WTF? Seriously, you have to be insane to think they're not the sign of a religion.



The first four of those are blatantly religious, and blatanly Judeo-Christian. You simply can't argue otherwise.

Yes, I think the ten commandments were and are very, very much a edifice of religion especialy Christanity. And I don't think they did anything wrong in removing it, it just seems funny about how they considered it a mixing of religion and state. The thing that is so funny to men though is that I've gone to schools where they had advertisments for the Wiccan on the walls and stuff. And people complained and were then told that it was just there to "introduce" children to other cultures, and that they weren't promoting it above any others. I just think it's strange that they were able to pass that off legaly while having a statue in a courthouse is unconstitutional.

I wasn't tryig to promote anything, just make a point about where these people "might" be coming from.(NOTE I highly doubt it) I completely agree that what they did was sick and unacceptable but not all Christians are like that is all I ment. Just as not all gays are chld-abusers.

Edit: I mean the rl wiccan not the Lusternian one.

Have you ever read the Hamurabi code?

Also the 10 commandments are no more a 'sign' of any religion as a bottle of wine is the 'sign' of a religion.

Its something used by religious people, but is not a symbol of any particular religion, if anything it is a symbol of law and authority.


Just incase your not sure what the Hamurabi code says.

http://eawc.evansville.edu/anthology/hammurabi.htm


The bias here is clearly that people still hold a grudge for the abuse of the powers of the Christian church from some 900 years ago, and are still fearfull for some reason even though a coherant central religous body that the majority of people listen to has not existed for probably 150 years, in any country that has a seperation of 'church and state'

But the 10 commandments ARE a symbol of religion. Didn't you read what Sylphas posted? It's like saying the Qu'ran (horribly misspelt, likely) isn't a sign of a religion, just something a religion uses.

The level of significance of the 10 commandments beyond being a symbol of Absolute law and authority is almost nil.

The Quran is used by -1- religion, the 10 commandments are mentioned by a minimum of 4, not including all the branch off religions.

The 10 commandments are a historical document of law used to give the early Israelites a basis of moral understanding and law that would transend and unite the various laws that each of the 12 tribe would have.

Some religions give it more signifcance than others. Then again, some religions worship spaceships... should the government not fund space programs because people worship spaceships?

The fact is that any sybmol that Christains decide to use gets deemed 'unconstitutional' but any other symbol from any other religion is called 'cultural awareness'. I'm Jewish and I can see the clear bias against the religion that I grew up believing would be the cause of all my troubles in the world. (1,000 years of persecution does that to a people)

I don't see any Jewish teachers leading prayers in public school. I don't see the Quran on the wall of court buildings. I don't see a pentacle plastered all over the damn place. Only Christians TRY this crap.

Well lets see, Required reading in Harvard for incomming freshman is the Quran.

Parts of Florida have banned Christamas trees in public, but allows Chanukiahs.

Grafiti is full of Pentacles.

Have you heard about this place called the middle east? Every country there is theocratically based.

Don't tell me other religions don't 'try this crap' they try and succeed.

I'd also ask you to find me an ancient document that is not religious in nature.

Sun Tzu's Art of War? :/ Not that I know for sure, just stabbing. I bet there's more than you think.

I happened to have read Sun Tzu and the 5 rings for a eastern religion class, so ummm.. yeah. Eastern Religions are not written about the same way that western ones are. My favorite is the quote from the emporer of china who said that he would allow the chinese to convert to Christianity if the Pope recognized the Emporer as Jesus's brother. (It was a serious request)

I notice that none of those are even comparable to the question at hand. The middle east is irrelevant because it's not the US, and we are clearly talking about US law. Required reading in Harvard is a totally different scenario with a totally different motivation. Grafitti is not condoned by the government, so I hardly see how its relevant here.

I'm having trouble finding this place in Florida you're talking about. The only one I can find is Pasco county, where Christmas trees were banned because all other religious symbols were banned and a man wanted to display a manorah. So, instead of allowing him to display his manorah, they banned Christmas trees as well. That hardly sounds like they're allowing other religions to display their symbols. It has been the case that Christianity was given special treatment in the past, and was allowed to display their symbols while no other religion could. Perhaps this apparent bias against Christianity is only an evening of the the scales?

I think Sylphas is right, if you can point me to a courthouse where any other religion tried to set up a symbol, and was allowed, I'd be amazed.

Also, the number of religions that make reference to the ten commandments is totally irrelevant. They are a religious symbol, and there's really no debate on the issue.

..crap? This thread is all about intolerance... don't be one of the so-called retards it's complaining about.

Don't make me explain to you how the bible was written by English Lords and Italian popes instead of hebrew prophets!

Psst, Prayer in school, in ANY form, is illegal. Oral sex in Florida is illegal. And so is making animal sounds in Miami. So is having a donkey in your bathtub in Brooklyn. Doesn't mean it's enforced.

Prayer in school *is* illegal. I just finished my AP US Gov't class. We spent like, four weeks debating it. Well, that and a few other things. Like burning a flag. Which we did to protest the christians praying on school! I'm a flag-burning hippy at heart, swear it!

Edit: Like my half-baked grammar? o.O

Maybe where you live...

Sorry about the late reply, I haven't really checked up on this thread (Usually my policy with things like this is to just ignore them). I'm not quite sure what options he was presented, it was a few years ago. However if he were to have other things up in the first place it wouldn't have been an issue. (The real issue there is where one courthouse is going to get enough money for several monuments.)

That would deffinetly be a Fedral law, unless you live outside the United States it's going to be the same everywhere. I did a quick search on the subject and here's what I found in the first link....

Prayer is not illegal.
State sponsored prayer is.
Many states now have a "Moment of Silence" in the mornings.
You are forbidden to talk, or disrupt the silence.
The state is unable to enforce this, as the student has the choice to leave the room.
The Establishment Clause only provides federal, consitutional legitimacy for any cases brought to the Supreme Court. Individual states may or may not encourage prayer, religious meditation or nonsecular activity in schools, but it is up to the individual to bring suit. In Virginia, our conservatives have thus far been unable to get rid of Mr. Jefferson's Statute of Religious Freedoms though, so we can do what we want with our schools' Minute of Silence and Pledge of Alleigiance, if we find it objectionable. Heck, the government is so right leaning, and the Court is changing around fast enough, that school prayer could be mandatory and no one would raise a finger.

Meh, I only meant to refute Amaru's claim that there could be some state nullifiying that, something which history has shown isn't done without consequences from the Fedral government, not to be 100% accurate. I was more speaking about the state level than the individual.

lets repeat here...

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion"

You can not say a religion is illegal, you can not say it is legal, you can not make a law about it.

As for Florida... http://www.cnsnews.com/ViewNation.asp?Page...T20041203a.html