It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

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

page: 23
9
<< 20  21  22    24  25  26 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 1 2015 @ 06:58 PM
link   

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus
a reply to: grandmakdw

And how do you handle all the laws and financial benefits now attached to marriage?



They would be exactly the same. The government issued permission to marry, ie license; will be treated exactly the same as the marriage contract. The marriage contract which is free of government interference, will be treated by law exactly the same as a government issued permission to have a marriage ceremony.

Shouldn't a moderator be scolding me for thread drift? Shouldn't a Mod step in and delete all these marriage only posts? They are all unauthorized thread drift and do not belong in this thread. I am surprised a mod hasn't done it yet. Also all the drifting on guns, progressives, etc.




edit on 6Wed, 01 Jul 2015 18:59:43 -0500pm70107pmk013 by grandmakdw because: addition

edit on 7Wed, 01 Jul 2015 19:01:38 -0500pm70107pmk013 by grandmakdw because: addition




posted on Jul, 1 2015 @ 07:01 PM
link   

originally posted by: grandmakdw
They would be exactly the same.


So we are just playing semantics with the term marriage then?

Seems like a waste of time, money and effort since the issue is settled.



posted on Jul, 1 2015 @ 07:07 PM
link   
a reply to: AugustusMasonicus

I think the monument of the 10 Commandments is being removed because of shame: the gov is ashamed of what they are doing to the country..



posted on Jul, 1 2015 @ 07:09 PM
link   

originally posted by: tony9802
I think the monument of the 10 Commandments is being removed because of shame: the gov is ashamed of what they are doing to the country..


If you say so.



posted on Jul, 1 2015 @ 07:23 PM
link   
I've seen a gazillion arguments in the past few days. Some more intelligent than others, some downright bizarre.

What it seems to boil down to is:

"Gays are icky, they're not like us, we've been told they're bad and our lifestyle is better -- so they shouldn't have what we straight people have."

I mean, when I combine all the anti arguments together and boil them down, that's pretty much what I seem to keep getting.

A group of people having to share something they don't want to share, because they don't like gay people. I get told "no! I have no problem with gay people...I just don't think they should get married".

And in my personal opinion? Any "God" that can create supermassive black holes, quantum physics and the countless other mysteries of the universe is so beyond our comprehension that it's an affront to think something like two men or women marrying offends him. In fact, it's offensive and arrogant to think we humans even can grasp what a creator may find offensive. We make assumptions based on what some people over 2,000 years ago wrote down in a book. How do we know some creator spoke to those people anyway? And why would a being so powerful give .2 over gay people marrying?

I think this shows the height of human arrogance and ignorance right there. Look around you, look at the trees, grass, sky -- imagine all the billions upon billions of stars in the sky. We're ants -- not even ants to something so impressively powerful as the creator of the universe. How silly of us to assume we know or understand what that creative force wants from us, write it down, and continue to follow those same words for over 2,000 years.



posted on Jul, 1 2015 @ 07:24 PM
link   
I keep seeing references to "Mosaic Law" as if that arose from nowhere and was not derived from older practices.

It is simple logic (and provable history) to show that the more developed cultures in the region influenced the Hebrew codes (i.e. Egyptian, Babylonian, Assyrian, etc.) that is, when it wasn't copied directly.

So it's just as reasonable to say that American law is based on Babylonian laws ...

/shrug

How far do you want to go? Indo-European, Atlantean, Pleiadian? (The last two are jokes)



posted on Jul, 1 2015 @ 07:25 PM
link   

originally posted by: Gryphon66
How far do you want to go? Indo-European, Atlantean, Pleiadian? (The last two are jokes)


Or are they? Dun-dun-dunnnnn.



posted on Jul, 1 2015 @ 07:27 PM
link   
a reply to: MystikMushroom

Ouch.

Very well said. It's good to see the passion that has come out in this thread.



posted on Jul, 1 2015 @ 07:32 PM
link   
Glad for this ruling, sad that such an unimportant ruling gets so many pages in so little time. There's our priorities, I guess.

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
Four of the Ten Commandments are about obeying God. I'm pretty sure those four commandments are pretty much irrelevant to anyone that isn't a Christian. So no, let's not do your suggestion.

Ten Commandments



Thou shalt have no other gods before me
Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image
Thou shalt not take the name of the Lord thy God in vain
Remember the sabbath day, to keep it holy

Honour thy father and thy mother
Thou shalt not murder
Thou shalt not commit adultery
Thou shalt not steal
Thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbour
Thou shalt not covet (neighbor's anything)

This one's always fun because people forget that the Sabbath is Saturday - not Sunday.
edit on 19Wed, 01 Jul 2015 19:35:46 -0500America/ChicagovAmerica/Chicago7 by Greven because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 1 2015 @ 07:40 PM
link   

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus

originally posted by: Gryphon66
How far do you want to go? Indo-European, Atlantean, Pleiadian? (The last two are jokes)


Or are they? Dun-dun-dunnnnn.


I guess it depends on where one believes "the Illuminati" originated ...

*looks mysterious*



posted on Jul, 1 2015 @ 07:54 PM
link   

originally posted by: introvert
a reply to: Krazysh0t

I don't care what it symbolizes. If we start down that road of removing everything that offends us, then we will have to remove everything. Someone will always be offended.

a reply to: grandmakdw



What, symbolism for the weak minded, how offensive and judgemental.


I know it's offensive, but it's the truth. Why would somebody quake in their boots from just seeing the 10 commandments? It's just words from a book. Only a weak-minded person would become confused at the very sight of something like that.



This argument should go both ways. There are many Christians who actually would quake in their boots if faced with a statue of Baphomet. I heard a couple of Christian gals at work discussing how one of them was interested in trying yoga, but when she went to a class there was chanting and so she is sure now that yoga is of Satan.



posted on Jul, 1 2015 @ 07:56 PM
link   

originally posted by: gwynnhwyfar
...yoga is of Satan.


Whoever invented those see through Lulu Lemon yoga pants should become God in my book.



posted on Jul, 1 2015 @ 07:58 PM
link   

originally posted by: tony9802
a reply to: AugustusMasonicus

I think the monument of the 10 Commandments is being removed because of shame: the gov is ashamed of what they are doing to the country..


Nah - I think you are wrong on that.

I think it is because someone pointed out that there are actually 3 versions of the 10 commandments..... Exodus 20:2-17, Deuteronomy 5:6-21 and Exodus 34:12-26, and they got into a theological debate about which should be put up which resulted in a schism, a counter-schism, then a rupture over the rapture and finally a break up into mutual recriminations from unreconcilable factions......



And when that one all that was over the popular peoples front for the other commandments asked "Well what about the OTHER 600 or so commandments in the OT?"....but they got shouted down by the Reformed Front for the People's Commandments who only believe in the 6 commandments in Matthew 19:18-19.

So then the True Commandments People's Liberation Committee won't hear of anything except the other 6 commandments in Mark 10:19, while the Real Commandments Prostylization Action Soviet thinks the 5 comandments in Luke 18:20 are clearly the ones that everyone should be following.

See - it's more complicated than just screwing up a country!!

edit on 1-7-2015 by Aloysius the Gaul because: spelling



posted on Jul, 1 2015 @ 08:18 PM
link   


According to John Bright, however, there is an important distinction between the Decalogue and the "book of the covenant" (Exodus 21-23 and 34:10–24). The Decalogue, he argues, was modeled on the suzerainty treaties of the Hittites (and other Mesopotamian Empires), that is, represents the relationship between God and Israel as a relationship between king and vassal, and enacts that bond.


John Bright, 1972, A History of Israel Second Edition. Philadelphia: the Westminster Press. 146-147 4th ed. p.150-151



posted on Jul, 1 2015 @ 08:34 PM
link   
a reply to: Gryphon66

Well Augustus is always spilling supet secret masonic stuff so sure it is just a matter if time befor we find out.



posted on Jul, 1 2015 @ 09:49 PM
link   
The "Ten Commandments" didn't originate solely with the Hebrews.

The god YHVH was a derivative of other Canaanite gods. In fact, in the actual Hebrew the word translated "god" is actually the name EL ... which was the head of the Canaanite pantheon.

-EL is retained in many Hebrew names ... Micha-el, Gabri-el, Rapha-el, El-ohim, etc. etc.

The Hebrews were polytheistic up until a relatively late period in their history.

These are not suppositions; these are facts backed up by archaeology, linguistics and history.



posted on Jul, 1 2015 @ 09:54 PM
link   

originally posted by: Gryphon66
I keep seeing references to "Mosaic Law" as if that arose from nowhere and was not derived from older practices.

It is simple logic (and provable history) to show that the more developed cultures in the region influenced the Hebrew codes (i.e. Egyptian, Babylonian, Assyrian, etc.) that is, when it wasn't copied directly.




This is a common idea that floats around......and also a full wagon load of BS.



posted on Jul, 1 2015 @ 10:02 PM
link   

originally posted by: Logarock

originally posted by: Gryphon66
I keep seeing references to "Mosaic Law" as if that arose from nowhere and was not derived from older practices.

It is simple logic (and provable history) to show that the more developed cultures in the region influenced the Hebrew codes (i.e. Egyptian, Babylonian, Assyrian, etc.) that is, when it wasn't copied directly.




This is a common idea that floats around......and also a full wagon load of BS.


In YOUR opinion.

But, let's be clear, I am referring to historical fact, not religious belief.

Or, if you care to offer any evidence for your position, feel free.



posted on Jul, 1 2015 @ 10:35 PM
link   

originally posted by: grandmakdw

originally posted by: Indigo5

originally posted by: grandmakdw


There are no more legitimate reasons for the government to control marriage.



visitation rights, property rights, child custody, inheritance, estate, pensions, workplace healthcare benefits, social security and dozens of other legal differentiators that are afforded a spouse vs. some person you just live with..

If religious zealots want to stop being legally married because some gay couple they have never met got married...they are welcome to..I kinda wish they would so that they might better understand the struggles that gay couples have faced not being able to legally marry..


a marriage contract that doesn't involve government permission to marry
will offer all the same benefits you mention above

.


You are floating the failed idea that Miss and Alabama have been trying in order to circumvent the SCOTUS ruling that specified States had to issue "Marriage Licenses" to same sex couples. They proposed the "contract solution" complete with inherent forbiddance of authorizing same sex couples to enter into that "contract"...

Apart from that..Contracts are still validated and enforced by government in the courts and are more complex than marriages with contract law and associated legal complexities and vulnerabilities. It is still by government, enforced by government...more expensive and complex than a marriage license etc.It in now way is simpler and it certainly doesn't remove government from marriage...it devolves the legal status of marriage to a much more complex legal document and agreement enforced and executed by government.

Here is the monster of a new law Alabama tried to pass stipulating a GOVERNMENT marriage contract...vs...just issuing a marriage license.
legiscan.com...

edit on 1-7-2015 by Indigo5 because: (no reason given)

edit on 1-7-2015 by Indigo5 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 1 2015 @ 10:37 PM
link   
Before they will share marriage, they WILL destroy it.




top topics



 
9
<< 20  21  22    24  25  26 >>

log in

join