the economy would...
grind to a halt. "My neighbor has an SUV, but I only have a Altima, so I better head on down to Joe's Gasguzzlers and buy me one of them suckers! Gotta keep up with the Joneses, ya know!" Same thing with clothing styles and home purchases, or even furnishings.

It's stupid for people to assert that our modern laws emerged from the 10 Commandments.

Explain the death penalty?

Explain the "invisible forces" that drive the economy?

Explain the many forms of idolatry exhibited by the same Xians who support the monument? Is not the worship of the very Montgomery monument a form of idolatry???

The whole idea that the 10 Commandments should have a footing in civil law is ridiculous...Like someone on DU said recently, they should be known as the "10 Suggestions" for moral living.

The whole thing in Alabama is a FARCE! Moore knows it. The protesters know it. The people of Alabama know it.

Most fundies here who I have talked to want it removed, because they think the whole controversy is bad for religion. I agree.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dpbrown Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-27-03 12:10 PM
Response to Reply #40
46. Good point, Capitalism depends on Coveting
So we're already sunk. LOL
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rocktivity Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-27-03 12:04 PM
Response to Original message
41. The basis of our laws, perhaps, but not of our government
The basis of our goverment is that all religions are considered equal. Having the monument in the courthouse suggests that Judeo-Christianity is America's one "true" religion if its laws are "based" on the Ten Commandments. And having a judge who refuses to remove it suggests that he's going to rule with his religious views instead of what's in his lawbooks--that makes him unfit to hold his job. If you want historical homage, put the monument in a church or museum.


rocknation


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Az Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-27-03 12:05 PM
Response to Original message
42. Lets examine some of the problems with this notion
First off there is the issue that the predominant sects of Judeo/Christianity do not agree on the versions of the 10 commandments. Secondly there seems to be some dispute about what Moses should have carved (see Ex 34).

Examining the protestant version of the 10 C's we find that most of them do not apply to our modern laws. Lets examine them.

1. Thou shalt have no other gods before me
This is pure religion and has no bearing on legal matters according to our first ammendment. If someone wants to worship a multiplicity of gods that is their choice.

2. Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image
This is another purely religious declaration. In fact there is a rift between the protestants and the Catholics over whether the Catholics Cruscifix represents a graven image or not.

3. Thou shalt not take the name of the Lord thy God in vain
Again a religious demand rather than a basis for law.

4. Remember the sabbath day to keep it holy.
Yet again another religious proclomation. This one is even disputed within religious circles as the sabbath is in question. Some recognise it as Saturday while others recognise it as Sunday. And seeing as how god ordered the death of a man for picking up sticks on the sabbath it may be important.

5. Honor thy father and thy mother.
A fine moral ideal but some believe that even parents have to earn some amount of respect. None the less this is not part of our legal code. In fact the bible's recommendation for a child that does not respect their parents is death.

6. Thou shalt not kill.
Finally a legal precidant that we can apply to our law books. Though you will find this one in nearly any book of moral codes. Trouble is this one gets twisted around so that the state can kill if it chooses to such as death penalty and war.

7. Thou shalt not commit adultery
Again a moral ideal but not mandated by law. It may be the basis for breaking a marriage contract but in a free society what two consenting adults do is between them and not the state.

8. Thou shalt not steal
Here is another one that finds its way to our law books. And again it is one you will find oft repeated in nearly any moral system or code you care to examine.

9. Thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbor.
This one has some value to the modern legal system. Slander and libel are recognised crimes. However the law is not as strident on this as the 10 C's.

10. Thou shalt not covet anything that is thy neighbor's.
A moral ideal. There is no effective way to legislate this.

Of the 10 commandments there are only 3 that have any direct connection to our legal system. And those three are repeated in nearly every moral code and society in one way or another.

Keep in mind we do not even know if this is the correct list of commandments. Exodus 34 seems to indicate that the version reported in Exodus 20 were incorrect. Consider a monument with these commandments on them:
1. Thou shalt worship no other god (For the Lord is a jealous god).
2. Thou shalt make thee no molten gods.
3. The feast of unleavened bread shalt thou keep in the month when the ear is on the corn.
4. All the first-born are mine.
5. Six days shalt thou work, but on the seventh thou shalt rest.
6. Thou shalt observe the feast of weeks, even of the first fruits of the wheat harvest, and the feast of ingathering at the year's end.
7. Thou shalt not offer the blood of my sacrifice with leavened bread.
8. The fat of my feast shall not remain all night until the morning.
9. The first of the first fruits of thy ground thou shalt bring unto the house of the Lord thy God.
10. Thou shalt not seethe a kid in its mother's milk.

The chief reason for maintaining a strict seperation of church and state is because arguments about absolute truth are interminable. By only legislating what can be agreed upon we leave religion unviolated as well as the state. Whatever religious view is taken by the state it is going to offend someone. In matters of religion people are willing to go to extremes. If we wish to build this nation on inclusive values rather than exclusion we cannot entwine religion and government. It is the nature of the system.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bandit Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-27-03 12:36 PM
Response to Reply #42
57. "god ordered the death of a man for picking up sticks on the sabbath"
God says thou shall not kill and then goes on to say kill him for gathering firewood on the sabbath. How to further gods wishes. To kill someone for doing something other than pray on Sabbath or No to killing. Which is it God? Which commandment should we follow?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ima_sinnic Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-27-03 12:50 PM
Response to Reply #57
61.  good catch!
what a bunch of BS
sorry, but I am one of those who is INtolerant of religious CRAP
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
atreides1 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-27-03 12:07 PM
Response to Original message
43. Actually...
The Ten Commandments were given to the people of Israel by God, but
according to the Jewish Torah they are only the headings of what is called the mitzvot.

In the Torah and in Rabbinical writings they are not even called the
Ten Commandments. The word used translates in to several meanings.
The Ten Sayings, Statements, Declarations, Words, and finally the Ten Things.

The laws that apply to Gentiles, i.e. Christians are the Seven Laws of
Noah.
1.To establish courts of justice
2.Not to commit blasphemy
3.Not to commit idolatry
4.Not to commit incest and adultery
5.Not to commit bloodshed
6.Not to commit robbery
7.Not to eat flesh cut from a living animal

Now perhaps you will provide evidence that the Ten Commandments were
used by the Founders to create this country, whether it be in the Bill of Rights or the US Constitution. Perhaps you can research the
surviving writings of the Founders and show where they state that the
laws of our country are based on the Ten Commandments.

If you or anyone else can connect the dots, then perhaps you can change peoples minds. What I am saying is don't make a statement that
you cannot back up with fact.

For more info on Judaism 101 you can go to www.jewfaq.org
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mandyky Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-27-03 12:08 PM
Response to Original message
44. Because 7 out of the 10 commandments are not
against any of our laws - as a matter of fact - Keeping up with the Jones, an American motto is actually coveting. Adultery is not against the law, but grounds for divorce.

Our laws are not based on religion, they are based on the ideal of personal freedom that do not infringe on others right to freedom.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
arcane1 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-27-03 12:09 PM
Response to Original message
45. ah, the "basis of our laws" lie....
what makes you say that the "10" commandments are the basis of the western world's laws? Surely you aren't suggesting that murder and theft were legal in all western cultures, prior to the Roman Catholic's influence?


This is a bogus, made-up assertion that fundies use to justify their bigotry and power-hunger, nothing more.


Try the Treaty of Tripoli, for starters


:eyes:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Zolok Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-27-03 12:11 PM
Response to Original message
49. Nothing wrong with the 10C...
But if you inscribe them on a two ton granite slab and then begin to worship said item in a gross and incontinent fashion it's primitive pagan idolatry and THEN you have problem.
It's not even FUN pagan idolatry like those "natives" in King Kong that venerated a enlarged simian...nope these poor serfs were groveling before a rock.
A
BIG
ROCK!
WWW.CHIMESATMIDNIGHT.BLOGSPOT.COM
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DarkPhenyx Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-27-03 12:14 PM
Response to Original message
51. In fact I do know where much of it came from.
Most came from Magna Carta and the Law Code of Hammurabi.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
makeanoise Donating Member (159 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-27-03 12:22 PM
Response to Original message
53. The problem is Hypocrisy
Many courtrooms and other justice buildings in the South have the Ten Commandments posted, however, isn't it hypocritical to have a plague made of stone with one line on it that says
"Thou Shall Not Kill"

hanging on a building which sentences people to death?


Is this some sort of sick joke like Mt.Rushmore on Indian Land, constantly mocking the Lakota of the Black Hills?

Yes, it is most certainly a sick joke.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
On the Road Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-27-03 12:30 PM
Response to Original message
56. Kamika, Posting Them Gives a False Picture of Our Founding Fathers
The 10 commendments would have been just fine with the Pilgrims or with most of the other 17th-century English colonists.

During the 18th century however, the religious climate changed enormously. By the 1770's, our leaders were absolutely not Bible-believing Christians. Most of them were deists who had not the slightest concern for implementing any of the commandments in the Bible. Our founding fathers would have been just as opposed to posting the ten commandments as we are today.

There are other good reasons why posting the ten commandments in a courthouse is misleading, bizarre, unconstutional, and should be opposed. Only three of the commandments relate to modern law (murder, theft, and false witness). Some are very specifically religious (eg the Sabbath, monotheism, idolatry). It is a definite breach of the 1st Amendment. John Adams did not even want the census to count pastors because of the separation of church and state.

I don't even understand why Bible-believing Christians want these commandments posted. Paul was very specific about the fact that the law was abolished, and the glory at Mt. Sinai had faded.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ChesWickatWork Donating Member (41 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-27-03 12:43 PM
Response to Reply #56
59. I can not understand why smart people still believe this deist lie
During the 18th century however, the religious climate changed enormously. By the 1770's, our leaders were absolutely not Bible-believing Christians. Most of them were deists who had not the slightest concern for implementing any of the commandments in the Bible. Our founding fathers would have been just as opposed to posting the ten commandments as we are today.

Franklin is the only one who claimed to be a desist. The reason the commandments being in the court house is bad is because the Mostly Christian founders of this nation founded it to be secular...to protect church from state and vice versa.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
arcane1 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-27-03 01:00 PM
Response to Reply #59
68. that doesn't mean they are Christians, either
Jefferson wrote quite a bit on how the Bible deserves to be thrown in the rubbish

but it's irrelevant what their religious beliefs were, the point is whether they based their system of Government upon the so-called-ten commandments. It's pure fundy bunk
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
On the Road Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-27-03 03:20 PM
Response to Reply #59
99. The Deist Thing is Absolutely True
It has to do with the whole intellectual climate of the 18th century. You can cull many quotes about God, Jesus, and Christianity from all our founding fathers, even to the point of Ben Franklin proposing a prayer at the constitutional convention.

Belief in God did not imply what it implies today, however. It was a part of a whole movement during the 18th Century that the founding fathers were clearly part of -- including social progress, science, self-improvement, morality as community service, and economic improvement. The 18th century was very anti-clerical. Ministers and organized religion were not highly thought of and church attendence was much lower than today. The text of the Bible was regarded with nothing like the reverence attached to it by evangelicals today. Chritianity was considered a civilizing force more than a means of personal salvation.

Here's an interesing discussion from ABC news:

http://abcnews.go.com/sections/us/Politics/presidents_r...


I think the founding fathers would have thought posting the ten commandments in a courthouse bizarre and inappropriate. It's difficult to know for sure, since there's no record of it's having been done. But the fact that there's no record of it's having been done is pretty compelling in itself.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Robin Hood Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-27-03 12:43 PM
Response to Original message
58. The ten commandments were not a basis of our laws.
Where do you people get this crap from. The only enforceable commandments are thous shall not kill or steal. The rest are not enforceable. So how is it the foundation of this country? it's not. it's just a veiled excuse for the right wing Christian identity movement to impose and stir up crap in this nation in the hopes of starting a religious war.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Wwagsthedog Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-27-03 12:52 PM
Response to Original message
62. Why hasn't anyone mentioned the Napoleonic Code?
After all, much of Louisiana's body of law is based on it. Yes, I know, the french are bad these days but that won't make their influence go away.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
corarose Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-27-03 12:53 PM
Response to Original message
63. If people didn't like it they could have walked past it
I am sorry but I didn't see anything wrong with the Statue being there.
Flame me but they could have put other statues up along side of it with other Religions.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
not systems Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-27-03 12:56 PM
Response to Reply #63
65. Satan
What about a big statue of Satan?

Can I put that up also?

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AntiCoup2K4 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-27-03 06:12 PM
Response to Reply #65
187. Only if you put it up in his son's hometown
That would be Crawford Texas, of course :evilgrin:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Clete Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-27-03 01:16 PM
Response to Reply #63
73. If I had a religion it would be one of the pagan ones.
I would want naked statues of Apollo and Aphrodite to represent me, but you can just walk by them if you are offended.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Walt Starr Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-27-03 01:29 PM
Response to Reply #73
80. I would prefer a statue of The Goddess and The God engaged in the sex act
Edited on Wed Aug-27-03 01:34 PM by Walt Starr
To me, that is the single best expression of divine law ever, and yes, I mean EXPLICITLY ENGAGED IN THE SEX ACT. This is the Great Rite from which all that is sprang and thus is the basis of not only the law, but of everything.

If you don't like it, just walk by it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
edward Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-27-03 01:25 PM
Response to Reply #63
77. "Love it or leave it."
One more vote for democracy.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sandnsea Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-27-03 01:26 PM
Response to Reply #63
79. Moore refused to do that
An email from the Alabama Freethought Association:

"Apparently Roy Moore thinks the rotunda of the Judicial building is his private domain, as he has refused to let any other group place artifacts in with the 10 Commandment rock. A black group wanted a wall plaque of Martin Luther King Jr and was refused. And the American Atheists wanted their symbol in there too - that definitely was refused."

That's the difference between this set of Ten Commandments and the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court has a variety of references to historic laws and doesn't claim the Ten Commandments are a superior source of historic law than another.

And it is not about offending anybody. It's about Roy Moore insisting that he use his Bible and Religion as a guide to intrepreting and enforcing US Law. Putting those Ten Commandments at a Courthouse endorses using the Judeo-Christian religion in that way which is against everything this country was truly founded on.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Kusala Donating Member (864 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-27-03 12:56 PM
Response to Original message
64. Five Precepts
Buddha - The Pali Canon @ ~ 500 BC

1. Panatipata veramani sikkhapadam samadiyami
I undertake the precept to refrain from destroying living creatures.

2. Adinnadana veramani sikkhapadam samadiyami
I undertake the precept to refrain from taking that which is not given.

3. Kamesu micchacara veramani sikkhapadam samadiyami
I undertake the precept to refrain from sexual misconduct.

4. Musavada veramani sikkhapadam samadiyami
I undertake the precept to refrain from incorrect speech.

5. Suramerayamajja pamadatthana veramani sikkhapadam samadiyami
I undertake the precept to refrain from intoxicating drinks and drugs which lead to carelessness.

Can we also post up the Four Noble Truths of Buddhism in the court, please?






Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
StandWatie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-27-03 12:56 PM
Response to Original message
66. thou shalt have no other God's before me?
That is completely ass backwards of the American legal system.

No Graven images? Are we the Taliban now? Is that somewhere in the legal system?

There is a law about using God's name in vain?

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mikeytherat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-27-03 01:00 PM
Response to Original message
67. OK! Challenge Accepted!
This is very simple, and will only consume about five minutes of your time. Ready?

List each of the Ten Commandments, in order, and explain each commandment's relevance or correlation to American jurisprudence. Not just the Easy Three (no killin', stealin' or lyin'), ALL of them.

I've applied this test hundreds of times and have yet to have anyone explain how Commandments 1-4, "Thou shalt have no God before me", "Thou shalt make no graven images", "Thou shalt not take the name of the Lord in vain", and "Honor the Sabbath" have any basis, for anything, in American law.

I await your response.

mikey_the_rat -- a Christian who knows idol worship when he sees it
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Blue_Chill Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-27-03 01:05 PM
Response to Original message
71. Laws come from society period
Whatever society decides should be illegal is, it has nothing to do with god. Unless of course you think God would punish you for smoking weed or speeding.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sujan Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-27-03 01:12 PM
Response to Original message
72. lol
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Liberal Veteran Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-27-03 01:22 PM
Response to Original message
76. The 10C can stay if I can put this statue beside it....
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
not systems Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-27-03 01:32 PM
Response to Reply #76
81. Yea that one too.
How about an eight foot phalis from that Japanese fertility rite.

That should be fair and balanced.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Walt Starr Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-27-03 01:35 PM
Response to Reply #81
83. I want a statue of a male and female engaged in the sex act
Yep, full frontal demonstration of insertion right there in the rotunda.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sujan Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-27-03 01:38 PM
Response to Reply #83
85.  kamasutra
all of it
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mumon Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-27-03 02:00 PM
Response to Reply #83
90. The HECK with statues. I want performance art!
Live nude exotic dancers engaged in simulated safe sex acts to celebrate the first ammendment.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Walt Starr Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-27-03 03:53 PM
Response to Reply #90
115. Simulated safe sex acts are so passe'
Edited on Wed Aug-27-03 03:58 PM by Walt Starr
Use live action safe sex acts, no simulations but the real thing, in the rotunda, both heterosexual and homosexual. There's religion for ya!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Clete Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-27-03 04:00 PM
Response to Reply #90
117. Here ya go!
Strippers for Jesus: http://www.lightdancers.org/
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DarkPhenyx Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-27-03 02:12 PM
Response to Reply #76
94. I like that statue!
Where can I get one just like it? Seriously! What's the source?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Liberal Veteran Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-27-03 05:21 PM
Response to Reply #94
172. You can buy one here.....
Do me a favor and buy a 2.5 ton one and plop it down in the rotunda of a courthouse for me, would you?

http://www.abaxion.com/dxbap.htm
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Clete Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-27-03 05:32 PM
Response to Reply #172
177. Like the site.
I do research on stuff like this for my stories. Thanx.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Uzybone Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-27-03 05:36 PM
Response to Reply #76
178. and this one (if the mods allow it)
needs to be right up there next to that engraven piece of stone

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mumon Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-27-03 01:58 PM
Response to Original message
88. I can't believe you haven't been reading about this.
Edited on Wed Aug-27-03 01:59 PM by Kanzeon
Read this:

http://www.almd.uscourts.gov/Opinions/Glassroth%20v%20M...

This "display" is bascially a scam and a stunt to a) give money to D. James Kennedy's Coral Ridge "ministry" and to b) ensure that Roy Moore is on the fundie rubber chicken circuit for ages to come.

It fails the test required to have a SECULAR purpose.

Finally, you're utterly wrong about "where we get our current laws."

Try Solon (http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/features/2000/ca... ) instead of Moses, for starters.

We ARE NOT and have never been a theocracy.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
donco6 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-27-03 02:03 PM
Response to Original message
91. That wasn't the purpose of the monument in AL
It was purely a political statement by a governor wannabe, who knew this grandstanding trick would get his constituents inflamed and digging into their wallets.

Don't be suckers. It had nothing to do with the message of the Commandments, most of which don't apply, several of which are patently offensive to me, as a non-Christian. It was simply a message that "we Christians are the ones who ought to have sole control over this country."

Blech.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mikeytherat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-27-03 02:08 PM
Response to Original message
92. Please see post #67
Still waiting for your responses.

mikey_the_rat
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Tyler Durden Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-27-03 02:32 PM
Response to Original message
97. NO they DID NOT originate with the 10 c's.
http://www.duhaime.org/Law_museum/hist.htm

How about this for a legal timeline?

<snip>

2350 BC: Urukagina's Code

This code has never been discovered but it is mentioned in other documents as a consolidation of existing
"ordinances" or laws laid down by Mesopotamian kings. An administrative reform document was discovered
which showed that citizens were allowed to know why certain actions were punished. It was also harsh by
modern standards. Thieves and adulteresses were to be stoned to death with stones inscribed with the
name of their crime. The code confirmed that the "king was appointed by the gods".

2050 BC: Ur-Nammu's Code

The earliest known written legal code of which a copy has been found, albeit a copy in such poor shape that
only five articles can be deciphered. Archaeological evidence shows that it was supported by an advanced
legal system which included specialized judges, the giving of testimony under oath, the proper form of judicial
decisions and the ability of the judges to order that damages be paid to a victim by the guilty party. The Code
allowed for the dismissal of corrupt men, protection for the poor and a punishment system where the
punishment is proportionate to the crime. Although it is called "Ur-Nammu's Code, historians generally agree
that it was written by his son Shugli.

<snip>


1700 BC: Hammurabi's Code

This Babylonian king came to power in 1750 BC. Under his rule, a code of laws was developed and carved on
a huge rock column. The expression "an eye for an eye" has come to symbolize the principle behind
Hammurabi's code. It contains 282 clauses regulating a vast array of obligations, professions and rights
including commerce, slavery, marriage, theft and debts. The punishments are, by modern standards, barbaric.
The punishment for theft was the cutting off of a finger or a hand. A man's lower lip was cut off if he kissed a
married woman. Defamation was punished by cutting out the tongue. If a house collapses because the
builder did not make it strong enough, killing the owner, the builder was put to death. If the owner's son
died, then the builder's son was executed.

1300 BC: The Ten Commandments

<snip>

I didn't include commentary due the the "3 paragraph rule."


As you can see, the codification of law in civilization dates back to (guess where?)

TA DA....ANCIENT IRAQ!

The 10 Commandments are just that; COMMANDMENTS, issued by a deity. Even the Talmud doesn't refer to them as "laws."

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Solomon Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-28-03 12:43 AM
Response to Reply #97
195. I waited all the way to the end to see if anyone would go to
Africa as the birthplace for law and civilization. Nope. It's beyond the realm of belief isn't it? The Sphinx is older than anything built. The civilization that built it had to have laws. Oh, that's right, must have been aliens. On second thought, there were a couple (besides me) who did mention Egypt.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SoCalDem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-27-03 03:25 PM
Response to Original message
101. Some of our laws derive from English Law too, but
we don't have a statue of Queen Victoria...

Religious artifacts belong in CHURCH/TEMPLE/MOSQUE/CATHEDRAL...They do NOT belong in the GOVERNMENT buildings..


It actually trivializes them to have them there.. If individuals want to "worship" them, then they are FREE to go where they are.. No one is blockading the church doors, so people cannot get in to see their icons..


The government is for ALL THE PEOPLE..not just the Christians, or the Jews or the Moslems, or the Hindus, or the Sikhs, or the Buddhists..

If religion is kept sacred among the followers of that particular faith, it is great.. But to bastardize faith, by forcing it on others....that is just plain wrong !!

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
K-W Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-27-03 03:27 PM
Response to Original message
103. Anyone
who argues that the commandment statue in question is there for historical purposes is being intentionally niave. Even the judge himself has made it clear that it is about religion. Displayed alone, prominantly, and in the way they were, it was clearly a very religious symbol. Your argument would only hold water if the display emphesized the legal history aspect and would probably have to include other historical codes.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
zeemike Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-27-03 03:44 PM
Response to Original message
110. Are they the basis of our law?
If that is true then the first one that says You shall have no gods before me is not being enforced. It should be unlawful for Hindus or Buddhist to practice there religion in this country sense they want to erect a shrine to Vishnu.
And what about Remember the Sabbath and keep it holy Do we let our land lie fallow every seven years like the commandment says? Do we return all property to its owner and forgive debts every 50 years?
To display them and not follow them is hypocrisy in its purest form.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SaveABug Donating Member (289 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-27-03 03:46 PM
Response to Original message
111. Every society has religious dogma designed to prevent it from collapsing
The 10 commandments are simply another version in an attempt to provide societal cohesion. This is a nation of immigrants from many different countries, and thus, with many different historical perspectives and belief systems. To say

"where the western worlds laws came from? they all originated from those ten commandments."

is to not have a good grasp of history.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
goobergunch Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-27-03 03:46 PM
Response to Original message
112. This poster has been tombstoned
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BurtWorm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-27-03 04:14 PM
Response to Reply #112
126. I can't say I wish her/him to rest in peace.
Such single-minded religiosity!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SaveABug Donating Member (289 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-27-03 04:17 PM
Response to Reply #126
129. I'm guessing a younger individual
who needs some education. That's not too bad, really. This place is for information gathering. Don't mind me. I'll be over in the corner minding my own business now!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BurtWorm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-27-03 04:22 PM
Response to Reply #129
141. Don't hang there too long, SaveaBug.
Edited on Wed Aug-27-03 04:24 PM by BurtWorm
Nice to have you at DU.

:toast:

The thing I noticed about Kamika was the constant calling of attention to his/her Christianity. It's one thing if you post a cross as an avatar. That's like wearing a cross around the neck. But to always be stating explicitly in everyone post that you're a Christian...as if anyone forgot!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Kamika Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Aug-29-03 12:27 PM
Response to Reply #141
202. yeah
Lets badmouth her while shes banned
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Kamika Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Aug-29-03 12:27 PM
Response to Reply #141
203. yeah
Lets talk bad about her while shes banned
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mandyky Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-27-03 04:48 PM
Response to Original message
167. Because Americans are coveters and idolators
generally - money is our god and keeping up with the Jones is our mantra. It's called take hypocrisy out of the state building. This monument has become an idol.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Uzybone Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-27-03 05:21 PM
Response to Original message
173. totally disagree
Saying the western world got thier laws from the 10 commandments is completely wrong. All cultures have similar laws and yes there were lwas agains murder, stealing, incest even before the 10 commandments were allegedly made. Besides God also wrote not to bow down to idols....putting up all these religious structures isnothing but idolatry in my opinion. Its a sick perversion. Hold Gods laws in your heart and minds and actions, not in fucking stone structures. And i havent even talked about the US constitiution yet....
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
qanda Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-27-03 05:22 PM
Response to Original message
174. I usually stay off of threads
Which discuss religion in any way, shape or form. Mainly because my mother is a pastor and I have a hard time defending "real" Christian values which are in short supply these days.

Anyway, I didn't have a problem with the ten commandment being where they were. With that being said, some of the very people who were there crying for the ten commandments "graven image" to stay were the same ones calling me unpatriotic for marching against the Iraq war. I don't think they ever stopped to think about the double standard and how hypocritical it is to pray for a monument to stay while our country violates the very laws written on it. My take on things is that people should write the word of God on their hearts, as the Bible says to do, and then they wouldn't care about pieces of stone that can only hold words and never act out what those words truly mean.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Booberdawg Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-27-03 06:21 PM
Response to Original message
189. Nothing "bad" about the ten commandments - you miss the point
Gov't promotion of religion is unconstitutional.

Federal judge ORDERED it be removed. Moore is NOT above the law - he is not free to decide which lawful orders he will and will not obey. He should be removed from the bench IMO.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rustydog Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-27-03 06:24 PM
Response to Original message
190. The government shall not favor one religion over another
Your "christian" religion is being touted over athiesm, buddhism,
Judaism,Muslim,etc.
The constitution expressly forbids such action..it is not the innocence of the act, it is the act, period!
It is unconstitutional. Period.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Section_43 Donating Member (252 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-28-03 01:15 AM
Response to Original message
197. God is in the heart and soul, not in a chunk of granite
and that is where God needs to stay. Period.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Ein Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-28-03 01:18 AM
Response to Original message
198. You're full of it.
and SHIT, I mean. The laws of this country have jack shit to do with your ideology, and all to do with rights, even though the government seems unable to follow those laws.

This country is based on Buddhism, don't you know, would Buddhists do any of that shit?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Einstein Donating Member (10 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Aug-29-03 01:10 AM
Response to Original message
199. The Supreme Court Priority System
The Supreme Court won't bother to save the 10 commandments, they have the time to rule on legalizing sodomy in Texas.

How much more messed up can it get.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
janekat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Aug-29-03 01:35 AM
Response to Original message
201. There's only two commandments that are laws
Saw Bill Maher on Larry King and he raised a very interesting (and true) point.

The only two commandments related to the law are:

Thou shalt not kill and

Thou shalt not steal

The rest of them are things such as:

You shall not work the sabbath
Honor thy father and mother
You shall not covet thy neighbors wife
Thou shalt not commit adultery


These people are full of bunk!!!!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Sat Apr 19th 2014, 10:22 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (Through 2005) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC