Page 22 of 35 FirstFirst ... 12202122232432 ... LastLast
Results 211 to 220 of 344

Thread: Judge rules Ten Commandments monument must go

  1. #211
    Sage
    Cephus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    CA
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 08:54 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Conservative
    Posts
    29,793

    Re: Judge rules Ten Commandments monument must go

    Quote Originally Posted by ernst barkmann View Post
    I don't want to say Christian founding, however in forming the ideas and our laws of this land, the founders did express statements of Christianity in creating them.
    More like Christianity expressed sentiments of humanity. The sentiments were around long before Christianity.
    There is nothing demonstrably true that religion can provide the world that cannot be achieved more rationally through entirely secular means.

    Blog me! YouTube me! VidMe me!

  2. #212
    Mixed Government advocate
    Master PO's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    93,000,000 miles from Earth where its very Hot
    Last Seen
    11-30-17 @ 01:52 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    31,331

    Re: Judge rules Ten Commandments monument must go

    Quote Originally Posted by Cephus View Post
    More like Christianity expressed sentiments of humanity. The sentiments were around long before Christianity.


    "Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people"....John Adams

  3. #213
    Sage
    Cephus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    CA
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 08:54 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Conservative
    Posts
    29,793

    Re: Judge rules Ten Commandments monument must go

    Quote Originally Posted by ernst barkmann View Post
    "Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people"....John Adams
    Which says nothing about Christianity. However, this does:

    "As the Government of the United States of America is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion; as it has in itself no character of enmity against the laws, religion, or tranquillity, of Musselmen; and as the said States never have entered into any war or act of hostility against any Mehomitan nation, it is declared by the parties that no pretext arising from religious opinions shall ever produce an interruption of the harmony existing between the two countries." - George Washington, Treaty of Tripoli
    There is nothing demonstrably true that religion can provide the world that cannot be achieved more rationally through entirely secular means.

    Blog me! YouTube me! VidMe me!

  4. #214
    Mixed Government advocate
    Master PO's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    93,000,000 miles from Earth where its very Hot
    Last Seen
    11-30-17 @ 01:52 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    31,331

    Re: Judge rules Ten Commandments monument must go

    Quote Originally Posted by Cephus View Post
    Which says nothing about Christianity. However, this does:

    "As the Government of the United States of America is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion; as it has in itself no character of enmity against the laws, religion, or tranquillity, of Musselmen; and as the said States never have entered into any war or act of hostility against any Mehomitan nation, it is declared by the parties that no pretext arising from religious opinions shall ever produce an interruption of the harmony existing between the two countries." - George Washington, Treaty of Tripoli
    Adams was a Christian person, so when he states it was created for a moral and religious people, that did of coarse include Christianity.

    notice is you statement at its very beginning---As the Government of the United States of America is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion.

    and that is correct ...the constitution which creates the federal government, it structure and FEDERALISM is not in any way religious, it not meant to me.....because It does what its supposed to do ......"create federalism"

    however the idea of constitutional law, which embodies the founding principles of the Declaration of Independence, which does has overtones of the deity... rights from a higher power, not man, and man made laws have be no authority to alter or abolish those rights.

    by the way...the declaration of independence is law........u.s. code... book 1 page 1

  5. #215
    Advisor Swit's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    Chicago, Illinois
    Last Seen
    10-13-16 @ 12:44 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    390

    Re: Judge rules Ten Commandments monument must go

    Quote Originally Posted by matchlight View Post
    It wouldn't get far with me, either, as far as the Constitution is concerned. I believe the Constitution should be interpreted according to the generally accepted definition of the words at the time they were written.
    Often times due to societal changes the USSC has opted to interpret based of the intent of a law as opposed to the definition of the words used (generally accepted definition at the time of authorship or not). This is at the behest of the sitting Judges and them alone.

    Quote Originally Posted by matchlight View Post
    The Supreme Court claimed the right to review the constitutionality of federal laws in Marbury v. Madison in 1803. I don't question that right. But the Court did not claim it was the solearbiter of what the Constitution means until Cooper v. Aaron in 1958. And I do question that claim. Congress has several ways to check the Supreme Court. And the people of the states have the final say about what anything in the Constitution means.
    The only real check that congress has over the USSC is refusing to confirm a nominee, aside from that they would need to amend the constitution to reverse a USSC desicion. What other checks do they have exactly? And can you provide an example of how the preople somehow have final say on what the Constitution means? Are you suggesting the people can overturn USSC descisions?

    Quote Originally Posted by matchlight View Post
    II have never seen an argument about the Constitution being a living, breathing document, including the ones made by Supreme Court justices, that was talking about amendments. You are conflating expansive interpretations of the Constitution with amendments to it in a very misleading way. I'll leave it to others to decide whether that's disingenuous of you.
    I am doing no such thing. The referemce to the constitution being a living document, was specifically refering to the amendment process.... hell its right there in black and white in the text you quoted from me. Giving you the benefit of the doubt, I think perhaps you misread what I wrote.
    here is Fenton's original quote:
    Quote Originally Posted by Fenton View Post
    A Constitution thats " living '', or that can be corrupted based on the whims of extremely short sighted individuals is NOT a Constitution any more.
    now look at my responce again. Fenton was arguing against the constitution being amendable (living) and trying to use those very same amendments (specifically the establishment clause of the 1st Amendment) to back up his previous arguments. See the irony there?

    Quote Originally Posted by matchlight View Post
    What you are claiming is flatly untrue. The ability to amend the Constitution does not depend at all on how strictly or expansively the Supreme Court has interpreted it in its decisions. No one had to make the Constitution a "living document," in the sense liberals have used that term to justify interpreting its words to mean whatever they want it to, to allow any amendment to it--including the amendments you mention.
    I never made any such claim, once again giving you the benefit of the doubt, I think you may have misread. I said that if the constitution was not a living document (i.e. not amendable) that we never could have inserted the bill of rights, abolish slavery, given women the right to vote, or ensure people have the right to bear arms (at least constitutionally) As they are all amendments. Where on eartrh did you get the notion that somehow i said USSC interpretation was somehow part of the amendment process?

    Quote Originally Posted by matchlight View Post
    The men who wrote the Constitution purposely included within it specific procedures for amending it, in Article V. The very fact they did that strongly suggests that they did not intend for it to be "amended" by the shortcut stratagem of torturing its meaning to fit the demands of whatever political faction happened to be squawking loudest at the time.

    The authors of the Constitution purposely made it hard to amend, by requiring a series of supermajority votes, for a damn good reason. And that is that a constitution which means nothing more than a simple majority--or even a vocal minority--can persuade a few judges to declare it means at a given time is not really a constitution at all. The document is the "Constitution of the United States"--not "Suggested Guidelines for Governing the United States."
    Sooooo..... You're basically just complaining about USSC descision that you don't like? Or are you really trying to make the argument that the USSC is somehow amending the Constitution because they interpret it differently than you do?
    Last edited by Swit; 08-09-14 at 05:59 PM. Reason: clarity and typos

  6. #216
    Sage
    Cephus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    CA
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 08:54 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Conservative
    Posts
    29,793

    Re: Judge rules Ten Commandments monument must go

    Quote Originally Posted by ernst barkmann View Post
    Adams was a Christian person, so when he states it was created for a moral and religious people, that did of coarse include Christianity.

    notice is you statement at its very beginning---As the Government of the United States of America is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion.

    and that is correct ...the constitution which creates the federal government, it structure and FEDERALISM is not in any way religious, it not meant to me.....because It does what its supposed to do ......"create federalism"

    however the idea of constitutional law, which embodies the founding principles of the Declaration of Independence, which does has overtones of the deity... rights from a higher power, not man, and man made laws have be no authority to alter or abolish those rights.

    by the way...the declaration of independence is law........u.s. code... book 1 page 1
    Which again, says nothing about Christianity at all. It's one thing for John Adams to have a personal opinion, it's entirely another to have it codified into law, as the Treaty of Tripoli did. Overtones of a deity says nothing about Christianity specifically, which is what people claim. This was not a nation founded and based on Christianity. It just wasn't.
    There is nothing demonstrably true that religion can provide the world that cannot be achieved more rationally through entirely secular means.

    Blog me! YouTube me! VidMe me!

  7. #217
    Dungeon Master
    Veni, vidi, dormivi!

    spud_meister's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Didjabringabeeralong
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    33,874
    Blog Entries
    8

    Re: Judge rules Ten Commandments monument must go

    Quote Originally Posted by Cephus View Post
    Hey, why not put Hitler quotes up there too? It's just words, what's the big deal?
    Hitler quotes would be in German, not many people could read them.
    So follow me into the desert
    As desperate as you are
    Where the moon is glued to a picture of heaven
    And all the little pigs have God

  8. #218
    Sage
    Cephus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    CA
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 08:54 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Conservative
    Posts
    29,793

    Re: Judge rules Ten Commandments monument must go

    Quote Originally Posted by spud_meister View Post
    Hitler quotes would be in German, not many people could read them.
    The Ten Commandments should be in Hebrew. Same problem.
    There is nothing demonstrably true that religion can provide the world that cannot be achieved more rationally through entirely secular means.

    Blog me! YouTube me! VidMe me!

  9. #219
    Dungeon Master
    Veni, vidi, dormivi!

    spud_meister's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Didjabringabeeralong
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    33,874
    Blog Entries
    8

    Re: Judge rules Ten Commandments monument must go

    Quote Originally Posted by Cephus View Post
    The Ten Commandments should be in Hebrew. Same problem.
    Good point.
    So follow me into the desert
    As desperate as you are
    Where the moon is glued to a picture of heaven
    And all the little pigs have God

  10. #220
    Sage
    apdst's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Bagdad, La.
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 09:46 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    76,496

    Re: Judge rules Ten Commandments monument must go

    Quote Originally Posted by danarhea View Post
    Others here can follow the conversation, and see for themselves how it went down. Now with that said, I can tell you for sure that your view is unconstitutional. From the Constitution of the United States......

    "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."

    There it is in black and white.

    1) While it says Congress, The Supreme Court ruled, in Everson v. Board of Education (330 U.S. 1), that the Establishment Clause also applies to state and local governments, not just the federal government.

    2) But what was on the mind of our forefathers, when the penned the First Amendment. It is pretty straightforward, when you look at this writing penned by Thomas Jefferson himself.

    "Believing with you 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."

    -Thomas Jefferson

    3) Now, while the meaning of the establishment clause is still up in the air, as to whether or not ANY religious symbols or writings are allowed to by put on public buildings, it is clear no government is allowed to pick and choose one religion over the other as to the choosing of those religious symbols or writings. For in doing so, they are "Prohibiting the free exercise thereof" to other religions, as defined in the First Amendment. This is unconstitutional.

    4) Now for the icing on the cake. How did our forefathers feel about religions other than Christianity? Thomas Jefferson again....

    "Where the preamble declares, that coercion is a departure from the plan of the holy author of our religion, an amendment was proposed by inserting "Jesus Christ," so that it would read "A departure from the plan of Jesus Christ, the holy author of our religion;" the insertion was rejected by the great majority, in proof that they meant to comprehend, within the mantle of its protection, the Jew and the Gentile, the Christian and Mohammedan, the Hindoo and Infidel of every denomination. "

    -Thomas Jefferson

    That's right. Freedom of religion does not apply to just one religion. It applies to ALL religions, and no government is allowed to pick and choose which religions are going to be favored. If that upsets you, then maybe you should just move to a nation that practices theocracy, because that is exactly what you are promoting. You might try Iran. While the Mullahs there might disagree with which religion you would choose to foist on the people, they would certainly agree with you that government should be dictated by a single religion of their choosing. That is not only unamerican, but is a view that is dangerous to the American way of life itself.
    Did I say that freedom of religion doesn't apply to all religions? Perhaps YOU should follow the conversation?
    Quote Originally Posted by Top Cat View Post
    At least Bill saved his transgressions for grown women. Not suggesting what he did was OK. But he didn't chase 14 year olds.

Page 22 of 35 FirstFirst ... 12202122232432 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •