for those of you that haven't read monkeywrench's article, it goes into a little more detail or the chain of events.


and for all of you that have a problem with this.....my question to you is...

are you going to sandblast the entire supreme court building?

Too often, visitors do not see the corresponding pediment and columns on the east side. Here the sculpture group is by Hermon A. MacNeil, and the marble figures represent great lawgivers, Moses, Confucius, and Solon, flanked by symbolic groups representing Means of Enforcing the Law, Tempering Justice with Mercy, Settlement of Disputes Between States,
and Maritime and other functions of the Supreme Court.

the large oak doors leading into the courtroom where the judges come in are inscribed with the 10 commandments...

many of the buildings and monuments are inscribed with religious statements, or depict religious characters....when is this all going to end? are they going to change all this because some over zealous judge gets bored and needs something to cause grief over? gimme a break...its been there 200 years....what does it hurt now....or have we gone from being a country of morals and values and now we are all offended because we are not living by these truths anymore?

 

this statue of moses holding the tablets with the 10 commandments is found inside of the Supreme Court Building

 

Fisher,

A few points.

First off, I agree, it can get silly, and where does it all end.

HOWEVER,

Just because something is there, ie it's been there 200 years, does not necessarily justify it being there. I think you'll get my point here without my needing to elaborate.

Also, for the umpteenth time RELIGION DOES NOT EQUAL MORALS. Christianity DOES NOT have the market cornered on being "right" or "good".

It has nothing to do with morality, and everything to do with that "morality" being "pushed" onto people, for lack of a better term, through the symbols/believers of a certain religion, REGARDLESS of what that religion may be.

I KNOW that you understand that idea Fisher, and I don't think you can argue with it at its basic level, the problem is, it can get taken too far.

Waxy

 

this is the east side of the Supreme Court Building...notice the one in the middle? Moses holding the two tablets

 

this is the door that seperates the courtroom from the central hallway...oak doors and what adorns them? Oh my...is that
it is...its the tablets with 10 Roman numerals on them...I sure hope the big court keeps its eyes closed in its own building or else...we the tax payers are gonna have to fix all this

 

There is scant evidence that, even when the citizenry were fond of paying lip service to such beliefs when erecting public buildings, that they lived by them in practice any more than they do today. (Slavery and the extermination of Native Americans come to mind...)
FWIW I am not a theist, but observe the few Christians I have met and admire for their integrity are effective proponents of Christianity because they lead exemplary lives.
If ya'all really want to promote your God, it isn't about school prayer, a chrome fish on your decklid, or a hunk of rock in a courthouse, but about actually living by your professed beliefs, for others witness what you do.
It's easier to carve the Ten Commandments into a dead stone then live by them.

 

I agree just because its always been there doesn't mean it is justified...but just because one or two people are now offended by it doesn't mean that it justifies removing it....time after time, I am offended by things that our government does...does my life go on without making a big stink out of it all? Yes....why must we continue removing things our nation has built upon because somebody somewhere is offended....remember the old saying can't please everybody all the time? why must we keep trying to appease a small group of people? in the above mentioned article, over 70% in Alabama and nationwide want the monument to stay...why must a little under 30% decide what happens to the rest of us?

I agree that Chritianity doesn't equal morals...but I think you will agree that 10 Commandments set a good moral foundation.... I admit that many have high morals and may have nothing to do with any organized religion....but why is it assumed that we're shoving them down the throat of others just because a monument is in a public place?

 

I agree....and as such, you will not find a crome fish on my F250 ..... but I don't see a problem with a monument depicting part of our belief, or public (whether it be in Congress --which still opens each session w/prayer -- or a football game) prayer. Why do we automatically lose our freedom of speech? Why is it that because we are Christians, we are supposed to do the "Chrisitian thing" and let it slide...why are we supposed to be the ones to give up on our beliefs because somebody else is offended? Why can we not pray in public because you don't want to hear it? Many of you on this forum that are against organized religion say that it is mindless...that we follow blindly ...but then when we make a stand we are being ridiculious and pushy with our beliefs? I always believe that actions speak louder than words, but at the same time the Words can't just disappear either...if they did FTE would be history

 

Um, where it that illegal?
School prayer in public schools is state sponsorship of generic theism, but the absence of mandatory prayer or mandatory time out to pray/reflect as a part of the schedule of public institutions cannot possibly stop prayer itself. There are plenty of places for organised group prayer. They are called churches, mosques, synagogues, ashrams, ...
Prayer is Constitutionally protected speech, but protected does not equal a requirement to organisationally integrate even very popular speech into secular areas.
(There is the argument, most famously advanced by the Taliban, that there are no secular areas and that society must be permeated by a particular religious view. This highlights the essential conflict between religion and constitutional democracy. Constitutional democracy of the American style was built to keep zealots from persecuting dissenters as had been the European habit for centuries. Religion is not normally the benign, toothless phenomenon we now see in the US. Normally (like elsewhere in the world) it is an excuse to exalt believers of one kind from another and justify the disempowerment of the weaker group.
It wasn't too long ago that varieties of Christianity itself were grounds for great prejudice between groups. (Which is why the election of the Catholic JFK was a breakthrough for Catholics.)The (IMO justified) dislike of great religious influence in government is rooted in observations of the behavior of believers, who even if their "book" is benign often use power gained by religious influence for nefarious purposes. A Google search of Jeffersons letters is instructive on how that was viewed by the Founders. The checks and balances of the Constitution were, it is also worth noting, conceived when there was no important non-theist thought in America. The problem was getting theists to behave together.
Unlike democracy, religion has no understanding that there should be checks on its power, since that power is presumed to derive from God. (Note the bitter resistance of the Catholic Church to handing over pedophile priests to secular law enforcement, and the devastating consequences of their considering their Church outside the law.) Given that worldview, believers may do anything and justify it by religion.
Given that situation, a _strictly_ secular State government is needed to ensure that no one group has undue influence.

 

I understand school prayer can still be accomplished if left up to the individual...I know we now have moments of silence (at least for now--- who knows what the future holds) where you can take the opportunity to pray.

I know that many religions do "bad & evil" things in the name of their religion...but were talking about a harmless monument...a monument that because it was put in a public place...a place paid for by the 70+% that wanted the judge in office and wanted the monument in place...a place filled with officials put their by the people of thier state....that because of the "type" of monument and the "location" of public place that all of a sudden religion is being "forced" onto somebody else...I don't buy it. If there are places I don't want to go because of the things in those places, then I don't go there...if I still need to go, then I ignore the things that offend me. When I go to a public bookstore and I look at the hunting magazines...right next to the very place that I must go in order to purchase a great hunting magazine with a nice rack on the front (no pun intended ) there is a plastic sealed magazine with some naked women on it. right there in plain sight...right there where people who don't want to see it still have to pass by it....in my opinion, this is the same...NEVER, EVER ..are we going to be able to please everyone...and I fear in the next couple of years that everyone will become offended by everything and who knows what all kinds of banishments will come up because of this. Many of you have been anti-government in alot of areas discussed on this site...and right now because its religious it may be ok for you to sit by...by your time is coming...soon you will be required to protect your rights or lose them....hope you don't lose out when they point to current trends

 

fisher,

I find it interesting that you are so defensive of these symbols and your "right" to display them in public buildings . Is it just because they are "your" symbols, or is it because you believe we should have whatever symbols we want on dispay in public buildings.

I find it VERY difficult to believe that you would be so adamant in your stance if the symbols in question were Moslem or Hindu in nature.

You seem to want to play the victim here, and I don't buy it.

Waxy

 

.

ahhhhh waxy...nothing gets past you does it?

I'm not near as concerned about the symbols.....I know your gonna find that hard to believe. The thing that concerns me is the judicial system's power. The very things we have grown to think of as part of our great nation are under attack...our pledge, different religious opinions, marriage, freedom of speech, etc. What really upsets me about this whole thing is that one judge can be offended at what another says and that they can injunction each other to death...and what does it accomplish...a lot of wasted tax payer's dollars, it causes division, and it pits different groups agains each other.

I'm concerned that the pledge of allegiance that was once so proudly recited daily by each American now is under attack because of the word's "one nation Under God." It doesn't specifiy the God of the Bible, Allah, Budda, or anyone else...it just says God...but now all of a sudden the government is promoting Christianity by American's recieting this...now all of a sudden its un-Constitutional? That the traditional American marriage is now under attack because some judge decided that marriage is not between a man and woman, but could possibly be between two people of the same sex? That the right to put religous symbols like "In God we Trust", or the 10 Commandments, or lets face it --- even a picture of Jesus somewhere in a public forum is now unconstitutional....

MY CONCERN IS THIS: If we don't stop them now...when do we all of a sudden get off our rears and do something about it? When we've lost all of these freedoms...No...then it will be too late! If we just keep sitting by, it won't be long before we will end up as a nation of mediocrity...a nation of immorality...a nation where anything goes and anyone has the power to overturn anyone else...a nation where nothing is sacred...a nation filled with lawlessness (partly because we can't figure out which ones are consitutional and which ones aren't) and reckless abandon. Even you agreed that it gets downright silly...so how much longer do we just stand by and let it happen?

I think Judge Moore did what he should have. He stood by his belief. He took an oath (which concidentally was on a BIBLE...and I'm sure somewhere in there mentioned the words "so help me God") to uphold the laws of this country and his state. To protect the very freedoms that he was booted for.

All that is necessary for evil to flourish is for good men to stand by and do nothing.

 

The Pledge of Allegiance reference to God was slipped in during the Cold War, and if one is to use history as an argument then since we went longer without the Pledge, and it was not written into the Constitution by the Founders or by subsequent amendments, its place is tenuous.
The analogy of the bookstore brings up interesting points.
A bookstore is a private business with public access, not an institution of the State, and as such it reflects the owners choice of what to offer for public choice or rejection. The public can take or leave it without penalty.
A courthouse is an institution that, as required by law, citizens are bound to interface with. More than that, they are at the mercy of the State, which history indicates must be kept from partiality to one group over others lest Justice under Law be corrupted.
The judicial arm of the government was created as a check on the others, because otherwise majority whim would simply crush minority rights.
The insistance of those who invoke the law and Constitution against what they regard as the leftovers of obsolete beliefs is often sustained by the law, which though previously unenforced is nonetheless valid until changed by legislative act. It is so strongly written that even theists who read it and are charged with enforcing it as written usually do so.
The panel that removed Roy Moore did so because, unequivocally, they found he broke the law and violated his sworn (on his favored book, BTW) oath of office. It was not a vote on God, it was a vote on wether Roy Moore obeyed the law.
If enough people want to change our previous laws to embed current Christian (and then agree specifically what that is!) doctrine overtly in US government institutions they can vote to change the Constitution and do so.
That would be quite the entertaining squabble.

 

- Pledge: The "Under God" portion of the pledge was added during the height of McCarthyism in a fit of paranoia, not piousness.

- Religious opinions: I fail to see how any of this has hampered anyone's ability to talk about religion. If anything we're talking about it more.

- Marriage: I also fail to see how allowing gay marriages could possibly devalue anyone's heterosexual marriage. Why should anyone care? (Unless, perhaps, it conflicts with their religious beliefs?)

- Freedom of speech: No one was prevented from speaking as a result of this. On the contrary, it sparked a nationwide debate resulting in a massive surplus of free speech.


What is the appropriate measure of the immorality of a Constitutional Republic? And if that measure is Christian values, at what point does the United States become a Constitutional Theocracy?

Let me be clear: If anyone was to try to prevent you from practicing Christianity I would join forces with you in outrage and action. I believe in the Constitution, and it's position on your right to practice your religion is explicit.

However, I'd like you to ponder this: Freedom of Religion is also Freedom to NOT have Religion. Any legislation that is motivated by religious beliefs rather than secular public interest threatens everyone's right to not participlate in that religion.

 

It is the issue of taking something away that we, as Americans, hold sacred. That is what fisher_of_man was getting at – I think. It just turned religious because everything boils down to that or politics when it concerns the rights of others.

What I have to say is this:
Religious – We are not to get in God’s way of defining this generation. If that’s where America is headed, then leave it alone or get steamrolled like Judge Moore did. He disobeyed the law and God’s commandment. Jesus tells us not to meddle in the affairs of this perverse generation, because what He has already proclaimed will happen, whether we get mauled attempting to stop it or not.

Political – This is a nation that holds no religion above another and it places no religious action on anyone. Obey the laws of the land, if you do not like them, push to have them changed. That’s it. That’s all we can do. Despite my feelings of bravado for this man – Moore broke the law.

How to slow down the progress: Stop electing lawyers into public office. These guys know how to manipulate the law as they see fit. Know who you are voting for!!! That sounds strange, but you would not believe the number of people who have no clue.

How to stop it: You can’t.

What is happening is circumvention, created by (among a host of other events) rogue filibusters, IMHO, and I think that’s where fisher_of_man was coming from.