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

a reply to: grandmakdw

most accredited colleges have religious study courses, where the student can get a overall history of religion in the various cultures of the world. if you want to study about the Christian religion, there are hundreds of colleges that do so...the reason they do not bring it up in elementary and secondary schools, is that it is left up to the parents at that young age...SO THE SCHOOL CANNOT ARBITRALITY INFLUENCE underage children. this is called freedom of choice

a reply to: grandmakdw

Then you need to stand up and fight against it. Contact the media. Make a big media stink about it and I guarantee that the schools will back down. To me this looks like a bunch of Christian educators being scared of Big, Bad Atheists coming to take their religion away and not fully understanding the rules about teaching religion. You did mention this is in Texas. I don't find it surprising that a bunch of Texan Christians wouldn't understand Atheist sentiment.

ETA: Where I live it is still 100% ok to teach religious history as long as you don't try to promote religion while doing it.

a reply to: Krazysh0t

You are 100% right about the hypocrisy in the right and this issue proves it. You are 100% wrong about the progressive agenda on guns......The progressive agenda puts the rights of the masses over individual rights. That is why they want to ban guns to keep the masses safe or so they say. Truth be told TPTB I believe use this mindset to control and divide so they can form lasting Oligarchies.

originally posted by: Spiramirabilis
a reply to: grandmakdw

Except for me, when was the last post that even mentioned the topic? Talk about thread drift, since I was here last the thread has gone off the cliff.

So let's get back on topic

Bruce Prescott, an ordained Baptist minister who was one of the plaintiffs in the case against the statue, said that the statue is “unavoidable” to people walking near the Capitol building, and it gives the impression that the state endorses Christianity as an official religion.

“I’m not opposed to Ten Commandment monuments; I’m opposed to them on government property,” he told The Washington Post on Tuesday. “How do you take a covenant between God and his people and make it a secular monument?”

Prescott added that Baptists have historically defended the separation of church and state and have insisted that religious texts continue to be interpreted in a religious context.

“If you’re saying that it’s no longer religious, what have you done to religion?” he said. “They’ve just completely destroyed the significance and value of the words.”

The emphasis is mine. An interesting position - how do you feel about it?

I actually agree with him. It's religious - posting it in front of government buildings changes it's meaning. For everyone

I'm not Christian. Should the government building that I look to to be the seat of power for my state - and which should above all else represent all it's constituents - be using the bible for anything at all?

That piece of religious art wasn't there historically. It was placed there specifically by a few people in 2012

Article II, Section V of the state constitution specifies that “no public money or property shall ever be appropriated, applied, donated, or used, directly or indirectly, for the use, benefit, or support of any sect, church, denomination, or system of religion, or for the use, benefit, or support of any priest, preacher, minister, or other religious teacher or dignitary, or sectarian institution as such.”

“It� ��s probably good for them to have an open and honest conversation instead of playing games,” he added.

If it is banned from one public arena by SCOTUS, to be fair and just and to give equal treatment to all - then it must be removed from all public arena's equally. It doesn't matter when it was placed there, or why, it was banned by the court within court grounds. The 10 Commandments are the same no matter when they were placed in a location or why, they are still the 10 Commandments. If SCOTUS wants it banned in one courthouse, it must by extension be banned from all.

a reply to: SubTruth

Name ONE legislative attempt to actually BAN guns within the last 15 years instead of restrict them. Just one.

a reply to: grandmakdw

Well, OK - fine I guess. But that isn't the answer to the question I asked you. It's actually a very interesting question...

Maybe you'll reconsider - and tell me what you think?

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: SubTruth

Name ONE legislative attempt to actually BAN guns within the last 15 years instead of restrict them. Just one.

It is all about getting a foot in the door.......Jews did not think guns were being banned when they had to start registering them...........I do not want to stray off topic and we can continue this another time in another thread and ya I know I brought it up.



I follow a simple mindset.......I think we should follow the constitution and individual rights. It can be hard at times because you believe in something that goes against that. Another poster brought up military memorials...........He is right. And it raises questions in mind about separation of church and state.

originally posted by: SubTruth

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: SubTruth

Name ONE legislative attempt to actually BAN guns within the last 15 years instead of restrict them. Just one.

It is all about getting a foot in the door.......Jews did not think guns were being banned when they had to start registering them...........I do not want to stray off topic and we can continue this another time in another thread and ya I know I brought it up.

I didn't ask for that. I asked for one legislative attempt to ban guns. There hasn't been one, so accusing Progressives of trying to ban guns remains right wing fear rhetoric. Also, you just invoked Godwin's Law here.

I follow a simple mindset.......I think we should follow the constitution and individual rights. It can be hard at times because you believe in something that goes against that. Another poster brought up military memorials...........He is right. And it raises questions in mind about separation of church and state.

Great, but I wish you'd be a little more intellectually honest about the wants of side of the political spectrum you disagree with. It's hard to come together on a compromise for things when you start off with strawman opinions about their arguments that must be dispelled and disproven first.

what gets me about arguing about any religion not being on government property, as the constitutions establishment clause dictates...IT'S ALL AROUND US....there is no lack of religious symbols, writings, statues, TV shows, radio stations, there is religion in newspapers, books, magazines, on buildings, on billboards, on T-shirts, on every outside-designed sign you can think of. there are whole blocks of a town that are taken up with churches, and religious schools. there are religious stores that are open to the public, there are religious books on Amazon, Ebay, and thousands of websites, there are regular brick and mortar book stores that contain entire sections on religion.....so....to say that it should be removed from our government buildings is NOT GOING to sink America into the depths of hell, or remove god from our lives.

a reply to: Krazysh0t

that aside, he is correct: the basic difference between "left" and "right" in America boils down to individual rights vs collective rights.

My oldest son and I have a lot of good talks hashing through his fiercely collective views and my fiercely individual views.

It is also a major divide between east and west. Collectivism is fundamental in eastern thought. Right down to the commercials you see, and how they position products to appear approved by the collective.

a reply to: bigfatfurrytexan

I wasn't denying that difference. That difference is certainly correct. I was dispelling the hyperbole about Progressives wanting to ban guns. Fun fact: Many Progressives ALSO own guns.

a reply to: Krazysh0t

I do not fit into the current political boxes everyone else tries to fit in.........I keep it simple now. I believe we should follow the constitution and put individual rights first. Heck even the political spectrum is corrupted today. Left is right and right is left.



The political spectrum is best described by control.....Laws/regulations. The right historically is for less laws and regulations and the far right would actually be anarchy with no laws or regulations. The left historically is for more laws and regulations and that means the far left is fascism.......Truth be told fascism is always an Oligarchy form of government.

a reply to: Krazysh0t

My uncle is a registered democrat that thinks Obama is the best thing since plastic bottles. He sleeps with a sawed off 4-10 next to his bed, and spent 2 decades as a Sgt at Arms for the Cossacks.

He is almost a walking paradox....but proves your point true.

originally posted by: SubTruth
a reply to: Krazysh0t

I do not fit into the current political boxes everyone else tries to fit in.........I keep it simple now. I believe we should follow the constitution and put individual rights first. Heck even the political spectrum is corrupted today. Left is right and right is left.

Fantastic. That isn't a bad position to take. You still appear to be susceptible to the propaganda though.

The political spectrum is best described by control.....Laws/regulations. The right historically is for less laws and regulations and the far right would actually be anarchy with no laws or regulations. The left historically is for more laws and regulations and that means the far left is fascism.......Truth be told fascism is always an Oligarchy form of government.

No... That isn't true at all. That just shows a COMPLETE lack of understanding about each side of the political spectrum. For one, HISTORICALLY the Left used to be Libertarian and the right used to be pro-Business. For two, the right is JUST as guilty of passing more controlling laws and regulations *cough*gay marriage bans*cough*, and the left has done things to remove controlling laws and regulations.

Also, you appear to not know what Fascism is. Fascism is a state of government controlled by hyper-patriotism, religion, and massive control. The right is more likely to implement a Fascist state going by that definition than the left.

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: bigfatfurrytexan

I wasn't denying that difference. That difference is certainly correct. I was dispelling the hyperbole about Progressives wanting to ban guns. Fun fact: Many Progressives ALSO own guns.

But also a fact--the leftist establishment, the people that "progressives" support, are the ones at the forefront of banning guns.

originally posted by: grandmakdw

originally posted by: SubTruth

originally posted by: introvert
a reply to: SubTruth

What you just described is exactly what the "progressives" are asking for. Keep you religion out of my face and I will stay out of yours.

Conservatives need to look at the bigger issue in this debate............Religion is personal not public. It really is that simple.

Ok, so you agree that religion should be completely scrubbed from the public arena?

Remove the entire facade of SCOTUS that has religious writings on it?

You seem to have fallen victim to religious propaganda..can you tell me what the religious writings of the Façade state?

www.snopes.com...

If by "Public Arena" you mean our government ...courts, capitols etc....Yes. they should not advocate for or endorse any specific religion.

And No...The architectural features of the Supreme Court building do not endorse any specific religion.

originally posted by: NavyDoc

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: bigfatfurrytexan

I wasn't denying that difference. That difference is certainly correct. I was dispelling the hyperbole about Progressives wanting to ban guns. Fun fact: Many Progressives ALSO own guns.

But also a fact--the leftist establishment, the people that "progressives" support, are the ones at the forefront of banning guns.

Restricting guns. Until a Progressive/Democrat tries to realistically pass a bill to actually ban ALL guns, I refuse to believe that they are trying to ban guns.

I don't even agree with many of the anti-2nd arguments, but it is a strawman to accuse them of trying to ban all guns. I'm sure SOME Progressives do want to ban guns, but most political Progressives know that is a stance that is unachievable.

originally posted by: NavyDoc

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: bigfatfurrytexan

I wasn't denying that difference. That difference is certainly correct. I was dispelling the hyperbole about Progressives wanting to ban guns. Fun fact: Many Progressives ALSO own guns.

But also a fact--the leftist establishment, the people that "progressives" support, are the ones at the forefront of banning guns.

For effs sake...what "forefront" of banning guns? There is no forefront...not a middle..not even a back....Gun's are more available today then they were at the time of Wild Earp.

The paranoid hyperbole of NRA mouthpieces is ridiculous.

a reply to: Indigo5

I recently said this in another gun thread:
"You know, with the way that gun purchases ALWAYS increase during these supposedly Democrat led "gun grabs" you'd think there was a conspiracy from gun lobbies to create these situations."

originally posted by: SubTruth
a reply to: Krazysh0t

I do not fit into the current political boxes everyone else tries to fit in.........I keep it simple now. I believe we should follow the constitution and put individual rights first. Heck even the political spectrum is corrupted today. Left is right and right is left.



The political spectrum is best described by control.....Laws/regulations. The right historically is for less laws and regulations and the far right would actually be anarchy with no laws or regulations. The left historically is for more laws and regulations and that means the far left is fascism.......Truth be told fascism is always an Oligarchy form of government.

you're wrong....here's the definition of facism...www.google.com...=definition+of+facism