Cut Ten Commandments down to 6?

Somerville said:

Sounds like an ex post facto defence to me. Every single time the supporters of these religious artifacts are allowed to speak, we hear the same thing - it's part of our "Judeo-Christian heritage". The more nuanced defence is the "cultural" one which attempts to place such blatantly religious displays into a more general societal definition but really for the overwhelming majority of the defenders of Ten Commandment displays it is the religious purpose that they support.

Click to expand...

Of course - it's *such* a part of our judeo-christian heritage that they put god in the constitution to seal the deal!

Oh wait . . . No they didn't!

Somerville said:

Sounds like an ex post facto defence to me. Every single time the supporters of these religious artifacts are allowed to speak, we hear the same thing - it's part of our "Judeo-Christian heritage". The more nuanced defence is the "cultural" one which attempts to place such blatantly religious displays into a more general societal definition but really for the overwhelming majority of the defenders of Ten Commandment displays it is the religious purpose that they support.

Click to expand...

If you don't like religious posters in public schools, don't post them in public schools.

Jerry said:

If you don't like religious posters in public schools, don't post them in public schools.

Click to expand...

I'm not.

My side is not - well, except for the satirical ones like the Flying Spaghetti Monster and Just Average Bob.

and a poster like the following is not religious but I'm very sure that no school district in a red state would allow a student to post it

Somerville said:

I'm not.

My side is not - well, except for the satirical ones like the Flying Spaghetti Monster and Just Average Bob.

and a poster like the following is not religious but I'm very sure that no school district in a red state would allow a student to post it

View attachment 67127555

Click to expand...

If the poster said "reason is a virtue" it would be welcomed. But that's not what the poster says. A struck-though 'faith' betrays the trolling anti-theist nature.

Jerry said:

If the poster said "reason is a virtue" it would be welcomed. But that's not what the poster says. A struck-though 'faith' betrays the trolling anti-theist nature.

Click to expand...

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

Somerville said:

Sounds like an ex post facto defence to me. Every single time the supporters of these religious artifacts are allowed to speak, we hear the same thing - it's part of our "Judeo-Christian heritage". The more nuanced defence is the "cultural" one which attempts to place such blatantly religious displays into a more general societal definition but really for the overwhelming majority of the defenders of Ten Commandment displays it is the religious purpose that they support.

Click to expand...

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.

Moot said:

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

Click to expand...

Ah so atheism is a religion for you to then assume the premise in your post that an atheist poster is equal to a religious poster?

A *real* atheist poster wouldn't address religion at all, thus a-theism. I'm sure that was not the only poster in that hall, and every poster which did not regard religion in anyway whatsoever was, by definition, atheist. Every textbook, for example, is atheist.

All we want is equal representation. 1 religious poster among all the other texts on that school property which were by nature a-theist.

Jerry said:

Ah so atheism is a religion for you to then assume the premise in your post that an atheist poster is equal to a religious poster?

Click to expand...

What are you trying to say? FYI, a non Christian can still believe in God. Jews for instance.

A *real* atheist poster wouldn't address religion at all, thus a-theism. I'm sure that was not the only poster in that hall, and every poster which did not regard religion in anyway whatsoever was, by definition, atheist. Every textbook, for example, is atheist.

All we want is equal representation. 1 religious poster among all the other texts on that school property which were by nature a-theist.

Click to expand...

No, that logic doesn't work because A.) not all non-christians are atheists. B) just because a public school doesn't have christian symbols doesn't mean that it is atheist. If anything a public school is secular because it is neither for or against religion. It's simply "separate". C) if religion wants "equal representation" then let it pay taxes.

Moot said:

What are you trying to say?

Click to expand...

That you're framing atheism as a religion, which debases you're entire argument. Thanks for shooting yourself in the foot.

Moot said:

FYI, a non Christian can still believe in God. Jews for instance.

Click to expand...

Moot said:

No, that logic doesn't work because A.) not all non-christians are atheists. B) just because a public school doesn't have christian symbols doesn't mean that it is atheist. If anything a public school is secular because it is neither for or against religion. It's simply "separate". C) if religion wants "equal representation" then let it pay taxes.

Click to expand...

Lots of religious folks pay taxes, money which then funds the schools we then work at and/or send our children to. We pied for it, so if we want to display a cultural vestiges of the Protestant Ethic which got us the money paying the teacher's over-inflated union salleries, then we're entitled.

Jerry-
Perhaps you will understand it better to call atheism a philosophy, not a religion. Framing a philosophic debate in religious trappings is skewing the discussion. I don't see a fish with feet on it as trolling, perhaps like beauty it is in the eye of the beholder?

The 'Protestant Ethic' as you call it would come as a bit of a slap in the face of every other hard working faith. True some Americans, mostly surprise, surprise the protestants, hold the phrase up as distinctly American little knowing at the time of it's coining it wasn't a compliment.

Bob-
Please don't confuse the teaching of religious mythology with the historical record. To my mind the early settlements in California are historic, the 10 Commandments religious myth. Would the same early settlement lessons include the enslavement and later extinction of most Californian tribes? Christians, both Catholic and Protestant, brought Gawd and Death in equal measure to the 'empty lands' Gawd's Manifest Destiny held open for our nation.

To be fair and even handed the class should include ALL history, not just the parts that bring a warm fuzzy to some.

notquiteright said:

Jerry-
Perhaps you will understand it better to call atheism a philosophy, not a religion.

Click to expand...

Moot is the person calling atheism a religion. Please address your correction to him.

notquiteright said:

Framing a philosophic debate in religious trappings is skewing the discussion.

Click to expand...

I agree. Bald is not a hair color, but it a hair style. So, if this is about philosophy, then are the atheists who brought the lawsuit saying that philosophy doesn't belong in the school?

notquiteright said:

The 'Protestant Ethic' as you call it would come as a bit of a slap in the face of every other hard working faith. True some Americans, mostly surprise, surprise the protestants, hold the phrase up as distinctly American little knowing at the time of it's coining it wasn't a compliment.

Click to expand...

I learned about the Protestant Ethic from an atheist teacher as part of a sociology 101 collage class curriculum: Protestant work ethic - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

If someone sees the term as a slap in the face, that's their problem.

Jerry said:

That you're framing atheism as a religion, which debases you're entire argument. Thanks for shooting yourself in the foot.

Click to expand...

I never said a word about atheism let alone it being a religion, so how could I shoot myself in the foot?

http://i0.kym-cdn.com/photos/images/newsfeed/000/210/119/+_2acc5a8841f8752904d37f90a8014829.png?1322693145 [/QUOTE] Yes, I did say because it's true.


[quote]Lots of religious folks pay taxes, money which then funds the schools we then work at and/or send our children to. We pied for it, so if we want to display a cultural vestiges of the Protestant Ethic which got us the money paying the teacher's over-inflated union salleries, then we're entitled.[/QUOTE]I was referring to organized religion, not individual religious folks per se. The money that the churches collect from the faithful should be taxed if the churches want to use our tax funded institutions to promote their beliefs.

Click to expand...

Jerry said:

A decorative laminated piece of paper hanging on a wall is not a church. Geez you people can be so stupid. It's a poster, there's nothing to "run". It just sits there. And you don't know tax money was used to buy it anyway.

Click to expand...

If all it is is a decoration, then it's no big deal to take it down. Case closed, right? Just like if they switched out the tile in the gym locker room.

Unless you're being disingenuous and you know good and damned well its' an attempt to have the government proselytize your faith, which isn't something the government is allowed to do.

Moot said:

I never said a word about atheism let alone it being a religion.

Click to expand...

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.

Moot said:

I was referring to organized religion, not individual religious folks per se. The money that the churches collect from the faithful should be taxed if the churches want to use our tax funded institutions to promote their beliefs.

Click to expand...

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.

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.

Grendel said:

If all it is is a decoration, then it's no big deal to take it down. Case closed, right? Just like if they switched out the tile in the gym locker room.

Click to expand...

As I said in post 83: At the outset of controversy, the school should have taken the poster down, students who wanted it up should have formed a Christian student group who could then display material, just like any student group, in the hallway. Now it's free religious expression by the student body, not endorsed religion by the school. The Commandments stay up, so the Christians are happy. If any local atheists want to make a counter display they could form a student group and acquire their equal space on the wall and post their views by putting absolutely nothing there, so the atheists would be happy. If there were any other religions, political affiliations, hobbiests or etc among the student body which wanted to display their material, they could likewise form student groups and display their material in an equal space.

Grendel said:

Unless you're being disingenuous and you know good and damned well its' an attempt to have the government proselytize your faith, which isn't something the government is allowed to do.

Click to expand...

I have the government sending millions of federal dollars to private religious schools, and I have the military's Chaplin Corps. This is in addition to all the federal funding which goes into the faith-based foster care my parent's are licensed through. A $5 poster on some random highschool wall doesn't even appear on the radar.

j-mac said:

This is what I think we see from the left today in political terms

Click to expand...

Really? I see both sides doing absurd things time and time again and it seems well more an attempt at "OMG...LOOK OVER THERE! Seriously guys, that dude over there is so doing something you'd hate! Check it out, I'll stay here and make sure everythings ok!"

Jerry said:

Ah so atheism is a religion for you to then assume the premise in your post that an atheist poster is equal to a religious poster?

A *real* atheist poster wouldn't address religion at all, thus a-theism. I'm sure that was not the only poster in that hall, and every poster which did not regard religion in anyway whatsoever was, by definition, atheist. Every textbook, for example, is atheist.

All we want is equal representation. 1 religious poster among all the other texts on that school property which were by nature a-theist.

Click to expand...

I hope you realise just how nonsensical this statement is: "atheism is a religion for you to then assume the premise in your post that an atheist poster is equal to a religious poster?"

"atheism is a religion for you" - makes an assumption about another who is known only thru this forum, while simultaneously using a definition for one specific stance about the universe that is only acceptable to those who hold other views.

"an atheist poster is equal to a religious poster" - this contradicts the earlier claim that "atheism is a religion", for it plainly states that one object is equal to another object thereby saying they are not the same.

"All we want is equal representation." Oh you poor, poor persecuted xians (and other faithists), the world is just so mean to you. How ever did you become the majority of the population with over 90% representation in elected offices when you don't have "equal representation"? Hellfire, man! You are right - you don't have "equal representation" - you have dominant and domineering representation.

Jerry said:

As I said in post 83: At the outset of controversy, the school should have taken the poster down, students who wanted it up should have formed a Christian student group who could then display material, just like any student group, in the hallway. Now it's free religious expression by the student body, not endorsed religion by the school. The Commandments stay up, so the Christians are happy. If any local atheists want to make a counter display they could form a student group and acquire their equal space on the wall and post their views by putting absolutely nothing there, so the atheists would be happy. If there were any other religions, political affiliations, hobbiests or etc among the student body which wanted to display their material, they could likewise form student groups and display their material in an equal space.

Click to expand...

jerry, you argue well with some thoughtfulness displayed but you also display your ignorance about the origins of the problem being discussed here.

The poster was taken down when a student asked that it be removed. THEN, a local church group blew this up into another example of "Christian persecution" with screaming matches at the school board meeting. The poster was reinstalled in the high school. A lawsuit was then filed despite pleas by the ACLU to "Please, just take it down. The district doesn't have any extra money to fight this and other schools that have tried the same thing have lost every time." ON a vote of 3 to 2, the decision was made to fight the lawsuit, the two voting against did so on economic grounds. Now we are at the stage which created the title: Cut Ten Commandments down to 6?

I have the government sending millions of federal dollars to private religious schools, and I have the military's Chaplin Corps. This is in addition to all the federal funding which goes into the faith-based foster care my parent's are licensed through. A $5 poster on some random highschool wall doesn't even appear on the radar.

Click to expand...

And this is an on-going debate in the political spectrum of modern America? Why should institutions that don't pay taxes also be able to receive funding from those taxes collected, sometimes from citizens who don't agree with the faith of the recipient? How much of that federal funding to "faith-based" institutions would fall under the definition of "pork" and "earmarks" if they went to a secular group doing the same thing?

Grant said:

And do you have any idea what inspired those laws you now enjoy?

Click to expand...

Many things. While one of them may include the 10 Commandments, that doesn't mean the 10 Commandments are the only thing that inspired our laws.

In fact it can easily be argued that the 10 Commandments weren't a very good inspiration for our laws since many of them do not show up in our laws, particularly as they are written. There is no law to hold any God above any other. There is no law that says you cannot worship idols. There are no laws against taking the lord's name in vain. There is no law that says a person must have a Sabbath day. There is no law that forces a person to respect their parents. There is no law that says a person cannot "covet" his neighbor's property, as long as they aren't actually trying to steal the person's property.

We do have laws against murder. And we have laws against stealing.

There is no law that says a person cannot lie at all. In fact, there are only a few specific laws against lying and those deal with lies that could actually do harm to someone. In fact, although there are a couple of places where adultery laws are on the books, it isn't likely that criminal laws concerning adultery can be enforced anywhere in the US besides the US military. The most adultery can do is change what you might get in a divorce in most places.

This means that we have two laws that may have been inspired by the 10 Commandments, although I'm pretty certain a very many societies that were not Christian or did not believe in any of the scriptures of the Bible also had those laws. Frankly, they are just good rules for society anyway. We have 2, possibly 3, that have some form of law that could possibly be seen keeping with the spirit of that commandment, but isn't really a complete law against everything that could be covered by the commandment. We have 5 commandments that really are not and can't honestly be made into laws for our country without violating the 1st Amendment in some way.

Somerville said:

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

Click to expand...

If this 'Breaking News' I'm assuming there's Jewish guy with a staff and a burning bush.

hazlnut said:

If this 'Breaking News' I'm assuming there's Jewish guy with a staff and a burning bush.

Click to expand...

But we don't have mountains in Florida
Exodus 32:15

Moses turned and went down the mountain with the two tablets of the Testimony in his hands. They were inscribed on both sides, front and back.

Click to expand...

Somerville said:

jerry, you argue well with some thoughtfulness displayed but you also display your ignorance about the origins of the problem being discussed here.

The poster was taken down when a student asked that it be removed. THEN, a local church group blew this up into another example of "Christian persecution" with screaming matches at the school board meeting. The poster was reinstalled in the high school. A lawsuit was then filed despite pleas by the ACLU to "Please, just take it down. The district doesn't have any extra money to fight this and other schools that have tried the same thing have lost every time." ON a vote of 3 to 2, the decision was made to fight the lawsuit, the two voting against did so on economic grounds.

Click to expand...

And I've twice given my objection to the school doing this.

Somerville said:

Now we are at the stage which created the title: Cut Ten Commandments down to 6?

Click to expand...

Has God chimed in yet with His decision whether or not to cut them down from 10 to 6?

Somerville said:

And this is an on-going debate in the political spectrum of modern America?

Click to expand...

Yes, passionately.

Somerville said:

Why should institutions that don't pay taxes also be able to receive funding from those taxes collected, sometimes from citizens who don't agree with the faith of the recipient?

Click to expand...

No school pays taxes, that would be redcurrant. Neither does the military, police or fire departments pay taxs.

Somerville said:

How much of that federal funding to "faith-based" institutions would fall under the definition of "pork" and "earmarks" if they went to a secular group doing the same thing?

Click to expand...

Real numbers can be made available in a thread about federally funding faith-based schools. My purpose with bringing these up was to give perspective on how petty it is for either side to fight over a $5 poster. No one should have put the poster up, objected to it, filed a lawsuit or fought al lawsuit. All parties involved are to be ashamed of themselves, especially in light of the illiteracy rate among American highschool graduates.

jerry wrote:

No school pays taxes, that would be redcurrant (??redundant??). Neither does the military, police or fire departments pay taxs.

Click to expand...

Are you comparing government agencies to churches? Does not compute.

Somerville said:

I hope you realise just how nonsensical this statement is: "atheism is a religion for you to then assume the premise in your post that an atheist poster is equal to a religious poster?"

"atheism is a religion for you" - makes an assumption about another who is known only thru this forum, while simultaneously using a definition for one specific stance about the universe that is only acceptable to those who hold other views.

"an atheist poster is equal to a religious poster" - this contradicts the earlier claim that "atheism is a religion", for it plainly states that one object is equal to another object thereby saying they are not the same.

"All we want is equal representation." Oh you poor, poor persecuted xians (and other faithists), the world is just so mean to you. How ever did you become the majority of the population with over 90% representation in elected offices when you don't have "equal representation"? Hellfire, man! You are right - you don't have "equal representation" - you have dominant and domineering representation.

Click to expand...

I like how you took out the first 2 words of that sentence and then ignored the question mark. It's weak trolling but I appreciate the effort. I was asking if he thought atheism was a religion, I was not stating that atheism was a religion. Have a goon one :2wave:

Somerville said:

jerry wrote:
Are you comparing government agencies to churches? Does not compute.

Click to expand...

Not at all.

We were talking about public schools and private religious schools. The claim was made that a religious display shouldn't be allowed in a public school since that public school received federal tax funding. I made the point that private religious schools also receive that same federal tax funding and yet they are permitted to saturate themselves with religiosity.

Mine was the act of controlling for the tax-funding variable. The existence of tax funding does not create a mandate for a religion-free environment, as evidence by tax funded religious schools. This is because religious schools are not churches, they are still school which have to comply with a host of regulation from the Department of Education.

No one is talking about churches.

The presence of a religious poster does not violate the 1st amendment. However, neither does removing said poster violate the 1st amendment. People are free to display or not display to their heart's content. It's a broad right with a wide range of acceptable behaviors.