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

originally posted by: Seamrog

originally posted by: introvert
a reply to: Seamrog

Who's trying to make this some sort of "utopia"?

originally posted by: introvert

I just want to live my life the way I see fit, allow others to do the same, and deny those that want to push their agendas and beliefs on to me.

I see this as an incredibly selfish, naive worldview. If you lived on your own little earth, this may be a valid concept, but in this reality, it speaks to a relatively narrow experience of a broader world.

I can't believe I just read that to be honest. He is selfish for wanting to live his life free of having ideology forced on him. I see comments like this from christians and instantly think "what would Jesus have said" definately not that he is selfish.

originally posted by: Krazysh0t

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.

Recognizing that it is not achievable--at least all at once--is not the same as not wanting a complete ban and, repeatedly that is has been the stated ultimate goal.

The left certainly has it's share of control freaks and progressives lead the charge for more regulation. Regulation on healthcare, energy, firearms, the internet, radio (they continually call for return of "the fairness" doctrine. They want to make more and more protected classes, something you have called for yourself, and demand that the government force individuals to comply with their notions of "fairness."

It is disingenuous to say that conservatives are for control and progressives are for individual liberty--that is simply a false dichotomy.

a reply to: grandmakdw

Why can't kids learn about religion in their churches, homes, and from those people that go door-to-door? Why does it have to be included into the school system?

I've already said in this thread that there at LEAST 313 different faiths and denominations in America. Is one more valid than another? Is one person's faith less valid or valuable than someone elses? How do we determine who's theism is to be presented over another's without bias?

The Christians have no problem stripping marriage altogether from the government now that gays can get married, what's the difference in stripping religion altogether from the schools if Christianity can't be taught?

originally posted by: Indigo5

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.

Your response is illogical. That they have not succeeded does not mean they haven't tried. Consider the myriad of calls for more gun control in the wake of the Charleston SC atrocity. ALL of the people and politicians using this disaster and the fear created in calling for gun control are "progressives."

originally posted by: NavyDoc
Recognizing that it is not achievable--at least all at once--is not the same as not wanting a complete ban and, repeatedly that is has been the stated ultimate goal.

Stated by who? I usually see this stated by Conservatives about Progressives.

The left certainly has it's share of control freaks and progressives lead the charge for more regulation. Regulation on healthcare, energy, firearms, the internet, radio (they continually call for return of "the fairness" doctrine. They want to make more and more protected classes, something you have called for yourself, and demand that the government force individuals to comply with their notions of "fairness."

I didn't deny this, but you equally can't deny that the right has its equal share of control freaks. In this case trying to impose Christian morality onto the public at large. The OP is about fixing one of those instances. Also, the reason marijuana and the Drug war at large are still on the books is largely due to conservatives. Liberals and independents appear to want to do away with it. Let's also not forget the wars for business profits the right likes to fight as well.

It is disingenuous to say that conservatives are for control and progressives are for individual liberty--that is simply a false dichotomy.

I didn't say that. My point was that people from EACH side of the political spectrum are control freaks using their sides political rhetoric to push their controlling ideas. There are also people from both sides of the political spectrum looking to extend personal liberty and expand equality as per the Constitution.

This is good new. The 10 commandments promote Judaism/yahweh-jehovah worship. It's not fair to other religions or followers of Christ who believe yahweh-jehovah is the demiurge/devil/false-god.

originally posted by: NavyDoc

originally posted by: Indigo5

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.

Your response is illogical. That they have not succeeded does not mean they haven't tried. Consider the myriad of calls for more gun control in the wake of the Charleston SC atrocity. ALL of the people and politicians using this disaster and the fear created in calling for gun control are "progressives."

You are conflating "restrictions" aka "gun control" with "ban".

Advocating for restrictions on who may buy alcohol or prescription codeine is not the same as advocating for prohibition or a ban.

This seems plain and logical to anyone not trained to respond to the NRA's "they are coming for your guns" fear whistle.

a reply to: NavyDoc

I was at the range Sunday shooting an AR-15. I probably put about 90 rounds down range, good grouping too at 25 and 50 yards. I have no problem with guns.

The guy next to me obviously had some kind of "tacti-cool" setup. Some kind of modified fully automatic 12g shotgun. I just don't ever see that as practical or useful -- but hey, it's his right.

Just like how there are crazy conservatives that get a lot of attention, there are a lot of crazy liberals that are anti gun everything. I think you'd find though if you took a poll that a lot of Democrats don't want to confiscate all your guns, simply have a more level-headed policy.

I mean, you can't own a nuclear bomb -- and there's nothing in the Constitution that says you can't. Technically it belongs under "arms" as it is an armament.

Given how many people own guns and how many guns are out there, I can't believe anyone thinks that the "gubment" is going to take their guns away. It'll never happen. It's fear mongering, this is America and we have a very unique history in regards to firearms -- hell, we invented some of the most famous ones here! They're not just tools, but part of our heritage and culture. The same can't quite be said for other countries.

a reply to: introvert

There are even those on the left that are pro-2nd, such as myself. I am a socialist and I am better at defending and articulating my 2nd amendment rights than any of these so-called "patriot" gun nuts.

*raises hand*
Me, too.

Hear, hear!

a reply to: Krazysh0t

As I said before this is not a debate about guns.....Another time perhaps. Perspective is key and many in this country have lost it.

a reply to: SubTruth

Fine. I'll drop it if you drop the slander against Progressives since they aren't the bad guys in this OP. That is ALSO an off-topic conversation.

originally posted by: MystikMushroom
a reply to: NavyDoc

I was at the range Sunday shooting an AR-15. I probably put about 90 rounds down range, good grouping too at 25 and 50 yards. I have no problem with guns.

The guy next to me obviously had some kind of "tacti-cool" setup. Some kind of modified fully automatic 12g shotgun. I just don't ever see that as practical or useful -- but hey, it's his right.

Just like how there are crazy conservatives that get a lot of attention, there are a lot of crazy liberals that are anti gun everything. I think you'd find though if you took a poll that a lot of Democrats don't want to confiscate all your guns, simply have a more level-headed policy.

I mean, you can't own a nuclear bomb -- and there's nothing in the Constitution that says you can't. Technically it belongs under "arms" as it is an armament.

Given how many people own guns and how many guns are out there, I can't believe anyone thinks that the "gubment" is going to take their guns away. It'll never happen. It's fear mongering, this is America and we have a very unique history in regards to firearms -- hell, we invented some of the most famous ones here! They're not just tools, but part of our heritage and culture. The same can't quite be said for other countries.

But that still does not change the salient fact that those who call for more gun control, who write and sponsor laws for more gun control, are entirely in the left.

originally posted by: NavyDoc

originally posted by: MystikMushroom
a reply to: NavyDoc

I was at the range Sunday shooting an AR-15. I probably put about 90 rounds down range, good grouping too at 25 and 50 yards. I have no problem with guns.

The guy next to me obviously had some kind of "tacti-cool" setup. Some kind of modified fully automatic 12g shotgun. I just don't ever see that as practical or useful -- but hey, it's his right.

Just like how there are crazy conservatives that get a lot of attention, there are a lot of crazy liberals that are anti gun everything. I think you'd find though if you took a poll that a lot of Democrats don't want to confiscate all your guns, simply have a more level-headed policy.

I mean, you can't own a nuclear bomb -- and there's nothing in the Constitution that says you can't. Technically it belongs under "arms" as it is an armament.

Given how many people own guns and how many guns are out there, I can't believe anyone thinks that the "gubment" is going to take their guns away. It'll never happen. It's fear mongering, this is America and we have a very unique history in regards to firearms -- hell, we invented some of the most famous ones here! They're not just tools, but part of our heritage and culture. The same can't quite be said for other countries.

But that still does not change the salient fact that those who call for more gun control, who write and sponsor laws for more gun control, are entirely in the left.

Only in congress where NRA Lobbyists write the checks and pull the strings.

The general public is much more nuanced.



www.people-press.org...

originally posted by: Indigo5

originally posted by: NavyDoc

originally posted by: MystikMushroom
a reply to: NavyDoc

I was at the range Sunday shooting an AR-15. I probably put about 90 rounds down range, good grouping too at 25 and 50 yards. I have no problem with guns.

The guy next to me obviously had some kind of "tacti-cool" setup. Some kind of modified fully automatic 12g shotgun. I just don't ever see that as practical or useful -- but hey, it's his right.

Just like how there are crazy conservatives that get a lot of attention, there are a lot of crazy liberals that are anti gun everything. I think you'd find though if you took a poll that a lot of Democrats don't want to confiscate all your guns, simply have a more level-headed policy.

I mean, you can't own a nuclear bomb -- and there's nothing in the Constitution that says you can't. Technically it belongs under "arms" as it is an armament.

Given how many people own guns and how many guns are out there, I can't believe anyone thinks that the "gubment" is going to take their guns away. It'll never happen. It's fear mongering, this is America and we have a very unique history in regards to firearms -- hell, we invented some of the most famous ones here! They're not just tools, but part of our heritage and culture. The same can't quite be said for other countries.

But that still does not change the salient fact that those who call for more gun control, who write and sponsor laws for more gun control, are entirely in the left.

Only in congress where NRA Lobbyists write the checks and pull the strings.

The general public is much more nuanced.

www.people-press.org...

In every one of those numbers, the Democrats are the majority.

a reply to: NavyDoc

Except for 'Laws to prevent mentally ill people from purchasing guns'.

While many of the people who drove pivotal events during the early years of our country were generally orthodox christiian, they were strongly opposed to organized religion or centralized government or any connection between government and religion. Most of them were educated too, so perhaps that helps explain why our nation didn't institutionalize rleigion.

Also just becaus someone identifies as christian says little of their actual beliefs. Thomas Jefferson was an Anglican or member of the Episcopal Church. Yet the older he became the looser his faith became:
en.wikipedia.org - Jefferson Bible...

There were few atheists. Somethihgn I want to get straight is atheists were never common and still aren't common. I think globally the incidence is probably less than 15%, maybe closer to 10% or less. The vast majority of people believe in some form of god. This was true during the founding of our country and is true today. AS well there's not just one "christianity", it's a whole envelope of denominations who don't agree with each other. So even if one twisted the facts to argue our nation's people are christian, they'd be perverting their own faith by saying it.

IMHO, people argue this nation was chrisitian and founded on its tenants because they want to insert religion into government. Nevermind it wasn't like they say, they simply want to tell others how to live.

a reply to: uncommitted
One person so far gets it. Yes , the 10 Commandments as well as the Laws of Moses are followed by all 3. Which are the 3 religions predominant in the history of the US.

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus
a reply to: NavyDoc

Except for 'Laws to prevent mentally ill people from purchasing guns'.

Yet, it still presents the salient fact that gun control is by and large a product of the left side of the isle.

a reply to: Gothmog

Who cares? It's still inappropriate to display in front of a state building regardless if it honors one religion or three.

a reply to: Krazysh0t
Why may I ask ? There must be a reason.