| Author | Message | ||
| Fayyaz Vellani (Fvellani)
Junior Member Username: Fvellani Post Number: 120 Registered: 8-2002 |
Would it be different if it was, say, a court clerk who decided to stick this monument in the middle of the courthouse? | ||
| rich stephens (Dino2400)
Member Username: Dino2400 Post Number: 569 Registered: 10-2001 |
Arlie, and act of congress may have added those words to the pledge but it was a mistake and it has since been (or is being) rectified now. (Art, are you aware of where they are in that process? Is it legal to use the words "under god" in public schools in California at the moment? I certainly don't want my children pledging allegiance to the concept of monotheism. | ||
| Horsefly (Arlie)
Intermediate Member Username: Arlie Post Number: 1460 Registered: 5-2002 |
Good link Art. They hit upon the exact same point I refered to earlier. "(Another historical note worth mentioning: The words "under God" were not part of the original Pledge Of Allegiance as written by Francis Bellamy in 1892; they were added by an act of Congress in 1954." If Congress can add a religious overtone to the Pledge of Allegiance, why can't they allow a monument of the Ten Commandments to appear in a state office building? Strange as it may seem Art, I do agree with you that some form of consistant line needs to be established by the government concerning the "religion and state" co-existance, and that line needs to be adhered to. Kind of difficult to say "No religion in government" and then have a multitude of religious overtones throughout government proceedings and policies. But just because a few of the forefathers leaned toward the side of a "Doubting Thomas" (excuse the religious terminology), that doesn't mean that the multitude of other people who helped design the foundation of our government were all devil worshippers. If I remember correctly, didn't Paul Revere receive his signal from laterns hung in the tower of what famous building? Wasn't it the old North CHURCH??? I don't think a bunch of pagans constructed that building. By the way Art, when we start adhereing to the exact letter of the law and eliminate all religious references in government proceedings, be sure and take the same attitude toward the Second Amendment. If the government expects me to exercise my freedom of religion by reading my Bible on my own time, then I also expect to be allowed to exercise my right to bear arms in the same manner. After all, we MUST obey the law, eh Art??? | ||
| Randall (Randall)
Member Username: Randall Post Number: 654 Registered: 1-2003 |
Thanks for the link. I've heard that stuff from people many times, but never actually read it before. I personally didn't see that big of a deal about the 10 commandments being there, but the idiots protesting the move couldn't even list all 10 when interviewed on television. I did think it was an inapropriate spot for it though, and it would be best moved to a city museum with a plaque explaining the hitory and controversy behind it. | ||
| arthur chambers (Art355)
Intermediate Member Username: Art355 Post Number: 2495 Registered: 6-2001 |
Arlie: Take a look here, this may help you with your US history: http://www.geocities.com/SoHo/Studios/6418/diests.html Art | ||
| Horsefly (Arlie)
Intermediate Member Username: Arlie Post Number: 1459 Registered: 5-2002 |
You're right Art. This whole "God and country" loyalty that has been going on for over 200 years is just one big misunderstanding. I'm sure that EVERY signer of the Declaration of Independence had a pagan altar full of deer antlers and burning candles on their coffee table instead of the Bible. Thanks for setting us all straight. I'll forward your comments to the national office of the PTA so that they can alter the corriculum of every grade school in America to correctly teach the atheistic nature of our evil forefathers. | ||
| rich stephens (Dino2400)
Member Username: Dino2400 Post Number: 568 Registered: 10-2001 |
For the record, though George Washington attended church with his wife, he refused communion. Doesn't sound like much of a gung-ho Christian to me... | ||
| Rosso (Redhead)
Member Username: Redhead Post Number: 356 Registered: 12-2001 |
Arlie... Thats exactly what I was in ref. to as well. I got really confused and have been on ask.com and goggle double checking my memory!!! Art, I don't agree with you on everything said, but what Rich Stephens said "My problem with this case is that the Alabama Judge's objections were based on his own religious beliefs. He was not making a legal argument. That is inappropriate - I wouldn't want to have my fate decided by a judge that can't keep his religious beliefs separate from his public duty. " I do agree with this. | ||
| arthur chambers (Art355)
Intermediate Member Username: Art355 Post Number: 2490 Registered: 6-2001 |
Arlie: I was talking about the framers of the consitution, not the earlier immigrants, who great, great, great grandkids founded the United States. Hell, if you're going back that far, I'm sure the Asians, who later became the Indians, who came over before the Europeans sure were Christians, were they? Art | ||
| Horsefly (Arlie)
Intermediate Member Username: Arlie Post Number: 1458 Registered: 5-2002 |
Art, I must have read the wrong books in school. I thought that the Pilgrims and Puritans came to America to avoid religious persecution? Was not their desire to be free to worship their faith one of the foremost reasons for them to travel to America in the first place? So therefore your statement that America was not founded by religious people is not quite true. | ||
| Horsefly (Arlie)
Intermediate Member Username: Arlie Post Number: 1457 Registered: 5-2002 |
"don't be jealous of your neighbors oxen" I use to be jealous of my neighbor's oxen, but I found out that he has to take the oxen to the vet ever 5000 hours for service. Also, there are getting to be too many replica oxen flooding the vintage oxen market. Turns out that many of them are actually regular steers with aftermarket body parts. | ||
| arthur chambers (Art355)
Intermediate Member Username: Art355 Post Number: 2488 Registered: 6-2001 |
America was not founded by religious people. Do a little research, most of them were diests (sp), which in the 1700s was a code name for either an atheist or agnostic. Jefferson is a prime example, as was John Hancock, among others. As to the commandments being the foundation of our legal system: not true. The Code of Hammarabi was some thousands of years before the ten commandments and is arguably the foundation for same, and guess what? almost all of the 10 commandments were contained in that code. Additionally, there are about 10 different versions of these commandments, which do we pick? If if we are showing the foundation for our legal system, why not just the ten commandments, not the entire statement which includes the pre-amble, which merely states who the god is and why he should be obeyed? I guess if we wish to put our foundational material in, I guess we'll have to go to Iraq for some of their material. Art | ||
| rich stephens (Dino2400)
Member Username: Dino2400 Post Number: 566 Registered: 10-2001 |
My problem with this case is that the Alabama Judge's objections were based on his own religious beliefs. He was not making a legal argument. That is inappropriate - I wouldn't want to have my fate decided by a judge that can't keep his religious beliefs separate from his public duty. BTW, contrary to what was mentioned below: in federal court, one does not put their hand on the bible and only swears to tell the truth - no mention of god. Some states still do this, though. But the federal government does not. People may claim that the 10 commandments are universal moral beliefs. However, as far as I can tell, only 2 of the 10 are things that our society has seen fit to deem illegal (killing and theft). The others may be good ideas (don't lie, don't cheat on your spouse, don't be jealous of your neighbors oxen or maidservants or ass, etc. ) but nothing that I feel the government should have any hand in enforcing. | ||
| Rosso (Redhead)
Member Username: Redhead Post Number: 355 Registered: 12-2001 |
Arlie ---Agree 100%. Why is it that if one person does like something, everyone has to suffer. Everyone complains about personal freedoms, yet, they will not allow what OUR country was founded on to be displayed? Our forefathers came to this country WHY AGAIN???????? And by the way, I am now accecpting donations for anyone that does not like there money that says "In God WE TRUST". PM me, I will send you my address. | ||
| James Dunne (Audiguy)
Member Username: Audiguy Post Number: 258 Registered: 6-2003 |
Arlie, Well said. | ||
| Horsefly (Arlie)
Intermediate Member Username: Arlie Post Number: 1456 Registered: 5-2002 |
Art, the problem that I have with the folks who want the religious items removed from government property is this: Like it or not, America WAS INDEED founded by people who utilized a belief in GOD and Christianity as their foundation for our government and constitution. That IS the way our country was founded. So what is the big problem with displaying religious items that WERE INDEED a basis for our very government? If our government was founded by people who worshiped GIANT BLUE ELEPHANTS, what would be the harm in displaying giant blue elephants in government buildings? Our constitution does not REQUIRE anybody to worship God or Christianity; that just happens to be the founding religious followings of our founding forefathers. There is nothing inherently wrong with displaying religious items that simply relate to a historical fact. As long as we do not require any citizen to worship any particular religion, whose freedom is being harmed? I would venture to guess that even if I PERSONALLY volunteered to pay for the cost and transportation of that Ten Commandments monument to be displayed in that Alabama state office building, there would STILL be protesters who would be offended by it because it could be plainly seen on display in the lobby of that building. I wonder if I could file a lawsuit in court against COCA COLA because a Coke machine with a Coca Cola corporate logo is also in plain sight of numerous government buildings. Why am I FORCED to view a corporate logo when I go into a government building? That's not fair either. Where does it end? | ||
| John Do'h (Combover)
New member Username: Combover Post Number: 42 Registered: 8-2003 |
"I bring to you these 15 (CRASH), 10, 10 commandments for all to obey" Moses in History of the World-Part 1 | ||
| arthur chambers (Art355)
Intermediate Member Username: Art355 Post Number: 2484 Registered: 6-2001 |
Arlie: You're right. Those statements should be removed from where ever they are. It is imporoper for our government to establish a religion, and references to God are indeed a form of that. I have no problem with people believing in a diety, I just don't want my money, my time and my attention distracted by their faith. They can do, believe or whatever, as long as they don't shove it in my face, which unfortunately is what a lot of "believers" do. Too bad their not secure enough in their own beliefs to shut up about them. Art | ||
| Lloyd (Lloyd)
Junior Member Username: Lloyd Post Number: 115 Registered: 8-2001 |
I wonder if one of the reasons that the U.S. Supreme Court decided not to hear this case is that apparently the U.S. Supreme Court building has several dipictions of the 10 Commandments throughout the building. Including the following picture I lifted off the web of the top of the Supreme Court building showing Moses and the ten commandments :   God, I love the law. | ||
| Horsefly (Arlie)
Intermediate Member Username: Arlie Post Number: 1453 Registered: 5-2002 |
So all you legal authorities, please answer me this: Since church and state MUST be seperate according to the law, when will the U.S. Government order the Treasury Department to eliminate the words "IN GOD WE TRUST" from every piece of U.S. currency? And since it must be legal for those words to have appeared on U.S. currency for a hundred years, how come this does not set a long standing precedence for this sort of thing? Did not the U.S. Government insert the words "UNDER GOD" into the pledge of allegiance many years ago? Does this not set one more long standing precedence for this sort of thing? And does not every person who testifies in a court of law take a sworn oath on a Bible to tell the truth. They don't take an oath with their right hand on a Sears catalog or a phone book, now do they? Once again, another long standing state/religious connection. Since we have at least THREE long standing government approved state/religious situations, why is it so horribly UNCONSTITUTIONAL to have a monument of the Ten Commandments sitting in a state office building? It's not like anybody is being FORCED at gun point to read it. I think the government legal folks are really over a barrel on this one. How can the government say that religion and state must be seperated when the government's own past actions do exactly the opposite? For what it's worth, I think the judge should have complied with the order and removed the Ten Commandments monument so that he would be consistant with obeying the law. But if I was him, I would have wheeled it into my office and called it a "personal effect" and let it sit there for everybody to see, just like they would see a portrait of his family hanging on his office wall. That way, everybody would be happy. | ||
| Thomas I (Wax)
Junior Member Username: Wax Post Number: 170 Registered: 7-2003 |
"When a religion is good, I conceive it will support itself; and when it does not support itself, and God does not care to support it, so that its professors are obliged to call for the help of the civil power, 'tis a sign, I apprehend, of its being a bad one." -Ben Franklin, in Poor Richard's Almanac. The question depends upon whether there is a precedent at the grounds for the displays of historical interest upon which the laws were based. If it were found among other works significant to law over time, then there should be no problem with them remaining as they are. If, however, the building is simply a civil structure with no other references, then they're out of place. The idea of church-state separation was not primarily to limit the church in the affairs of state, but to keep the state out of the church, a sort of one-way door. Under what conditions was the 10 commandments memorial commisssioned and installed? When looking at America's history, there is an interesting dilemma one runs into . Do you go with the more influential founding fathers of the goverment towards church/state separation, or do you go back further, to the puritans and such, who despised the Anglican church, but established a civil society based largely upon religious law? One can respect the judge for standing up for himself - exercising free speech. After all, *that* is one of our primary founding principles. Too much ingratiation and too much separation are both a bad thing; forced imaginary boundaries. When all is said and done - What's interesting takes place *in* the courthouse... place your hand on the bible is the first option offered when being sworn in. | ||
| James Glickenhaus (Napolis)
Intermediate Member Username: Napolis Post Number: 2451 Registered: 10-2002 |
No. | ||
| chris cummings (Entelechy)
Member Username: Entelechy Post Number: 475 Registered: 5-2001 |
Definitely agree. You wouldn't happen to know Catherine Crier as well, would you? She's a friend and colleague of Morris' who lives in New York - we're working on a project together. | ||
| James Glickenhaus (Napolis)
Intermediate Member Username: Napolis Post Number: 2450 Registered: 10-2002 |
Chris My family has known and supported him for years. He's a great American. | ||
| chris cummings (Entelechy)
Member Username: Entelechy Post Number: 474 Registered: 5-2001 |
James - you know Morris? We were filming Big Fish in Montgomery and became friends with he and Susan. They have one of the most amazing homes I've ever been to. Not aware of the details here, but from my time in Alabama, it doesn't surprise me... | ||
| Jim E (Jimpo1)
Intermediate Member Username: Jimpo1 Post Number: 2458 Registered: 7-2001 |
I think Russ summed it up pretty well. | ||
| Russ Turner (Snj5)
Member Username: Snj5 Post Number: 424 Registered: 2-2003 |
Talking to my friends in Alabama, they are sick of this more than anyone as they descibe this as pure political grandstanding by a pompous judge. | ||
| James Glickenhaus (Napolis)
Intermediate Member Username: Napolis Post Number: 2444 Registered: 10-2002 |
Once again my friend Morris Dees led this fight. (Southern Poverty legal center). I'm proud to suport him. | ||
| arthur chambers (Art355)
Intermediate Member Username: Art355 Post Number: 2479 Registered: 6-2001 |
I've been watching the news about the Alabama Chief Justice, who has refused to obey a Federal Judge's order regarding the 10 commandments memorial. I wonder what those who live in the area think about a man empowered to enforce the law in his state, refusing to follow an order from a federal judge, when there was no appeal pending? Any thoughts? Art |