OK Supreme Court: Ten Commandments Monument Must Be Removed From Capitol

originally posted by: Logarock
I don't know why you would be confused considering I conceded your point....which was not much of a leap. The reason you keep driving your point is because of your bigotry against christianity.

My distaste for ALL organized religions is irrelevant. If some asshats wanted to exclusively erect a Koran monument on public grounds I would be just as adamant that it should be removed.

You just don't like me advocating for the churches position here. And really you like to use context.....

I do not like that you are doing it disingenuously.

a reply to: Krazysh0t

The point you are missing is that America does have a Christian founding, ass seen in it's laws and culture and even says so on the justification for keeping IN GOD WE TRUST on US currency.

"reference to the country’s religious heritage." did you read that.

originally posted by: ScientificRailgun
a reply to: bigfatfurrytexan

Churches and religious organizations tend to do a lot of Charity work. Which is primarily what the 501(c) status entails, is that the organization is a not-for-profit charity venture. Plenty of non-religious groups also have 501(c) status. I'm sure you already knew that, of course. Just figured it bears repeating for those who may be confused on why churches have this status. It is not because the churches are religious, it is because they are charitable.

It doesn't clear up anything. All you are doing is demonstrating your deeply ingrained ignorance of why the IRS unconstitutionally applied that definition to protected 1sr amendment status. The constitution does not under the 1st amendment define religion by any auxiliary and non-commercial function which they undertake.

originally posted by: theabsolutetruth
a reply to: Krazysh0t

The point you are missing is that America does have a Christian founding, ass seen in it's laws and culture and even says so on the justification for keeping IN GOD WE TRUST on US currency.

"reference to the country’s religious heritage." did you read that.

I'm not missing any point. I acknowledge freely that the country has been historically majority Christian and that historically Christians have attempted to and have even succeeded (all the way up to the present I might add) to install parts of their religion into the government. None of that makes this nation a Christian nation though. The Constitution is clear on that.

For someone that likes to go on and on about the Constitution being trampled over, you don't appear to understand what it says very well.

a reply to: AugustusMasonicus

The entire context of the letter is:

Christian pastor: ''Put something Christian on the currency for posterity so in the future people know we weren't heathens and our nation's Christian heritage is known''

Secretary Chase: ''Okay then, here ya go ''IN GOD WE TRUST'' and words like it will be on the currency''

Try some CONTEXT.

originally posted by: theabsolutetruth
a
"reference to the country’s religious heritage." did you read that.

Spot the word 'Christian' in there that we may be missing?

Know the difference between Christian and religion?

originally posted by: theabsolutetruth

The entire context of the letter is:

Christian pastor: ''Put something Christian on the currency for posterity so in the future people know we weren't heathens and our nation's Christian heritage is known''

Secretary Chase: ''Okay then, here ya go ''IN GOD WE TRUST'' and words like it will be on the currency''

Try some CONTEXT.

Let me see if I grasp your rather simplistic point, God=Christianity, that about right?

Try again.

a reply to: Krazysh0t

Never once on ATS have I mentioned the constitution being ''trampled over'' in fact I rarely mention the constitution at all.

I pointed out the US is based on Christian legacy, I am correct, all you and a few others did was twisted words, denied it then said the same thing.

As usual arguing for arguments sake.

originally posted by: Krazysh0t

originally posted by: NavyDoc
Our laws have a variety of influences, English common law, Mosaic law, Roman Law, etc. and many of those influences influenced each other--English common law had influences from Roman, Christian, and pagan laws and traditions, for example.

Ok, that is a fair point. I was being a bit overly simplistic with my answer there, but the sources for our law also aren't primarily Christian like theabsolutetruth is suggesting.

That given, I don't think that the 10 commandments is an endorsement of religion--which religion? Christian? Hebrew?--as long as it is simply a representation of the concept of the law.

But there are religious decrees in the 10 commandments. Almost half of of the commandments demand respect to god.

The SCOTUS has the 10 commandments but also the code of Hammurabi and Roman deities as references to the history of the law and law giving that influenced us.

This was addressed earlier in the thread. The point was that the ten commandments under scrutiny here is because it is a monument sitting alone and by itself. Your example is paying tribute to other religions as well to display a different message through the artwork.

Certainly that is part of the verbiage, but is it being followed? Mandated? Most courts have a statue of "lady justice" as well. Do remove it as it is a pagan symbol or recognize it as a historical reference? Unless, of course, the judge is ruling based on pagan principles.

At least it is a state court making a decision on their state and not a federal mandate.

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus

originally posted by: Logarock
I don't know why you would be confused considering I conceded your point....which was not much of a leap. The reason you keep driving your point is because of your bigotry against christianity.

My distaste for ALL organized religions is irrelevant. If some asshats wanted to exclusively erect a Koran monument on public grounds I would be just as adamant that it should be removed.

You just don't like me advocating for the churches position here. And really you like to use context.....

I do not like that you are doing it disingenuously.

Don't really care what you don't like. You use "context" disingenuously throughout this thread.

But yea public grounds can be free of religious this and that. And before some of yous get on a full roll about the Muslims....they traditional love the public property to be full of their symbols. Sadly no better than the christians here. sarc

originally posted by: ScientificRailgun
a reply to: bigfatfurrytexan

Churches and religious organizations tend to do a lot of Charity work. Which is primarily what the 501(c) status entails, is that the organization is a not-for-profit charity venture. Plenty of non-religious groups also have 501(c) status. I'm sure you already knew that, of course. Just figured it bears repeating for those who may be confused on why churches have this status. It is not because the churches are religious, it is because they are charitable.

Which, it bears mentioning, supports the very libertarian nature of our nations founding.

Charity was not meant for the government, it was meant for religious institutions (and other groups that would today be called "charitable organizations")

a reply to: AugustusMasonicus

Read the text it says Christianity, that is the context of the request.

a reply to: theabsolutetruth

Well when you try to rewrite history with lies, I'm going to call you on it. The nation isn't a Christian nation. It ISN'T a theocracy no matter how much you believe it to be. Christians have just successfully pushed their religion into government where it doesn't belong in the past. Rulings like the OP are just fixing those mistakes.

originally posted by: Logarock

Don't really care what you don't like.

I know, that is why I prefaced my comments by saying my personl view is irrelevant. I, unlike the religious nutters, can separate my personal feelings from interpretation of the law.

You use "context" disingenuously throughout this thread.

Not really, I fully understand the context of the First Amendment when it says religion; it means religion.

But yea public grounds can be free of religious this and that. And before some of yous get on a full roll about the Muslims....they traditional love the public property to be full of their symbols. Sadly no better than the christians here. sarc

Well good for them, they cannot indiscriminately erect religious monuments just like every other denomination.

originally posted by: bigfatfurrytexan
a reply to: TheSemiSkeptic

Yes, the treaty is a statement of governance, not culture.

The topic of this thread is governance, not culture (a government building, to be precise)

Obviously, you can feel free to discuss culture. I was just wanting to point out that culture was neither part of the topic of the thread, nor the post you were replying to.

My statement of, "America is absolutely not a Christian nation." is accurate, as evidenced by and in context to the Treaty of Tripoli.

Sorry for the delay in answering, your post slipped by and I went digging through the thread to find it. Now with that being said.

A Nation is not the Government and the Government is not the Nation. You stated that America is not a Christian Nation and then point to a Government document to prove your point. Two separate entities, granted they can not exist without one another, but they are two separate entities.

originally posted by: Krazysh0t

originally posted by: theabsolutetruth
a reply to: Krazysh0t

The point you are missing is that America does have a Christian founding, ass seen in it's laws and culture and even says so on the justification for keeping IN GOD WE TRUST on US currency.

"reference to the country’s religious heritage." did you read that.

I'm not missing any point. I acknowledge freely that the country has been historically majority Christian and that historically Christians have attempted to and have even succeeded (all the way up to the present I might add) to install parts of their religion into the government. None of that makes this nation a Christian nation though. The Constitution is clear on that.

For someone that likes to go on and on about the Constitution being trampled over, you don't appear to understand what it says very well.

However, the Constitution is for a secular government without a state religion. It doesn't say much about eliminating every and anything that might be religious from public areas--if it did we'd have to remove most of the historical artwork from historical buildings throughout D.C. and take a bulldozer to Arlington National Cemetery.

a reply to: NavyDoc

That's a good point about the Lady Justice statue... I hadn't thought about that iconography before. I'm going to have to contemplate how I feel about that for awhile now.

originally posted by: theabsolutetruth
Read the text it says Christianity, that is the context of the request.

He is asking if the person he is corresponding with is Christian.

And once again, does God=Jesus/Christianity?

Thought not.

Don’t worry folks this will all be settled when the Satanists demand equal billing by the state.

Then the religious Christians will cease this tendency to want to display their religious symbols on government property


The concept of the original constitution writers is a sublime one: trying to be even handed regards religion and not ever let one dominate the political landscape.


It amazes me why people can’t understand that


By doing this they protect all of our rights

originally posted by: NavyDoc

originally posted by: Krazysh0t

originally posted by: theabsolutetruth
a reply to: Krazysh0t

The point you are missing is that America does have a Christian founding, ass seen in it's laws and culture and even says so on the justification for keeping IN GOD WE TRUST on US currency.

"reference to the country’s religious heritage." did you read that.

I'm not missing any point. I acknowledge freely that the country has been historically majority Christian and that historically Christians have attempted to and have even succeeded (all the way up to the present I might add) to install parts of their religion into the government. None of that makes this nation a Christian nation though. The Constitution is clear on that.

For someone that likes to go on and on about the Constitution being trampled over, you don't appear to understand what it says very well.

However, the Constitution is for a secular government without a state religion. It doesn't say much about eliminating every and anything that might be religious from public areas--if it did we'd have to remove most of the historical artwork from historical buildings throughout D.C. and take a bulldozer to Arlington National Cemetery.

I didn't suggest that it did say that. I've been very clear on my points about this topic in the beginning about historical artwork that depicts religious symbols for reasons other than to promote religion.

You can make whatever case you want about this, but the fact remains the ten commandments in OK where there solely to promote Christianity. That is why they were removed.