• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Cut Ten Commandments down to 6?

Yes you did. In my post 207 I asked you, and you answered my question with a question, which is only something one does when the answer is in the affirmative and the asked wants to avoid admitting it. Maybe next time you try answering questions directly.
No, you ignored my question in post #206 by accusing me of being atheist. I never said a word about or gave an opinion about atheism. So why don't you answer my question first and we'll go from there....

So what was the intent of posting the religious poster in a public funded school if not trolling non-christians?

Imo, a Christian hung the religious poster to troll non-Christians. I think you think that too or you wouldn't be bouncing all over the place trying to dodge my question.

It hasn't been established that the poster in question was owned by any church. For all we know, it was perchesed privately from an online vendor who likely sells a wide variety of posters from all genre, and hung by someone who was never a member of clergy, maybe by someone who doesn't even work at the school. It could have been a random parent who got a verbal ok from a lower administrator or the teacher of the classroom it was nearest to. It could have been a night janitor who thought it was just something nice to display, no harm/recruitment/intimidation/harassment/proselytizing intended. You don't know, but you're making a host of assumptions and reading novels of sub-text which isn't actually there.
I think it's a reasonable assumption to say that whoever hung up the religious poster was a Christian. Do you agree?

In context to the discussions thus far on this thread, "religion" refers to the private beliefs of individuals in the community, thus "cultural vestiges". We were not referring to religion as the organised variety by default. If that's what you mean, then that's what you have to go out of your way to specify: "organised"; and link to how you know exactly, by name, which specific church/temple was being represented by this poster as not all churches are 501c3 and it's possible that the church already does pay taxes.

Also, if religion is now being equated with philosophy, then if you're referring to *organised* religion, you are also therefore referring to organised atheism, so be prepared for that **** storm.
Yes, I'm referring to organized religion and no, atheism is not considered a religion. So, it's probably not that difficult to deduce which particular religion put up the poster when you consider the schools location and the predominate Protestant Evangelical religion in the area and no, they don't pay taxes on the donations they recieve. But they probably should if they want to have "equal representation" to promote their beliefs in public schools, don't you think? So why not give them a choice, to either pay up or shut up?
 
I have the government sending millions of federal dollars to private religious schools [ . . . ] This is in addition to all the federal funding which goes into the faith-based foster care my parent's are licensed through.

I know. That crap needs to stop, too.
 
This is about a public high school in Virginia that has posted the Ten Commandments in a hallway of the school. There were protests and the poster with the Commandments was removed, more protests followed and the poster was re-installed. Now it is in court.



Why do the hyper-religious Christians continue to wast taxpayer dollars in fighting the lawsuits which they inevitably lose in court? For example, here in Florida, this past week - Bradford County Ten Commandments monument dedicated

How about this:

1) Thou shalt not run in thy hall.

2) Thou shalt not raise thy voice indoors as thou might outdoors.

3) Thou shalt not possess herbs in thy lockers.

4) Thou shalt not covet thy school cheerleaders.

5) Thou shalt not covet thy cheerleader's ass.

6) Thou shalt not make thyself late for home room.

7) Thou shalt not write false rumors on the walls.

8) Thou shalt not lock the meek in his locker.

9) Thou shalt not fornicate by hand or mouth whilst at school.

AND

10) Thou shalt NOT flee thy school before the last bell hath rungeth...
 
How about this:

1) Thou shalt not run in thy hall.

2) Thou shalt not raise thy voice indoors as thou might outdoors.

3) Thou shalt not possess herbs in thy lockers.

4) Thou shalt not covet thy school cheerleaders.

5) Thou shalt not covet thy cheerleader's ass.

6) Thou shalt not make thyself late for home room.

7) Thou shalt not write false rumors on the walls.

8) Thou shalt not lock the meek in his locker.

9) Thou shalt not fornicate by hand or mouth whilst at school.

AND

10) Thou shalt NOT flee thy school before the last bell hath rungeth...

wow your commandments fully condemned left wing students:2wave:
 
wow your commandments fully condemned left wing students:2wave:

You mean because right-wing students don't lust after cheerleaders, try to leave school early, or talk too loud in the hall?

And no right-winger has ever smoked pot or bullied a another student. (oops, Romney)
 
Last edited:
Why didn't you include that link in your original post?

You act irritated that people ask you to back up what you said.

Welcome to DP.
I had just seen a mod do that on another thread ;)
 
It occurs to me now, to remember that when I was in elementary school, in Santa Barbara, we were taught about the history of the area. In particular, I learned a fair amount about Friar Junípero Serra, and about the important role that he played in settling much of that part of California. He was responsible for the series of Catholic Mission buildings that were built across that part of the area in the 18th century. He was, of course, a religious man, and much of what he did had to do with spreading the Catholic faith. One cannot adequately learn about this part of California's history, without a detailed coverage of the religious aspects thereof.

I suppose that in the modern climate, with religion being treated as such a taboo subject in public schools, that many of today's schoolchildren from my home area are not being appropriately taught about the history of that area.
There are distinct differences between teaching historical fact and religion.
 
It occurs to me now, to remember that when I was in elementary school, in Santa Barbara, we were taught about the history of the area. In particular, I learned a fair amount about Friar Junípero Serra, and about the important role that he played in settling much of that part of California. He was responsible for the series of Catholic Mission buildings that were built across that part of the area in the 18th century. He was, of course, a religious man, and much of what he did had to do with spreading the Catholic faith. One cannot adequately learn about this part of California's history, without a detailed coverage of the religious aspects thereof.

4th graders all over California are making Missions out of Styrofoam and many don't know anything about Catholicism.

You don't need to know anything about religious philosophy to study the history of California. The missionaries were teaching their beliefs to the natives. That's all you need to know.
 
jerry-
just thought NOT trying to twist the debate to atheism is religion was more productive than mucking up the flow with rhetorical tap dancing.

Do think attempting to combine the 10 Commandments with Protestant Work Ethic as an amalgamate of our heritage and a stand alone like George Crossing the Delaware is flawed. If the old Testament/10 Commandants/Moses's wanderings is part of the Philosophy class AND other topics of discussion were posted as well.... maybe.

Now the slap that is given all the Glory unto the PWE. Hard workers are not Protestant only, contrary to the myth of Protestants founding the work ethic. Odd thing is the PWE was 'practiced' by Catholic immigrants such as the Irish, Poles, and Eye-talians. It doesn't take a lot of research to find the tenants of Capitalism and the work as vocation in Europe before The Reform. Many historians argue that no matter the religion of any part of Europe it was the secular social structure that helped or hindered capitalism.

Calvinism is given the lead in creating Gawd and work equals good. However factual evidence it did is lacking. I've been to Scotland and seen the buildings designed by the Calvinists and all I can say is we have found the set for '1984'.

Now lets look at the PWE in the USofA-
First the original and somewhat enshrined group of Puritans that landed were city folk. They didn't understand farming in general and in America for sure. Their native neighbors spent little time at what Europeans considered work but never suffered famine like the always toiling Puritans. It is the Protestant Work Ethic turned on it's head. In those early, not oft discussed years Gawd's Grace seemed to not fall on the Puritans but on the natives.... well until after that first somewhat propagandized 'Thanks Giving Feast', 90% of the natives who attended that one were not alive for a second one.

Thus began Gawd's Grace on Thee... soon the Puritans were spreading out into abandoned farms of the now decimated natives and adopting their cropping systems. it was OK, Gawd smote the heathen Natives and now Blessed his new Chosen people. Well, except life was still hard, work back breaking and the 'bounty' pretty thin. The comparison between an indentured servant in the southern and middle colonies and one of Gawd's Chosen folks was easy enough to make. Throw in a Witch Hunt or two due to having to survive on spoiled grain during yet another famine and it is difficult to see just how the work ethic was working out so better.

But things did start in improve, some did start to gain wealth and status. In an effort to explain why all Puritans were working hard but only some were succeeding in stepped the theory of Gawd's Grace on the truly worthy. It was a theory in England but in the colonies it became a sign of salvation itself. Salvation through wealth! Wadda country.

One other reason advanced for why the term for hard work leading to success is not so Blessed-
19th century 'invasion' of Irish Catholics into American cities. Not only were these new people not from the same family tree, they were from one seen as inferior both culturally and intellectually, but of a hated religion. Remember Europe fought for ten decades for the Gawds they made. Those battles came over here,(but we don't talk about that). So soon the new people were lazy, drunken bums who's papalist beliefs corrupted the shining light on the hill of John Winthrop.

Now you can hold to what your atheist teacher said, FYI learning from someone not subscribing to the theory doesn't make it true, anyone can have a flawed lesson plan, can tell the myth as taught unto him.

I chose a rather broader bunch of sources. But like believing the Constitution says nothing about private business discrimination, or the income tax amendment wasn't properly ratified-

to each there own :peace
 
jerry-
just thought NOT trying to twist the debate to atheism is religion was more productive than mucking up the flow with rhetorical tap dancing.

If there was a time to be reasonable, it was before anyone filed or fought a lawsuit over a stupid goddamn poster. The time for reason is long past.

Do think attempting to combine the 10 Commandments with Protestant Work Ethic as an amalgamate of our heritage and a stand alone like George Crossing the Delaware is flawed.

Who did that?

If the old Testament/10 Commandants/Moses's wanderings is part of the Philosophy class AND other topics of discussion were posted as well.... maybe.

We don't know that the poster was part of any class at all.

Now the slap that is given all the Glory unto the PWE.

What Glory? What's a PWE?

Hard workers are not Protestant only..
+_2acc5a8841f8752904d37f90a8014829.png





Odd thing is the PWE was 'practiced' by Catholic immigrants such as the Irish, Poles, and Eye-talians. It doesn't take a lot of research to find the tenants of Capitalism and the work as vocation in Europe before The Reform. Many historians argue that no matter the religion of any part of Europe it was the secular social structure that helped or hindered capitalism.

Wiki'd that yourself, aye? Good job.

Calvinism is given the lead in creating Gawd and work equals good. However factual evidence it did is lacking. I've been to Scotland and seen the buildings designed by the Calvinists and all I can say is we have found the set for '1984'.

.............:coffeepap...........

Now lets look at the PWE in the USofA-

Go for it...let me know when you're don so we can get back to our discussion.
 
If that is the case, then I have just as much right, if I were a teacher, to make my students bow down to Allah, or worship Buddha, talk like a pirate to the flying spaghetti monster, or get on their knees to Cthulhu. After all, we are talking about freedom of religion here. I think that, with separation of church and state, our forefathers also had another idea in mind.... Freedom FROM religion.

Well sense in this case nobody is being made to bow, worship, talk in some strange tongue or get on their knees you have no point.
 
4th graders all over California are making Missions out of Styrofoam and many don't know anything about Catholicism.

You don't need to know anything about religious philosophy to study the history of California. The missionaries were teaching their beliefs to the natives. That's all you need to know.

This seems to perfectly illustrate my point.

What is the point of making models of missions, and learning about their existence, in the absence of an understanding of their purpose? What you describe is a half-assed attempt at teaching, deciding that essential and relevant parts of the whole lesson aren't anything that the students need to know. The beliefs on which Friar Serra was acting are directly relevant to his accomplishments, and an understating of them is necessary in order to understand the significance that he had in our history. Any students who are being taught about Friar Serra, but not about his beliefs, are not being properly educated about him and relevance to the history of the area.
 
This seems to perfectly illustrate my point.

What is the point of making models of missions, and learning about their existence, in the absence of an understanding of their purpose? What you describe is a half-assed attempt at teaching, deciding that essential and relevant parts of the whole lesson aren't anything that the students need to know. The beliefs on which Friar Serra was acting are directly relevant to his accomplishments, and an understating of them is necessary in order to understand the significance that he had in our history. Any students who are being taught about Friar Serra, but not about his beliefs, are not being properly educated about him and relevance to the history of the area.
Thats ridiculous. You don't need to learn theology in order to learn history.
 
This seems to perfectly illustrate my point.

What is the point of making models of missions, and learning about their existence, in the absence of an understanding of their purpose? What you describe is a half-assed attempt at teaching, deciding that essential and relevant parts of the whole lesson aren't anything that the students need to know. The beliefs on which Friar Serra was acting are directly relevant to his accomplishments, and an understating of them is necessary in order to understand the significance that he had in our history. Any students who are being taught about Friar Serra, but not about his beliefs, are not being properly educated about him and relevance to the history of the area.

Do you have to learn historical European paganism to learn about Europe? How many of the religious rites of Vikings did you have to learn to understand the sacking of English monasteries?
 
Yeah - learn a little theology and then compare those teachings with what the various believers of any specific faith actually did and you would probably turn the kids away due to their understanding of the hypocrisy.
 
Then why does it need to post religious law? What's it's purpose if not to teach and proselytize religious teachings? What's the secular value of the ten commandments being posted in a hallway?


History


j-mac
 

Then they should go to the source and post the code of Hammurabi, since it pre-dates the 10 commandments and also contains all of them, and has considerably more historical significance, being the first example of written law.
 
Then they should go to the source and post the code of Hammurabi, since it pre-dates the 10 commandments and also contains all of them, and has considerably more historical significance, being the first example of written law.

not quite, I agree with the sentiment as to the history aspect but there is at least one known law text that pre-dates Hammurabi

The Code of Ur-Nammu is the oldest known tablet containing a law code surviving today. It was written in the Sumerian language c. 2100–2050 BC. Although the preface directly credits the laws to king Ur-Nammu of Ur (2112–2095 BC), some historians think they should rather be ascribed to his son Shulgi.

The first copy of the code, in two fragments found at Nippur, was translated by Samuel Kramer in 1952; owing to its partial preservation, only the prologue and 5 of the laws were discernible[1]. Further tablets were found in Ur and translated in 1965, allowing some 40 of the 57 laws to be reconstructed.[2] Another copy found in Sippar contains slight variants.

Although it is known that earlier law-codes existed, such as the Code of Urukagina, this represents the earliest legal text that is extant. It predated the Code of Hammurabi by some three centuries.

(1) Kramer, History begins at Sumer, pp. 52–55.

(2) Gurney and Kramer, "Two Fragments of Sumerian Laws," 16 Assyriological Studies, pp. 13–19
 
Then they should go to the source and post the code of Hammurabi, since it pre-dates the 10 commandments and also contains all of them, and has considerably more historical significance, being the first example of written law.

That's fine, but are you saying to the exclusion of?


Why?


j-mac
 
That's fine, but are you saying to the exclusion of?

Why?

j-mac

Because our laws are not based on the 10 Commandments. It would be like posting the rules of Sharia law for women "in the name of history" for the entire school year.

Even the Golden Rule would be more relevant than the 10 Commandments. At least it doesn't project the idea that the 10 Commandments are more important in history, and therefore should be more important to everyone, no matter their beliefs, than other religious and cultural rules and laws.
 
Because our laws are not based on the 10 Commandments. It would be like posting the rules of Sharia law for women "in the name of history" for the entire school year.

Even the Golden Rule would be more relevant than the 10 Commandments. At least it doesn't project the idea that the 10 Commandments are more important in history, and therefore should be more important to everyone, no matter their beliefs, than other religious and cultural rules and laws.


We have classes now, usually in middle school that study the religions of the world. But yet somehow liberals in this country are so frightened, intimidated even by the 10 commandments that any excuse to diminish them, mock them, keep them from sight, is their goal.

Stopping the high school valedictorian from saying a prayer at invocation.

A judge that threatens another if they even say an opening prayer, or so much as mention God in the Pledge.

This is a predominantly Christian nation, that contrary to Obama's declaration that we are not, is no threat to liberals, or any other religions. Yet as scared as some seem to be, conservatives know better but allow themselves to be cowed under by these liberal bullies.

j-mac

PS. Although I will not be the one to say the the commandments are the sole source of American law, that would be foolish, some elements play at least a supporting role. Is that not perfectly fine for a country where upwards of 80% of the country liberal, and conservative claims Christianity in one form or another as their belief?
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom