10 Commandments come down

Fairweather Pure · Post by **Fairweather Pure** » August 21, 2003, 1:46 pm

http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dy ... ge=printer

I've been following this ever since it became an issue. A quick summary for those not in the know:

Chief Justice Roy Moore, a judge in Alabama, recently had a statue of the 10 Commandments installed outside the state judicial building. With the whole seperation of church and state being a hot topic, it seemed he was trying to make a point. Well, he got the attention he was craving, and was told to remove the monument by U.S. District Judge Myron Thompson. Roy Moore took it to the Supreme Court, standing firm on his religious backing and absolutley refusing to remove the monument, despite court orders. While it has been in the hands of the Supreme Court, Roy has been adamant about never, ever, removing the commandments (despite the court rulings and the State facing fines of $5,000 per day as long as they remained. He was expressing confidence in God and the Supreme Court to keep the commandments in place. The Supreme Court said no. I can't wait to see what he does now

This has some potential, I knew that when I first read about it a few months ago. Be sure to keep an eye on it.

Here's an older article, but there are some pretty crazy ones out there if you look hard enough.

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,94764,00.html

This is one example of why church and state need to be seperate. Zealots and fanantics still gain power and try to push their personal agendas. It was a very poor choice to use tax payer money to finance his little crusade.

Voronwë · Post by **Voronwë** » August 21, 2003, 1:48 pm

incoming posts from some people who will say:

our laws cum from them comandments, they are legal dokeemints.

Fairweather Pure · Post by **Fairweather Pure** » August 21, 2003, 1:52 pm

http://www.cnn.com/2003/LAW/08/14/alaba ... mandments/

I found an old report with some of the things he actually says. This stuff is golden.

"The question is not whether I will remove the monument," Moore added. "It is not a question of whether I will disobey or obey a court order. The real question is whether or not I will deny the God that created us."

This guy is KooKoo for CoCoa Puffs.

Kylere · Post by **Kylere** » August 21, 2003, 1:57 pm

You have to realize that this is from a state that required NATIONAL GUARD TROOPS TO DESEGREGATE IT'S SCHOOLS.

Dumb redneck bastards.

Krimson Klaw · Post by **Krimson Klaw** » August 21, 2003, 2:34 pm

Our laws come from them ten commandments, they are moral documents.

Voronwë · Post by **Voronwë** » August 21, 2003, 3:00 pm

yes "dont steal, don't kill" are definitely concepts unique to 1200 BC Judaism...and definitely entered into society on planet earth through Moses' talk with God.

And there are definitely laws in the US prohibiting:

1. Thou shalt have no other god than me.

Congress shall make no law abridging the freedom of....religion

2. though shalt not make any graven images (idols)

very illegal...

3. though shalt not take the Lord's name in vain

... freedom of speech....

4. Remember the Sabbath and keep it holy

see #1, and last i checked i can work on Sundays

5. honor thy father and mother

6. dont kill

7 dont steal

8 dont commite adultery

9. dont bear false witness against neighbor

10. dont covet neigbors property.

#6,7,and 9 are arguably crimes in our society. 30% seems kind of low.

The US legal system arises from the British legal system. Which is basically rooted in the Magna Carta.

What is the Magna Carta? in 1215 a bunch of barons in England banded together, and had enough strength in numbers to put together an agreement between the King and other nobles to eliminate arbitrary rule. To that point the king could do whatever the fuck he wanted to whoever, etc. some other crap in it too...

http://www.bl.uk/collections/treasures/ ... ation.html

#39: "No freeman shall be captured or imprisoned ... except by lawful judgement of his peers or by the law of the land".

it basically has some flowery language about God, the church in Rome as well as in England, and settling some political business between the two. basically that the church of England is free to appoint people to its positions without consent of the King. That is the crux of all that.

But there is nothing at all alluding to the 10 commandments from what i have read.

and if the 10 commandments are legal documents here, then why is not the Book of Leviticus also a legal document? why are those laws regarding eating pork, shellfish, and all those other things not law here?

yes the Church had immense political authority across Europe for over a thousand years. what city is the Vatican in? Roman law did not arise from Judeic religious works. the laws that ruled Israel from 1200 to ~700 did not have any kind of real meaningful impact on the formation of Western law. For starters the people who really laid the foundation were not Jews, and Christianity did not exist at the time.

And things such as Don't Kill, Don't Steal were obviously part of legal codes predating the 10 commandments by hundreds if not thousands of years. So it hardly gets credit for that. In fact "an eye for an eye" is not truly from the Old Testament. It is from Hammurabi's code in 1700 BC predating Moses by 500+ years.

196. If a man put out the eye of another man, his eye shall be put out.

there is no mention of who punishes crime (besides God) in the 10 Commandments.

Draco in 621BC in Athens codified laws expressly giving the authority to the state to punish crime and enforce law.

In 450 BC in Rome, the 12 Tables were written which are regarded as the foundation of modern Western Law. Describing things like property rights and so on. And it started the important precident of laws being written, and not arbitrarily interpretted.

Kylere · Post by **Kylere** » August 21, 2003, 3:18 pm

Damn Voronwe, well done

Krimson Klaw · Post by **Krimson Klaw** » August 21, 2003, 3:20 pm

I did not read it, but I am sure it was good too. I was just biting like he wanted me to.

Fallanthas · Post by **Fallanthas** » August 21, 2003, 3:21 pm

Beat me to it Vor.

Krimson Klaw · Post by **Krimson Klaw** » August 21, 2003, 3:26 pm

Ok I read it. Maybe you thought I said the ten commandments were legal documents? You said that, not me. I typed out that the ten commandments were moral documents. Good response otherwise though.

Adex_Xeda · Post by **Adex_Xeda** » August 21, 2003, 3:26 pm

The true battle is for people's hearts.

Chance people's hearts, and their laws will naturally reflect their sentiments.

That judge is fighting the wrong battle.

Krimson Klaw · Post by **Krimson Klaw** » August 21, 2003, 3:32 pm

I dont prescribe to fighting to keep the ten commandments up. Would I like them to stay up? Yes. Will I fight because someone points out that it offends them? No. I would be upset if someone posted some muslim proverbs in a courthouse, or posted in a courthouse how worshipping God instead of Satan is for the weak minded, so I can empathize here. I abide by the laws of my country.

Kilmoll the Sexy · Post by **Kilmoll the Sexy** » August 21, 2003, 4:01 pm

Voronwë wrote:
196. If a man put out the eye of another man, his eye shall be put out.
there is no mention of who punishes crime (besides God) in the 10 Commandments.

You were doing good, then you got greedy.

Exodus 21:23 But if any harm follows, then you shall give life for life, 24eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot, 25burn for burn, wound for wound, stripe for stripe

The 10 commandments were not the only things that were given as rules to follow by God. If you really wish, I could lay out a whole lot more than you wish to see.

Voronwë · Post by **Voronwë** » August 21, 2003, 4:12 pm

Kilmoll the Sexy wrote:
Voronwë wrote:
196. If a man put out the eye of another man, his eye shall be put out.
there is no mention of who punishes crime (besides God) in the 10 Commandments.
You were doing good, then you got greedy.

Exodus 21:23 But if any harm follows, then you shall give life for life, 24eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot, 25burn for burn, wound for wound, stripe for stripe

The 10 commandments were not the only things that were given as rules to follow by God. If you really wish, I could lay out a whole lot more than you wish to see.

Kilmoll, you apparently dont understand what i said.

And it is obvious i know the Torah contains laws beyond the 10 commandments, since i mentioned Leviticus- a book of laws...

The quote i made was from 1700 BC.

Moses led the Jews out of Egypt (Exodus) around 1100 BC.

So you are telling me that Hammurabi's code copied from the Torah, even though it predates it by 500 years? I think you don't understand what i was saying here....

My point was clearly that the Bible borrowed from other traditions (as all human works do) in its codification of laws. In the instance of eye for an eye, they simply put in some of Hammurabi's Code, that had pervaded the region for the previous couple of centuries.

My post said nothing to imply that i didnt think the Torah was full of laws and rules (it is).

My post was clearly pointing out that the roots of Western Law are found in Greece and Rome, and not the 10 Commandments. WHich means there is no reason the 10 Commandments should be on the wall of a government building in the United States.

You quoting that excerpt from Exodus, further proves the points i was trying to make. A point i apparently made well enough for at least 3 people to read and understand.

kyoukan · Post by **kyoukan** » August 21, 2003, 4:24 pm

I think its pretty fucking sad that Alabama has to deal with a chief justice that puts his personal beliefs over the legal system he swore an oath to uphold. I saw on the TV earlier that he is still refusing to take it down.

How can the man expect anyone to respect his rulings if he won't respect the rulings of his peers? He should resign, and if he doesn't, he should be removed. The state of Alabama should recoup the losses of the fines they are getting (the $5000 fine actually doubles every week) by selling lottery tickets where the winner gets to sledgehammer his stupid monument while Moore is tied to a chair and forced to watch.

Dexail · Post by **Dexail** » August 21, 2003, 4:34 pm

If we were forced to take down, hide, or not exhibit everything that offended someone, this would be one bland, barren-ass country.

Separation of church and state began in England and Europe to control the power of the monarchs when religion was not just a practice, but a strict way of life.

Maybe I'm biased because of the Christian family I was raised in, but I don't see anything wrong with a public place displaying a statue of the Ten Commandments.

Post by **Sylvus** » August 21, 2003, 4:34 pm

Forget the rulings of his peers, what about that angry Yaweh he seems to be so cool with...

Exodus 20:4-5 wrote:Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image, or any likeness of any thing that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth.

Thou shalt not bow down thyself to them, nor serve them: for I the LORD thy God am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children unto the third and fourth generation of them that hate me;

Krimson Klaw · Post by **Krimson Klaw** » August 21, 2003, 4:42 pm

Are you kidding me Sylvus? You are actually saying the ten commandments are a graven image, or that he is worshipping them?

Anyways, he should at the very least be reminded of one thing though.....render unto caesar.

Ennia · Post by **Ennia** » August 21, 2003, 4:45 pm

gotta love George Carlin

GEORGE CARLIN ON THE 10 COMMANDMENTS
from "Complaints and Grievances" (HBO special)

Here is my problem with the ten commandments- why exactly are there 10?

You simply do not need ten. The list of ten commandments was artificially and deliberately inflated to get it up to ten. Here's what happened:

About 5,000 years ago a bunch of religious and political hustlers got together to try to figure out how to control people and keep them in line. They knew people were basically stupid and would believe anything they were told, so they announced that God had given them some commandments, up on a mountain, when no one was around.

Well let me ask you this- when they were making this shit up, why did they pick 10? Why not 9 or 11? I'll tell you why- because 10 sound official. Ten sounds important! Ten is the basis for the decimal system, it's a decade, it's a psychologically satisfying number (the top ten, the ten most wanted, the ten best dressed). So having ten commandments was really a marketing decision! It is clearly a bullshit list. It's a political document artificially inflated to sell better. I will now show you how you can reduce the number of commandments and come up with a list that's a little more workable and logical. I am going to use the Roman Catholic version because those were the ones I was taught as a little boy.

Let's start with the first three:

I AM THE LORD THY GOD THOU SHALT NOT HAVE STRANGE GODS BEFORE ME

THOU SHALT NOT TAKE THE NAME OF THE LORD THY GOD IN VAIN

THOU SHALT KEEP HOLY THE SABBATH

Right off the bat the first three are pure bullshit. Sabbath day? Lord's name? strange gods? Spooky language! Designed to scare and control primitive people. In no way does superstitious nonsense like this apply to the lives of intelligent civilized humans in the 21st century. So now we're down to 7. Next:

HONOR THY FATHER AND MOTHER

Obedience, respect for authority. Just another name for controlling people. The truth is that obedience and respect shouldn't be automatic. They should be earned and based on the parent's performance. Some parents deserve respect, but most of them don't, period. You're down to six.

Now in the interest of logic, something religion is very uncomfortable with, we're going to jump around the list a little bit.

THOU SHALT NOT STEAL

THOU SHALT NOT BEAR FALSE WITNESS

Stealing and lying. Well actually, these two both prohibit the same kind of behavior- dishonesty. So you don't really need two you combine them and call the commandment "thou shalt not be dishonest". And suddenly you're down to 5.

And as long as we're combining I have two others that belong together:

THOU SHALT NOT COMMIT ADULTRY

THOU SHALT NOT COVET THY NEIGHBOR'S WIFE

Once again, these two prohibit the same type of behavior. In this case it is marital infidelity. The difference is- coveting takes place in the mind. But I don't think you should outlaw fantasizing about someone else's wife because what is a guy gonna think about when he's waxing his carrot? But, marital infidelity is a good idea so we're gonna keep this one and call it "thou shalt not be unfaithful". And suddenly we're down to four.

But when you think about it, honesty and infidelity are really part of the same overall value so, in truth, you could combine the two honesty commandments with the two fidelity commandments and give them simpler language, positive language instead of negative language and call the whole thing "thou shalt always be honest and faithful" and we're down to 3.

THOU SHALT NOT COVET THY NEIGHBOR"S GOODS

This one is just plain fuckin' stupid. Coveting your neighbor's goods is what keeps the economy going! Your neighbor gets a vibrator that plays "o come o ye faithful", and you want one too! Coveting creates jobs, so leave it alone. You throw out coveting and you're down to 2 now- the big honesty and fidelity commandment and the one we haven't talked about yet:

THOU SHALT NOT KILL

Murder. But when you think about it, religion has never really had a big problem with murder. More people have been killed in the name of god than for any other reason. All you have to do is look at Northern Ireland, Cashmire, the Inquisition, the Crusades, and the World Trade Center to see how seriously the religious folks take thou shalt not kill. The more devout they are, the more they see murder as being negotiable. It depends on who's doin the killin' and who's gettin' killed. So, with all of this in mind, I give you my revised list of the two commandments:

Thou shalt always be honest and faithful to the provider of thy nookie.

&

Thou shalt try real hard not to kill anyone, unless of course they pray to a different invisible man than you.

Two is all you need; Moses could have carried them down the hill in his fuckin' pocket. I wouldn't mind those folks in Alabama posting them on the courthouse wall, as long as they provided one additional commandment:

Thou shalt keep thy religion to thyself.

Voronwë · Post by **Voronwë** » August 21, 2003, 4:48 pm

Krimson Klaw wrote:Are you kidding me Sylvus? You are actually saying the ten commandments are a graven image, or that he is worshipping them?

Anyways, he should at the very least be reminded of one thing though.....render unto caesar.

absolutely Krim

render undo Caesar what is Caesar's and unto God what is Gods.

In this case, the courthouse in Alabama is "Caesar's". The church down the street is God's, and that would be a great place for the 10 commandments to be posted on the wall, on the front lawn, on a billboard they pay to rent, on TV commercials they pay to buy, on flyers they pay to distribute, on books they give out to people =).

if i read Sylvus' post right i think he is just making a point that God in that commandment sounds like a lunatic, not making a reference that the Ten Commandments Monument was a graven image.

Fairweather Pure · Post by **Fairweather Pure** » August 21, 2003, 4:48 pm

I saw on the TV earlier that he is still refusing to take it down.

Sweet. I was hoping he would say that!

Post by **Sylvus** » August 21, 2003, 4:48 pm

No, I'm not kidding you, that is what it seems like to me. The Bible says not to make a likeness of anything of heaven above nor to bow down to them. By not taking this statue down, I feel like this guy is placing too much importance in a physical object, and that's one of the things that the object he's worshipping says not to do. I dunno, just seems a bit hipocritical to me.

What does graven image mean, exactly? I was under the impression that "graven image" was synonymous with "statue".

That's not specifically what I was going for, Voro, though Old Testament God is a bit of a lunatic.

Kilmoll the Sexy · Post by **Kilmoll the Sexy** » August 21, 2003, 4:49 pm

Voronwë wrote: In fact "an eye for an eye" is not truly from the Old Testament.

You had stated this. -----^

Granted, much of what was laid down in God's words to Moses and others were things that most people would take as pretty much common sense laws for any society to be able to function.

In retrospect to your original post, you are missing a couple. Number 4 (remember the sabbath) until the last 25 or so years WAS basically in effect in the U.S. I don't know that it was made into a written law, but nothing was open on Sundays. It was only the greed of coporations that ended this.

Number 8 (adultery) is still illegal in some places and still can be a legally touchy issue (especially in divorce cases).

The first Commandment is one reason why there is a United States to begin with. To have freedom from religious persecution that was happening when people wanted to worship. The irony of that is that we allow people to worship in any way they want.

Skogen · Post by **Skogen** » August 21, 2003, 5:02 pm

Dexail wrote:If we were forced to take down, hide, or not exhibit everything that offended someone, this would be one bland, barren-ass country.

Separation of church and state began in England and Europe to control the power of the monarchs when religion was not just a practice, but a strict way of life.

Maybe I'm biased because of the Christian family I was raised in, but I don't see anything wrong with a public place displaying a statue of the Ten Commandments.

How about your avatar? Do you suppose she's a good christian?

Skogen · Post by **Skogen** » August 21, 2003, 5:04 pm

Ennia wrote:gotta love George Carlin

Thanks Ennia! I was just looking for that, then I spotted your post on it!

Ebumar · Post by **Ebumar** » August 21, 2003, 5:10 pm

FUCK. Im moving to a different fucking country. I hate this fucking place. I wonder what the weather is like in australia...

Voronwë · Post by **Voronwë** » August 21, 2003, 5:10 pm

Kilmoll, substitute "originally" for "truly" in that sentence of mine that you quoted, and i probably would have comunicated that point more clearly.

masteen · Post by **masteen** » August 21, 2003, 5:13 pm

Ebumar wrote:FUCK. Im moving to a different fucking country. I hate this fucking place. I wonder what the weather is like in australia...

There's nude beaches and hawt bitches. The sun shines a lot.

Xzion · Post by **Xzion** » August 21, 2003, 5:20 pm

Ennia wrote:gotta love George Carlin

GEORGE CARLIN ON THE 10 COMMANDMENTS
from "Complaints and Grievances" (HBO special)

Here is my problem with the ten commandments- why exactly are there 10?

You simply do not need ten. The list of ten commandments was artificially and deliberately inflated to get it up to ten. Here's what happened:

About 5,000 years ago a bunch of religious and political hustlers got together to try to figure out how to control people and keep them in line. They knew people were basically stupid and would believe anything they were told, so they announced that God had given them some commandments, up on a mountain, when no one was around.

Well let me ask you this- when they were making this shit up, why did they pick 10? Why not 9 or 11? I'll tell you why- because 10 sound official. Ten sounds important! Ten is the basis for the decimal system, it's a decade, it's a psychologically satisfying number (the top ten, the ten most wanted, the ten best dressed). So having ten commandments was really a marketing decision! It is clearly a bullshit list. It's a political document artificially inflated to sell better. I will now show you how you can reduce the number of commandments and come up with a list that's a little more workable and logical. I am going to use the Roman Catholic version because those were the ones I was taught as a little boy.

Let's start with the first three:

I AM THE LORD THY GOD THOU SHALT NOT HAVE STRANGE GODS BEFORE ME

THOU SHALT NOT TAKE THE NAME OF THE LORD THY GOD IN VAIN

THOU SHALT KEEP HOLY THE SABBATH

Right off the bat the first three are pure bullshit. Sabbath day? Lord's name? strange gods? Spooky language! Designed to scare and control primitive people. In no way does superstitious nonsense like this apply to the lives of intelligent civilized humans in the 21st century. So now we're down to 7. Next:

HONOR THY FATHER AND MOTHER

Obedience, respect for authority. Just another name for controlling people. The truth is that obedience and respect shouldn't be automatic. They should be earned and based on the parent's performance. Some parents deserve respect, but most of them don't, period. You're down to six.

Now in the interest of logic, something religion is very uncomfortable with, we're going to jump around the list a little bit.

THOU SHALT NOT STEAL

THOU SHALT NOT BEAR FALSE WITNESS

Stealing and lying. Well actually, these two both prohibit the same kind of behavior- dishonesty. So you don't really need two you combine them and call the commandment "thou shalt not be dishonest". And suddenly you're down to 5.

And as long as we're combining I have two others that belong together:

THOU SHALT NOT COMMIT ADULTRY

THOU SHALT NOT COVET THY NEIGHBOR'S WIFE

Once again, these two prohibit the same type of behavior. In this case it is marital infidelity. The difference is- coveting takes place in the mind. But I don't think you should outlaw fantasizing about someone else's wife because what is a guy gonna think about when he's waxing his carrot? But, marital infidelity is a good idea so we're gonna keep this one and call it "thou shalt not be unfaithful". And suddenly we're down to four.

But when you think about it, honesty and infidelity are really part of the same overall value so, in truth, you could combine the two honesty commandments with the two fidelity commandments and give them simpler language, positive language instead of negative language and call the whole thing "thou shalt always be honest and faithful" and we're down to 3.

THOU SHALT NOT COVET THY NEIGHBOR"S GOODS

This one is just plain fuckin' stupid. Coveting your neighbor's goods is what keeps the economy going! Your neighbor gets a vibrator that plays "o come o ye faithful", and you want one too! Coveting creates jobs, so leave it alone. You throw out coveting and you're down to 2 now- the big honesty and fidelity commandment and the one we haven't talked about yet:

THOU SHALT NOT KILL

Murder. But when you think about it, religion has never really had a big problem with murder. More people have been killed in the name of god than for any other reason. All you have to do is look at Northern Ireland, Cashmire, the Inquisition, the Crusades, and the World Trade Center to see how seriously the religious folks take thou shalt not kill. The more devout they are, the more they see murder as being negotiable. It depends on who's doin the killin' and who's gettin' killed. So, with all of this in mind, I give you my revised list of the two commandments:

Thou shalt always be honest and faithful to the provider of thy nookie.

&

Thou shalt try real hard not to kill anyone, unless of course they pray to a different invisible man than you.

Two is all you need; Moses could have carried them down the hill in his fuckin' pocket. I wouldn't mind those folks in Alabama posting them on the courthouse wall, as long as they provided one additional commandment:

Thou shalt keep thy religion to thyself.

that was good, and most likely very true

the 10 commandments directly say THAT THERE SHOULD BE NO OTHER GOD....NO OTHER GOD=no freedom of religion, hmmmmmmm....of course they should be taken down without question

call me a "paranoid athiest" even though im not an athiest but im all for "in god we trust" and "one nation under god" being thrown out soon too
hopefully they will be

Gamei · Post by **Gamei** » August 21, 2003, 6:17 pm

As someone who lives in Alabama...fuck off any of you who believe that this is a state battle. This is a single man with his fanatical followers forcing his will on the rest of the state, due to his similarily won position.(He ran based on a religious platform, but I don't think most who voted for him expected such extremist values. No, I didn't vote for him.)

This man has become an embarrassment to everyone I personally discuss these things with in my day to day life. I would feel confident in saying that the majority of Alabamians do not wish him to cost our state $5k+ or so per day, considering as how we're already on thin ice financially(Do a search for Gov. Riley's tax proposal if you're interested, should be easy to find. I will be voting yes for it.)

And I agree with the argument that he should be removed from office due to his unwillingness to follow the law set down by his peers. I'm fairly sure I read an editorial stating that Alabama has codes in place to impeach in such a situation as this. I'm also fairly sure, however, that our state Congress is too pussified to bring forth an impeachment hearing, as the state's religious lobbying orginizations are ridiculously well-funded and powerful.

Gah. I love Alabama the land, but I hate Alabama the state(as in, the politics around here.)

kyoukan · Post by **kyoukan** » August 21, 2003, 7:56 pm

Gamei wrote:As someone who lives in Alabama...fuck off any of you who believe that this is a state battle. This is a single man with his fanatical followers forcing his will on the rest of the state,

Riley supports him and his efforts to keep his monument to stupidity.

Dexail · Post by **Dexail** » August 21, 2003, 10:59 pm

Skogen wrote:
Dexail wrote:If we were forced to take down, hide, or not exhibit everything that offended someone, this would be one bland, barren-ass country.

Separation of church and state began in England and Europe to control the power of the monarchs when religion was not just a practice, but a strict way of life.

Maybe I'm biased because of the Christian family I was raised in, but I don't see anything wrong with a public place displaying a statue of the Ten Commandments.
How about your avatar? Do you suppose she's a good christian?

damn right she is... already in the praying position!

Pahreyia · Post by **Pahreyia** » August 22, 2003, 12:40 am

Dexail wrote:If we were forced to take down, hide, or not exhibit everything that offended someone, this would be one bland, barren-ass country.

Separation of church and state began in England and Europe to control the power of the monarchs when religion was not just a practice, but a strict way of life.

Maybe I'm biased because of the Christian family I was raised in, but I don't see anything wrong with a public place displaying a statue of the Ten Commandments.

Dex, the context by which "separation of church and state" was presented was from a letter by Thomas Jefferson.

Believing that religion is a matter which lies solely between man and his God, that he owes account to none other for his faith or his worship, that the legislative powers of government reach actions only, and not opinions, I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their Legislature should "make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof," thus building a wall of separation between Church and State (Letter to the Danbury Baptists, 1802).

As far as England goes, the church and state have strong roots together. The Church of England, started by King Henry VIII, declared the state religion of the whole of Britain in, I believe, but don't quote me, 1529.

vn_Tanc · Post by **vn_Tanc** » August 22, 2003, 5:09 am

The Church Of England is the official religion here. The monarch is titular head of state and head of the chucrch as well. Defender of the Faith.

The US's religious freedom is codified more strongly than that in the UK.

Only 2% of the UKs population attends church regularly.

Izna Marcos · Post by **Izna Marcos** » August 22, 2003, 6:21 am

I agree , he's making himself look bad. If Alabama doesn't do anything bout the stupid monument, at the VERY least they should get rid of him. Our laws, aren't just guidelines, maybe some are, but the Constitution was originally created giving us ALL the choice of religion,not having it forced upon us. I'd feel sick walking into that courthouse, and seeing that digusting display of some fantiac's opinon, on how I should live my life.

Sad that some people think a belief is something we all should share because for them it's the right choice...

Krimson Klaw · Post by **Krimson Klaw** » August 22, 2003, 8:33 am

He's practicing civil disobedience, which is fine, and a very valid way to voice opposition and to force the hand of change. So just make him pay the fines and we are all set. I agree with Adex completely on his post that this guy chose the wrong battle. You simply just cannot impose your religious will onto everyone else, at least not on government property. I believe in the ten commandments and I try my hardest to follow them, but I understand the law of the land in which I live too.

Just read this debate concerning this matter, check it out.
http://www.cnn.com/2003/LAW/08/21/cnna. ... index.html

kyoukan · Post by **kyoukan** » August 22, 2003, 10:59 am

judges, even chief justices, swear an oath to uphold the law. defiance of a court ruling does not really fall under civil disobedience.

Vetiria · Post by **Vetiria** » August 22, 2003, 11:06 am

This guy doesn't even have a defense. He was on MSNBC last night. When the host asked him if he's going to put up Koran, he asked her to define religion. The part that got me was that he said the 10 Commandments do not define Christianity. Yep....

Krimson Klaw · Post by **Krimson Klaw** » August 22, 2003, 11:13 am

kyoukan wrote:judges, even chief justices, swear an oath to uphold the law. defiance of a court ruling does not really fall under civil disobedience.

Civil disobediance by its very nature disobeys laws, so I disagree, whether you took an oath to obey it or not.

Cartalas · Post by **Cartalas** » August 22, 2003, 11:19 am

This is so screwed up!

This is comming from a Govt. that allows prayers before a senate meeting, We have In God we trust on our money, We swear in our officials with their hand on the bible. Just leave the friggin thing there and say it is a piece of art.

Sionistic · Post by **Sionistic** » August 22, 2003, 11:21 am

That statue shows that the state has a preference in a certain religion. That is clearly unconstitutional

kyoukan · Post by **kyoukan** » August 22, 2003, 11:24 am

is your brain honestly incapable of determining the difference between civil disobediene to protest something and an elected representative of the legal system openly defying said legal system after swearing a solemn oath (on a bible no doubt) to uphold it's rulings and judgements?

or are you trolling me?

Krimson Klaw · Post by **Krimson Klaw** » August 22, 2003, 11:33 am

No, you are trolling me. You responded to me on civil disobedience, I did not reply to you. You need to look up what civil disobedience means. Just because you swear an oath to not break the law, does not mean you cannot practice civil disobedience. Are you daft? Openly defying a court order IS CIVIL DISOBEDIENCE, REGARDLESS OF WHAT OATH THEY TOOK TO GET INTO OFFICE, as long as it stays non-violent. To defy a law that you feel is unjust is civil disobedience. There is no rule anywhere that I know of that says only non-politicians can practice it. When you are elected to office, you essencially take an OATH to not practice civil disobedience, but that does not mean you cannot go back on your word and do it, just like this guy is doing. His beliefs are in conflict with the oath he took to office, so he is practicing civil disobedience. There is no other perfect example of it than this. Stop trying to argue with me for arguments sake and stop replying to me. Jeez you are simple.

Adex_Xeda · Post by **Adex_Xeda** » August 22, 2003, 11:38 am

Half of the battle is fought for the sake of terminology.

Our reality seems defined by our language.

We righteously practice civil disobedience or ruthlessly break the law.

If you define your opponent exclusively under the unfavorable term, you burden his cause.

Krimson Klaw · Post by **Krimson Klaw** » August 22, 2003, 11:44 am

Read this kyoukan
http://atheism.about.com/b/a/009446.htm

Even this liberal is calling it civil disobedience.
http://warliberal.com/mt/blog/archives/006219.html

now kindly shut up, I'm getting tired of proving you wrong lately.

Pherr the Dorf · Post by **Pherr the Dorf** » August 22, 2003, 11:51 am

Cartalas wrote:This is so screwed up!

This is comming from a Govt. that allows prayers before a senate meeting, We have In God we trust on our money, We swear in our officials with their hand on the bible. Just leave the friggin thing there and say it is a piece of art.

Our money has the Freemason symbol on it, and to be honest if you want to find out who has more control in this country then the church, look to the Masons

Voronwë · Post by **Voronwë** » August 22, 2003, 11:53 am

Jessica Sanders {AP} wrote:"They do not acknowledge the God of the holy Bible on which the country was founded," Moore says. "My duty under the Constitution is to acknowledge the Judeo-Christian God."

"We are not a nation founded upon the Hindu god or Buddha."

He is clearly endorsing a particular religion. And he is clearly delusional as well. "My duty under the Constitution is to acknowledge...God." Yeah that's a very reasonable conclusion to draw from the Constitution...

Do you think somebody who was perhaps a Muslim would feel like he could get a fair trial in front of this judge? And this is just what the judge is saying publically. He has been in politics for years, so must have some understanding of public speech...i wouldnt be surprised at all if his private opinions were downright bigoted.

Krimson Klaw · Post by **Krimson Klaw** » August 22, 2003, 11:54 am

Exactly Voro. About the only link I can make to this guy is the country was founded by Christians yes, but they used a religiously neutral framework.

Voronwë · Post by **Voronwë** » August 22, 2003, 12:10 pm

If you can calle Deists a form of Christians yeah then I guess that statement is correct.

http://www.wsu.edu/~dee/GLOSSARY/DEISM.HTM wrote:The Deists were not atheists; they simply asserted that everything that concerned the physical and human universes could be comprehended independently of religious concerns or explanations.

However, Deism encompassed far more than this. For the Deists believed that if God created a rational universe, a universe that could be understood by human reason alone, that must mean that God was rational as well. If God is rational, then God can be understood through the use of reason without recourse to mysticism, superstition, prayer, or even the divinity of Christ. The Deists set out to replace Christianity with its ceremonies, devices, and supernatural aspects with a religion they called "The Cult of the Supreme Being."

Ben Franklin and Thomas Jefferson were definitely Deists, and Washington and Monroe probably were as well.

Basically, the truth is that these are the founding fathers of our country, and they weren't Christians. there is obviously a position in that linked piece, but it seems to be a fact based arguement, though i can't vouch for the source, and don't have the time unfortunately to look up more right now )

This is of course not compatible with the politica agenda of the conservative right in the US. But like many of their positions, the facts simply do not support them.

Thomas Jefferson wrote: The legitimate powers of government extend to such acts only as are injurious to others. But it does me no injury to my neighbor to say there are twenty gods or no god. It neither picks my pocket nor breaks my leg. (Dumas Malon, Jefferson The President: First Term 1801-1805. Boston: Little Brown and Company, 1970, p. 191)

Dalmoth · Post by **Dalmoth** » August 22, 2003, 12:32 pm

Being that I'm from Alabama as well....

Not everyone here believes that Moore is a kook. No doubt that he is standing up for something he believes in. Something that I belive we as a nation no longer do until it involves us personally. We have grown apathetic as a country, our typical choice on most matters is to study it, measure it, plan to do something, then maybe we'll do something. Apathy is what is making this country weaker. Agree or disagree with Moore, he is starting to get people here to actually do something other than ignore whats going on in our society.

On a more philosophical note, is not the removal of all relgious trappings from public places not a religious movement in itself?

Even atheism meets one of the definitions of religion.