Logical, non-offensive thought on the Ten Commandments & the US Government

[aden_nak]

I was having a debate (read: not an argument or a pissing contest, but an actual debate) with an acquaintence of mine regarding the Ten Commandments and whether it was logical or even just to erect them in public buildings, especially courthouses and the like. When it came back down to it, although he was willing to admit that the United States Government was not founded as a Christian nation (and that took some doing, might I add), he continued to insist that the morality of Christian doctrine is inherent in our system of laws.

So I thought about that for a moment, and decided to take the approach I ususally take when I am debating someone who takes a religious stance. I went back, looked directly at the text he was referencing, and challenged him to explain his position. Specificly, I asked why it was appropriate to display this list of laws when the truth is that the US Government has only really adopted 2 or 3 of them, at best. So we broke them down together.

1 - I am the Lord thy God. Thou shalt not have strange gods before me.

Not a law. In fact, we have the exact opposite concept clearly expressed in the First Amendment of the Constitution.

2 - Thou shalt not take the name of the Lord thy God in vain.

Blasphemy isn't exactly a national past time, but it's not a crime, either.

3 - Remember thou keep the Sabbath Day.

There is no law against breaking the Sabbath.

4 - Honor thy Father and thy Mother.

Again, there is no law about honoring your family, either.

5 - Thou shalt not kill.

Okay, this makes ONE.

6 - Thou shalt not commit adultery.

This is only ciminalized if you happen to be a Clinton, and thus was disqualified for the purposes of our discussion.

7 - Thou shalt not steal.

That's TWO. The right to personal property, again, was not unique to the Christian religion, however.

8 - Thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbor.

Depends on interpretation. Am I allowed to say that my neighbor has sex with goats? Sure. Am I allowed to say it on the front page of the New York Times? Maybe. Am I allowed to say it under oath, in a courtroom? Not unless it's true. We agreed to count this one as a "halfie".

9 - Thou shalt not covet thy neighbour's wife.

Well, why shouldn't I? He's busy with the goats. Besides, there's no law against this unless, again, you are a Clinton.

10 - Thou shalt not covet thy neighbour's goods.

No law against that, either. In fact, if it weren't for the coveting of goods, Capitalism would all but collapse.

The point of all this is that by the end, the guy I was debating was almost a little surprised to realize how much of what was in the Ten Commandments really has NOTHING to do with our Government. Now, granted, he is an otherwise rational and good-humored human being. So when I present him with a completely rational and logical argument, he actually considers it before allowing his knee to jerk. And one can't always expect that sort of thing when talking about such a personal issue as religion.

But I think this is a course that others might consider when they are trying to talk about this. And it has a chance of getting through, I think, because it says nothing bad or wrong about Christianity. It just points out that the Ten Commandments do not really apply to our legal system as much as many "believers" think they do.

[BurtWorm]

1. Well done! I recommended this for the Greatest page.

:toast:

[HereSince1628]

2. Interesting, the evidence speaks.

Of course you have to keep it framed with federal law, some states have laws about 2 and 3.

[aden_nak]

3. Yeah, we considered Blue Laws.

But even Blue Laws are a limited application of keeping the Sabbath.

[ProfessorGAC]

11. But Even Those States Don't Close Hospitals On Sunday

They pick & choose which businesses must be closed on Sunday and which can be open.

So, even where the "law" states no biz on the Sabbath, the law passers made exceptions.

I think the OP was ok on this one.
The Professor

[Jesus Saves]

4. Why not put up the Code of Hammurabi?

Hey I believe in the Ten Commandments - but from a pure governmental point of view the Hammurabi code was the first written law, period. It was a turning point in human history.

Here's the first ten...

"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; 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. "

[realisticphish]

16. we read those in government

and from then on, every time our prof asked what the result of a trial was, or what a punishment was, we would say "He shall be put to death!"

[Ranec]

5. I liked this blogpost on the subject...

http://www.pandagon.net/mtarchives/004700.html

She suggests that the fetish for the 10 commmandments has less to do with what they say than the symbol of a harsh, rule-making God.

[aden_nak]

10. Great read, and I agree that that's what it's all about.

Luckily, though, we are not yet at a point where they other side can just come out and SAY that. They have to hide behind a patently false "logical" rationale. So we still have the capacity to knock it down.

[Kansas Wyatt]

6. Okay, just for a hypothetical thought....

If the fundies were to get their way and just make the Ten Commandments federal law, can anyone else see all of the trouble all of the high priced evangelists and politicians would be in?

They would be screaming for seperation of Church and State.

[aden_nak]

9. Words without deeds. /wink

[Mist]

7. Nice work! I'm saving this for the next rw who believes the 10

commandments are the "basis of our law."

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

8. We only need one commandment.

"Thou shalt not stuff 47 tennis ball down your toilet."

It gives plenty of room for everyone. If one wants to be completely pure - stuff no tennis balls down your toilet.

If one ones to sin but a little - 4 or 5 should do the trick.

For bolder spirits - 10-12

For those into orgiasitic sinning 20-30

And, for those full of defiance and downright depraved - 45-46

Of course there would be those who insist on being beyond the pale.

Note: This was borrowed from a hilarious book by Alan Sherman.

[walldude]

18. Carlin also has one in his book about only needing

2 commandments. They picked 10 because it was a nice round number, top 10, 10 most wanted, etc. It was basically a marketing decision to have 10...

[wryter2000]

12. Graven images

I think that falls under #1, not sure. But one of the commandments states we can't have any graven images -- and what does your pal think Roy's rock is, if not a graven image?

And bearing false witness is only illegal if done under oath. So, yes, a halfie, but it doesn't require too much contemplation if you look at it that way.

[aden_nak]

13. Well, we were also considering libel and slander.

[wryter2000]

14. Ooops, you're right

Still a halfie.

I've been using this approach for a while, and it sure puts a hitch in their giddyup.

[killbotfactory]

15. Good job

The first commandment goes against our first amendment. It shouldn't be displayed in a monument at our god damned courthouses UNLESS it is displayed with other forms of law throughout history.

Seriously, how many legal scholars are out in front of the courthouses praying? It's all reverends whipping up ferver because they hate the first amendment.

[Joe Chi Minh]

17. I don't think

you understand at all the debt Western societies owe to Judaeo-Christianity, or Judaism and Christianity.

The Ten Commandments (as opposed to Suggestions), while binding on Christians and Jews, and in spite of their being continually breached by life-long sinners (the Christian Church always remains a church of sinners on this side of eternity), serve in the context of that court-house statue, as an excellent symbol of the Judaeo-Christian ethic.

A freeper, a while back, proudly pronounced that, in his view, pedophila was the worst possible crime, seemingly unaware that, if he didn't think in that way, there would be something seriously wrong with him. I was half expecting him to then proudly pronounce that he thought lynchings and concentration camps were unkind. But you know, he was by no means alone in "misunderestimating" Judaeo-Christian principles, as the bedrock of our Western values and, in fact, consonant with the values of *all* the mainstream religions (Hinduism, at least, qua Vedanta, i.e. in its purest form).

In Scandinavia, at the moment, there are learned professors and PHDs
writing learned treatises explaining why pedophilia is actually a meritorious activity and even beneficial to the children concerned. Apart from punching their lights out, in what way would atheists be able to respond, on the basis of a higher authority than their own personal opinion, and a horror and disgust ensuing from it, and in fact, historically shared by all societies, until our present God-forsaken, worldly-wise madhouse of the West?

The alternative to an over-arching State religion, is the widest possible pluralism, i.e. everyone making up their own value-system, and that can only lead to chaos - not merely in terms of the social anomie that has become increasingly the norm in our societies these days, thanks to the far right, but no possibility of a more or less agreed framework of reference for what *should* be laws and acceptable codes of behaviour, and what shouldn't.

In short, if you can't subscribe to a mainstream religion, you should at least understand your debt to Christianity and Christian culture (and to Judaism, implicitly), despite the often scandalous deficiencies of its human administration and adherents, historically.

I was struck by the helpless questioning of a non-plussed Guardian journalist, in the face of the Jamie Bulger murder. I had the impression that he was beginning to wonder where else a society could look for an explanation and remedial measures, without codified relgious values. Apparently the ten-year olds, or whatever they were, had watched hard-core sex videos of their parents. And in the UK, at least, the Bulger case was just a foretaste of the ever-more gross and violent sex-crimes by school-children from elementary-school upwards, which would soon be reported, fairly regularly.

[Warren Stupidity]

19. "pass time" not "past time"

Also your 10 seem a little unusual. Then again there is a lot of confusion regarding exactly what it was Moses was handed. For example see this discussion: http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/04153a.htm for the Catholic take on which 10 it is.

Their dissection into 4 laws regarding God and 6 regarding Man is interesting. What it boils down to is that the Judeo-Christian-Islamic god, like all gods and all religions and all societies disapproves of violating other peoples bodies and possesions, and frowns on lying about other people. Of course there are all sorts of exceptions that permit killing and taking and misstating the truth, otherwise how could the state go about its business as usual?

For your fundy friends just ask them to enumerate the religious references in the founding document of our republic: the constitution.

There is only one: the date at the end of the document.