I've Almost Seen It All....

[LoArmistead]

Yep. The ten commandments are taken off of our court buildings even when a majority of the local townspeople are against it. God is forcefully taken out of our lives, "In God we Trust" is being taken off the stone walls of our court buildings that have stood there for almost 100 years. Children are not required to say "under God" in the pledge of allegience. Not that we should MAKE them do anything, but the sheer fact that, in our day and time, this thought is even up for debate is astounding. Why weren't these things being taken off of our court buildings 50, 70, even 100 years ago? Why now? The answer to that is a moot point, but I'm guessing it has a lot to do with the shift to liberalism in America and across the world.

 

The "Seperation of Church and State" is overused and spun out of proportion. In the constitution, the only thing it says about the seperation of church and state is that the government is not perimitted to force anyone in the country to practice a particular religion. Everyone is free to practice whatever religion they want, without any government intereference. It does NOT state that religious symbols cannot be placed on our federal buildings. This nation, after all, though hard to believe, WAS founded on the basic principles of christianity, hence why our law buildings have biblical scripture written on them. Modern law as we know it today is founded on the principles of the ten commandments. Anyone who says that "seperation of church and state" means we can't have "under God" written on anything has been watching too much CNN.

 

Let's look at it this way. If we have been going against the constitution all these years, writing "Under God" and "In God we Trust" on everything, why hasn't anyone said anyhting until the late 60's (the beginning of the leftist movement in America)? How could it all be going smoothly for 200 years, then BAM, "OMG we've been doing wrong all along and didn't even know it?!". BS. They weren't doing it wrong, in fact there is nothing anywhere in the constitution that forbids a religious marker being on any federal building, it's simply a flaw in the way the constitution was written that the liberals have taken and spun to the point that it is amost ridiculous. The constitution was written to be able to adapt to the times (Elastic Clause). These people that try to do everything to negate the constitution sure don't mind using the freedom's it provides to them to get their way.

[Kash]

Why weren't these things being taken off of our court buildings 50, 70, even 100 years ago?  Why now?  The answer to that is a moot point, but I'm guessing it has a lot to do with the shift to liberalism in America and across the world.

534981[/snapback]

 

You have to keep in mind that most of the immigrants that came to this country in the first 150 years were either from various European nations or from Hispanic nations, both of which have predominant Christian populations. It didn't matter if they were Catholic or Protestant or whatever, they were still Christians in a sense.

 

Immigrants entering this country over the past 25 years have been coming from Asian countries. Most of these people are NOT Christians. They are Muslim, Hindu, Buddhist, and Atheist. I'm guessing the reason why any mention of the Christian God would be offensive in public places is because of non-Christians that have been immigrating to this country over the past three decades. The right of religious freedom is being evoked now more than ever before because the sheer number of religions being represented in this country have sky-rocketed.

[LoArmistead]

You have to keep in mind that most of the immigrants that came to this country in the first 150 years were either from various European nations or from Hispanic nations, both of which have predominant Christian populations. It didn't matter if they were Catholic or Protestant or whatever, they were still Christians in a sense.

 

Immigrants entering this country over the past 25 years have been coming from Asian countries. Most of these people are NOT Christians. They are Muslim, Hindu, Buddhist, and Atheist. I'm guessing the reason why any mention of the Christian God would be offensive in public places is because of non-Christians that have been immigrating to this country over the past three decades. The right of religious freedom is being evoked now more than ever before because the sheer number of religions being represented in this country have sky-rocketed.

534985[/snapback]

 

 

Also keep this in mind, nowhere on any building does it say "In christian God we trust", it doesn't say, "one nation under christian God". It says "In God we trust" and "one nation under God". It makes no reference to any particular God. Any religion around the world, whether they be muslim, christian, catholic, Jewish, Hindu, or buddhist, ALL believe in some form of God or divine being or beings. OK, so it can be "In Allah we Trust" for all the Muslims care, Allah is their God. The Jews could translate it to "In Yeho we trust", for the Hindi people they could translate that to be any one of their multiple gods.

 

As for the atheists..plenty of them existed when this nation was founded, and in these times, just as in the 1780's, the atheists are SOL. 90% of Americans today believe in some form of 'God'. You can be atheist, fine. But to choose to live in this nation, a nation founded upon the teachings of our lord and savior Jesus Christ, you need to be emotionally able to handle "GOD" written on our buildings. If it offends you, tough %$, get the %&$^ out, we were founded on the pillars of christianity, and if you don't like it, no one says you have to stay here. Better yet, if you're an atheist and don't believe in God, what reason is there to be 'offended' by his name being mentioned? I don't believe in aliens, but when someone mentions "aliens" I don't shat my pants do I? I don't go whining to my congressman that someone mentioned a word that offends me.

 

Now don't get me wrong, I'm not an overly religious person, but I will give credit wher it's due. And "God" (whoever your religion's divine being is) is responsible for the way this nation has functioned for the past 229 years, and I presonally think it's gone quite nicely, what with us being the greatest nation on earth and all. And I don't plan on changing that anytime soon. God truley has blessed America, and I am not about to turn my back on that just over a few liberal spins on a n abused historical document.

[cybergrunt69]

edit: arguing in political threads is pointless. removing this post 'cause it don't matter to anyone. OCC is a computing forum, this post's OT, so goodbye.

 

 

 

never mind

Edited September 28, 2005 by cybergrunt69

[LoArmistead]

Nicely stated over-view on the "separation of church and state" - that's one thing that's pissed me off to no end for a long time...

 

I don't think it's the number of other religions that's eroding what the country's stance on religion used to be.  I think it has more to do with the "feel-good liberal touchy-feeley it's-not-your-fault whiney-arsed" people who are so incredibly loud in their complaining that get this pushed around.  Other people's religions usually stay with them, and they stay committed to it, and they aren't the ones doing the complaining - it's the ones with no religion who can't stand to be criticized (sp?) or hear/see anything that they disagree with.

534992[/snapback]

 

I coudn't agree more.

[94Camaro]

The Constitution guarantees freedom OF religion, NOT freedom FROM religion. Get over it.

 

 

Sorry for feeding the off topic discussion.

[wanksta]

im suprised a computer was not in there, "natural enviornment"

[BrewMeister2010]

Please read the essays.

EDIT: And kids get religion thrown at them by walking outside and watching TV. "Call now for your free Bible!"

 

Therefor, saying that they are only taught Evolution isn't entirely true.

534959[/snapback]

 

Well, I read the essays, and my views remain unchanged. I still see no solid evidence to support either hypotheses.

[battery]

wow, ok where to start...lets see...

Also keep this in mind, nowhere on any building does it say "In christian God we trust", it doesn't say, "one nation under christian God". It says "In God we trust" and "one nation under God". It makes no reference to any particular God. Any religion around the world, whether they be muslim, christian, catholic, Jewish, Hindu, or buddhist, ALL believe in some form of God or divine being or beings. OK, so it can be "In Allah we Trust" for all the Muslims care, Allah is their God. The Jews could translate it to "In Yeho we trust", for the Hindi people they could translate that to be any one of their multiple gods.

 

 

first off ..you're right it does say in God we trust...God...as is a christian god...otherwise it would be in a god we trust..notice the capitalization...

 

 

 

As for the atheists..plenty of them existed when this nation was founded, and in these times, just as in the 1780's, the atheists are SOL. 90% of Americans today believe in some form of 'God'. You can be atheist, fine. But to choose to live in this nation, a nation founded upon the teachings of our lord and savior Jesus Christ, you need to be emotionally able to handle "GOD" written on our buildings. If it offends you, tough %$, get the %&$^ out, we were founded on the pillars of christianity, and if you don't like it, no one says you have to stay here. Better yet, if you're an atheist and don't believe in God, what reason is there to be 'offended' by his name being mentioned? I don't believe in aliens, but when someone mentions "aliens" I don't shat my pants do I? I don't go whining to my congressman that someone mentioned a word that offends me.

 

 

SOL, eh? so atheists don't have the same rights as other americans? just because the nation was founded on certain principles doesn't make it right...if you have such a big deal with atheists trying to change the placement of God in the gov't then tough %^(*&, you can get the %^(*& out. people arn't just arguing about it being offensive...we're arguing about it being wrong..and unconstitutional...

 

 

Let's look at it this way. If we have been going against the constitution all these years, writing "Under God" and "In God we Trust" on everything, why hasn't anyone said anyhting until the late 60's (the beginning of the leftist movement in America)? How could it all be going smoothly for 200 years, then BAM, "OMG we've been doing wrong all along and didn't even know it?!". BS. They weren't doing it wrong, in fact there is nothing anywhere in the constitution that forbids a religious marker being on any federal building, it's simply a flaw in the way the constitution was written that the liberals have taken and spun to the point that it is amost ridiculous. The constitution was written to be able to adapt to the times (Elastic Clause). These people that try to do everything to negate the constitution sure don't mind using the freedom's it provides to them to get their way.

 

 

there are tons of different reasons why people probably didn't bring it up til the 60's... and you're right no where does it specifically state that there shouldn't be religious markers on federal buildings...but that doesn't mean there should be...oh the elastic clause...gotta love it...gives us people the ability to adapt to a new understanding of the way things should be done...like amending the constitution to no longer allow religious markers on federal buildings...or amending it so that every federal building also contains a religious marker for every known religion...i mean..why should we limit ourselves to christianity? the muslims have jsut as good a chance of being right as the christians do...so why shouldn't what the hell symbols they have not be sittin' right next to the bible or that cross?

 

bah i could go on all day. but i know i'm wasting my time...i'm gonna go play some css...

[Kamikaze_Badger]

In which case, that's your choice. I see plenty of evidence to support evolution, and if you wish, I will take the time to pull it out for you.

 

 

LoArm:

 

http://www.religioustolerance.org/chr10cj1.htm

 

It is important to remember:

bullet There are absolutely no problems associated with the public display of the Ten Commandments, or any other religious statements, as long as they are located on land or in buildings owned by religious institutions, or by individuals or by companies. In fact their right to display religious material is protected by the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution.

bullet There are absolutely no problems if the Decalogue is shown in government offices, public land, courts, public schools as part of a cultural display containing similar material from other religions, and from secular sources.

bullet Problems can arise if a Ten Commandments document is shown in a government office, public land, courts, or public school:

bullet By itself in isolation, as in the Texas case.

bullet As part of a cultural display which excludes comparable secular documents

bullet As part of a cultural display which excludes comparable documents from other religions as in the Kentucky case.

 

Past courts have interpreted the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution as requiring a separation of church and state. That is, the government cannot promote:

bullet Secularism in preference to a religious lifestyle.

bullet A religious lifestyle in preference to secularism.

bullet One religion as being superior to any other faith.

 

One factor that does not appear in the media reports is that the Ten Commandments is actually formed of over twenty instructions. They can be grouped into two parts:

bullet The first section is a series of orders that people must recognize Yahweh as the only deity. These deny the legitimacy of other religions and a secular lifestyle. This is a purely religious document. It threatens non-believers with retribution from God which will affect the non-believer, their children, their grand-children, etc. It produces some real First Amendment concerns since it promotes a specific religious tradition. It also implies that other religions are without merit.

bullet The second part is a slightly longer series of commands forbidding such behaviors as lying, stealing, committing adultery, murdering people, etc. This set of behavioral laws were combined with elements of Pagan Roman law, and facets of other legal systems to produce systems of laws common to many jurisdictions in the western world.

 

Most Americans are aware of the second part, particularly the commandments against murder, stealing, and committing adultery. A surprising percentage are unaware of the threats and religious commands which form part of the first section. However, many followers of non-Judeo-Christian religions are very aware of such phrases as "Thou shalt have no other gods before me." Some find the words to be very offensive.

 

 

I have nothing against them posting the second half. However, if the first half was posted, then I would agree with at least that part being removed. If it were posted among OTHER religious articles (such as the Wiccan Rede, whatever the rulings of the Buddha were, Muslim rules, etc), then I wouldn't mind it being there. It would actually be nice to see those there, if they meant to represent a tolerance of religion.

 

However, I may just be rambling on about random things again... I have a very short attention span.

 

But I do truly get tired of people who go about saying "ZOMG FRST AMD SEZ U CNT HV THT!" when it comes to "under God" or "in God we trust." While the Christian God is commonly referred to as God alone, and one can interpret those phrases as Christian statements from that, I don't mind them.

[LoArmistead]

you just said it was unconstitutional... then turned around saying there is nothing in the constitution stopping us from putting religious sayings on our buildings.

 

Then again, you are so...athesit you aren't thinking clearly. To Muslims, Allah is God, with a capital G. To Jew, Yeho, Yahway, however you want to spell it, is their God, with a capital G. In essence, Allah, "God", and Yeho are all the same thing. All three religions believe in basically the same God.

 

It does not mean that atheists shouldn't have any rights, but as I said above, why should you CARE if we have God written on our buildings? If you don't believe in him what effect does it have on you? Nothing. You are just trying to make something out of nothing, just as the liberals have done. I don't believe in Darwinism, but when I walk by a car that has a Darwinist sticker on it, I read it, smirk, and go about my day. I don't protest it and lobby to the sticker taken off the car. Something out of nothing... there is no doubt in anyone's mind (if there is then you'd better not post here because you're stupid) that this nation was founded on christianity. Thus, our judicial system was founded on christianity, and it has been made clear since the beginning. Why should it change just because a minority of a minority of people are atheist or justlike making waves?

 

 

and KB: thank you, that link reinforces what I am saying. We were not founded upon Vishnu, Saktha, or the Dalai Lama. If a town wants to petition that their courthouse put a statue of buddha on the front steps, so be it. I will laugh...but the people have spoken. But there should be NO reason why any of the ten commandements be prohibited.

[94Camaro]

You do realize, that to remove all signs of a religion from our government, would in effect be recognizing humanism, which has been recognized by the courts as, you guessed it, a religion. Uh oh, now the government is back to 'promoting' religion.