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: 5
9
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 1 2015 @ 08:47 AM
link   

originally posted by: introvert

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: grandmakdw

I could get behind that movement.


Tell me, where do we stop? Should we take down the Washington monument because he owned slaves?

Perhaps the real problem is that us humans are too attached to the symbols around us. They really serve no purpose, so why do we even erect these symbols in the first place?


Of course we should take down the Jefferson and Washington monuments because they owned slaves!

We should take down all symbols that either represent a current or past religion or religious figure
to be consistent and fair and just to all.

We should take down all symbols and monuments of persons whose personal behavior
anyone in the US finds offensive and/or immoral.

Integrity and honesty and fairness and justice for all demand these things!




posted on Jul, 1 2015 @ 08:47 AM
link   

originally posted by: introvert

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: grandmakdw

I could get behind that movement.


Tell me, where do we stop? Should we take down the Washington monument because he owned slaves?



Or should we take it down because its clearly Masonic/Egyptian on public property.



posted on Jul, 1 2015 @ 08:48 AM
link   
a reply to: Logarock

Obelisks are not used in Masonry.



posted on Jul, 1 2015 @ 08:48 AM
link   
a reply to: Krazysh0t

Though it's origins are in Ancient Egyptian religion.



posted on Jul, 1 2015 @ 08:50 AM
link   
a reply to: grandmakdw

Better just raze America then because it exists and things that are offensive to some or other is basically how it reduces to.

*Not actually, I don't want America razed.



posted on Jul, 1 2015 @ 08:54 AM
link   
a reply to: theabsolutetruth



It doesn't matter if it is written down or not, the fact is America was founded upon Christianity, many of it's laws have their origins there.


Absurd. At the founding of this nation, the founding fathers couldn't agree on many points regarding religion and that is specifically why they wanted to ensure a SEPARATION OF CHURCH AND STATE.

So what is your point? Should Christianity be the official state religion? Should only Christian monuments and biblical verses be plastered on the halls of government?

Or should we take what they actually DID write and ensure a clean separation?



posted on Jul, 1 2015 @ 08:56 AM
link   

originally posted by: Logarock
a reply to: Krazysh0t

There are some that want PC to go right into the church sanctuary. Get certain off the radio that talk about certain issues from a christian perspective.



Well those some are wrong. You won't see me advocating the removal of church rights inside church. I just don't like it when churches preach politics from the pulpit. That is a violation of their 501(c)3 status.



posted on Jul, 1 2015 @ 08:57 AM
link   

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus
a reply to: Logarock

Then they are not Masonic.



Did you catch that thread a while back......pictures from inside Masonic headquarters in Chicago or Detroit? The rooms were full of Babylonian and Egyptian icons.

Banks, old banks are also full of the art. In context. Lotus and ankh ect. Old bank down the road has an all seeing eye on the top near the roof gable. 1800s building.



posted on Jul, 1 2015 @ 08:57 AM
link   
About the $ ''IN GOD WE TRUST''.

www.treasury.gov...


History of 'In God We Trust'

The motto IN GOD WE TRUST was placed on United States coins largely because of the increased religious sentiment existing during the Civil War. Secretary of the Treasury Salmon P. Chase received many appeals from devout persons throughout the country, urging that the United States recognize the Deity on United States coins. From Treasury Department records, it appears that the first such appeal came in a letter dated November 13, 1861. It was written to Secretary Chase by Rev. M. R. Watkinson, Minister of the Gospel from Ridleyville, Pennsylvania, and read:

Dear Sir: You are about to submit your annual report to the Congress respecting the affairs of the national finances.
One fact touching our currency has hitherto been seriously overlooked. I mean the recognition of the Almighty God in some form on our coins.


You are probably a Christian.[/] What if our Republic were not shattered beyond reconstruction? Would not the antiquaries of succeeding centuries rightly reason from our past that we were a heathen nation? What I propose is that instead of the goddess of liberty we shall have next inside the 13 stars a ring inscribed with the words PERPETUAL UNION; within the ring the allseeing eye, crowned with a halo; beneath this eye the American flag, bearing in its field stars equal to the number of the States united; in the folds of the bars the words GOD, LIBERTY, LAW.

This would make a beautiful coin, to which no possible citizen could object. This would relieve us from the ignominy of heathenism. This would place us openly under the Divine protection we have personally claimed. From my hearth I have felt our national shame in disowning God as not the least of our present national disasters.


To you first I address a subject that must be agitated.

As a result, Secretary Chase instructed James Pollock, Director of the Mint at Philadelphia, to prepare a motto, in a letter dated November 20, 1861:

Dear Sir: No nation can be strong except in the strength of God, or safe except in His defense. The trust of our people in God should be declared on our national coins.
You will cause a device to be prepared without unnecessary delay with a motto expressing in the fewest and tersest words possible this national recognition.


It was found that the Act of Congress dated January 18, 1837, prescribed the mottoes and devices that should be placed upon the coins of the United States. This meant that the mint could make no changes without the enactment of additional legislation by the Congress. In December 1863, the Director of the Mint submitted designs for new one-cent coin, two-cent coin, and three-cent coin to Secretary Chase for approval. He proposed that upon the designs either OUR COUNTRY; OUR GOD or GOD, OUR TRUST should appear as a motto on the coins. In a letter to the Mint Director on December 9, 1863, Secretary Chase stated:
I approve your mottoes, only suggesting that on that with the Washington obverse the motto should begin with the word OUR, so as to read OUR GOD AND OUR COUNTRY. And on that with the shield, it should be changed so as to read: IN GOD WE TRUST.
The Congress passed the Act of April 22, 1864. This legislation changed the composition of the one-cent coin and authorized the minting of the two-cent coin. The Mint Director was directed to develop the designs for these coins for final approval of the Secretary. IN GOD WE TRUST first appeared on the 1864 two-cent coin.

Another Act of Congress passed on March 3, 1865. It allowed the Mint Director, with the Secretary's approval, to place the motto on all gold and silver coins that "shall admit the inscription thereon." Under the Act, the motto was placed on the gold double-eagle coin, the gold eagle coin, and the gold half-eagle coin. It was also placed on the silver dollar coin, the half-dollar coin and the quarter-dollar coin, and on the nickel three-cent coin beginning in 1866. Later, Congress passed the Coinage Act of February 12, 1873. It also said that the Secretary "may cause the motto IN GOD WE TRUST to be inscribed on such coins as shall admit of such motto."

The use of IN GOD WE TRUST has not been uninterrupted. The motto disappeared from the five-cent coin in 1883, and did not reappear until production of the Jefferson nickel began in 1938. Since 1938, all United States coins bear the inscription. Later, the motto was found missing from the new design of the double-eagle gold coin and the eagle gold coin shortly after they appeared in 1907. In response to a general demand, Congress ordered it restored, and the Act of May 18, 1908, made it mandatory on all coins upon which it had previously appeared. IN GOD WE TRUST was not mandatory on the one-cent coin and five-cent coin. It could be placed on them by the Secretary or the Mint Director with the Secretary's approval.

The motto has been in continuous use on the one-cent coin since 1909, and on the ten-cent coin since 1916. It also has appeared on all gold coins and silver dollar coins, half-dollar coins, and quarter-dollar coins struck since July 1, 1908.

A law passed by the 84th Congress (P.L. 84-140) and approved by the President on July 30, 1956, the President approved a Joint Resolution of the 84th Congress, declaring IN GOD WE TRUST the national motto of the United States. IN GOD WE TRUST was first used on paper money in 1957, when it appeared on the one-dollar silver certificate. The first paper currency bearing the motto entered circulation on October 1, 1957. The Bureau of Engraving and Printing (BEP) was converting to the dry intaglio printing process. During this conversion, it gradually included IN GOD WE TRUST in the back design of all classes and denominations of currency.

As a part of a comprehensive modernization program the BEP successfully developed and installed new high-speed rotary intaglio printing presses in 1957. These allowed BEP to print currency by the dry intaglio process, 32 notes to the sheet. One-dollar silver certificates were the first denomination printed on the new high-speed presses. They included IN GOD WE TRUST as part of the reverse design as BEP adopted new dies according to the law. The motto also appeared on one-dollar silver certificates of the 1957-A and 1957-B series.

BEP prints United States paper currency by an intaglio process from engraved plates. It was necessary, therefore, to engrave the motto into the printing plates as a part of the basic engraved design to give it the prominence it deserved.

One-dollar silver certificates series 1935, 1935-A, 1935-B, 1935-C, 1935-D, 1935-E, 1935-F, 1935-G, and 1935-H were all printed on the older flat-bed presses by the wet intaglio process. P.L. 84-140 recognized that an enormous expense would be associated with immediately replacing the costly printing plates. The law allowed BEP to gradually convert to the inclusion of IN GOD WE TRUST on the currency. Accordingly, the motto is not found on series 1935-E and 1935-F one-dollar notes. By September 1961, IN GOD WE TRUST had been added to the back design of the Series 1935-G notes. Some early printings of this series do not bear the motto. IN GOD WE TRUST appears on all series 1935-H one-dollar silver certificates.

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



posted on Jul, 1 2015 @ 08:58 AM
link   
a reply to: introvert

I see it as honoring a hero that stood to extend and promote racism. Why can't we instead honor a hero that fought AGAINST intolerance like Jim Brown? For instance, I think there is a stark difference between having a monument dedicated to Thomas Jefferson (a slave owner) versus this guy. This guy's legacy involves his stark refusal to be tolerant. Thomas Jefferson's legacy is MORE than just owning slaves. Though, it shouldn't be forgotten that TJ was a slave owner too.



posted on Jul, 1 2015 @ 08:58 AM
link   
a reply to: Logarock

Those are themed rooms, there are also Gothic and Norman rooms as well, are those Masonic? The symbols dp npt appear in the teachings or degrees.



edit on 1-7-2015 by AugustusMasonicus because: networkdude has no beer



posted on Jul, 1 2015 @ 08:59 AM
link   
a reply to: bigfatfurrytexan

Let me see if I have this correct. When you quote the Treaty of Tripoli as evidence that the United States of America is not a Christian nation, you are on the topic. When I refute your claim I am off topic.

Interesting, is this always your tatic in debates?
You brought the Treaty into this debate. I am just refuting that claim because the Treaty talks about the Government, not the Nation.



posted on Jul, 1 2015 @ 08:59 AM
link   

originally posted by: theabsolutetruth
a reply to: Krazysh0t

Though it's origins are in Ancient Egyptian religion.


It's the same case as the Ten Commandments in the Supreme Court. It isn't promoting the religion. It is being used as a symbol to say something else. There is a nuanced difference that you appear to be missing.



posted on Jul, 1 2015 @ 09:00 AM
link   
a reply to: grandmakdw

Well, that's frightening.

I believe that government buildings should not post the commandments, but I would not want to remove the Byrd statue or the Washington monument. We are going too far with this.

We are never going to move forward if we are stuck in the past or have the belief that our personal religion is superior because we falsely believe the country was founded on our religion.



posted on Jul, 1 2015 @ 09:01 AM
link   

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus

originally posted by: Seamrog

Before the Supreme Court rules on any display of the Ten Commandments, they'd have to chisel them off their own building first
.


Poor analogy. They are on the Supreme Court but so are representations of every other major religion and historical law giver.




Oh good point, they all must go.

Clear the Supreme Court building of all religious symbols,

all religious representations,

from all religions.

Religion has no place on the Supreme Court building of all places.

Remember separation of church (ie religion) and state,

that means all religions.

No religious writing or symbol,

ancient or modern has any place at on on the Supreme Court building.

They must all be chiseled off or removed entirely

and immediately,

or the courts are being inconsistent,

and offensive and violating their own principles.

All must go and now!

If you agree the 10 commandments are offensive and must be removed from a court setting,
then any and all religious sayings, symbols, writings, ancient or modern must be removed
immediately from all court houses, including the Supreme Court, or the Supreme Court
is being inconsistent.



posted on Jul, 1 2015 @ 09:01 AM
link   
a reply to: introvert

People need to learn to read and recognise when something is a REPLY.

It is a response to those denying America as being built on Christian foundations. The fact is it was despite it now being written as such in the constitution, there are plenty of references to the fact. I have posted a few already, including the $ IN GOD WE TRUST and the very Christian origins of that.



posted on Jul, 1 2015 @ 09:02 AM
link   
a reply to: Krazysh0t

Yes, Byrd was a member of the KKK, but he also served his state and country. If we can forgive a founding father for actually owning slaves to justify his memorial, we can forgive a man that was a member of a racist group, but never owned a slave or killed a person of color.



posted on Jul, 1 2015 @ 09:03 AM
link   
All the sudden Ted Cruz's giving advice to States not named in SCOTUS marriage ruling to ignore it looks to be legitimized by the Oklahoma court action.

Similar suit in Texas was ruled on by US SCOTUS and 10 Commandment display was ruled Constitutional.

Now anti-religious zealots just go to different venue to seek contrary ruling.

I want to see those who claim federal law/courts trumps all verbally twist language to get out of this conumdrum in supporting the Oklahoma ruling.



posted on Jul, 1 2015 @ 09:03 AM
link   
a reply to: grandmakdw

Hysterics and hyperbole.

Recognition of one is very different from recognition of all. The Supreme Court has already ruled on this.



posted on Jul, 1 2015 @ 09:03 AM
link   

originally posted by: TheSemiSkeptic
a reply to: bigfatfurrytexan

Let me see if I have this correct. When you quote the Treaty of Tripoli as evidence that the United States of America is not a Christian nation, you are on the topic. When I refute your claim I am off topic.

Interesting, is this always your tatic in debates?
You brought the Treaty into this debate. I am just refuting that claim because the Treaty talks about the Government, not the Nation.


The Christian Nation Myth


Whenever the Supreme Court makes a decision that in any way restricts the intrusion of religion into the affairs of government, a flood of editorials, articles, and letters protesting the ruling is sure to appear in the newspapers. Many protesters decry these decisions on the grounds that they conflict with the wishes and intents of the "founding fathers."

Such a view of American history is completely contrary to known facts. The primary leaders of the so-called founding fathers of our nation were not Bible-believing Christians; they were deists. Deism was a philosophical belief that was widely accepted by the colonial intelligentsia at the time of the American Revolution. Its major tenets included belief in human reason as a reliable means of solving social and political problems and belief in a supreme deity who created the universe to operate solely by natural laws. The supreme God of the Deists removed himself entirely from the universe after creating it. They believed that he assumed no control over it, exerted no influence on natural phenomena, and gave no supernatural revelation to man. A necessary consequence of these beliefs was a rejection of many doctrines central to the Christian religion. Deists did not believe in the virgin birth, divinity, or resurrection of Jesus, the efficacy of prayer, the miracles of the Bible, or even the divine inspiration of the Bible.

These beliefs were forcefully articulated by Thomas Paine in Age of Reason, a book that so outraged his contemporaries that he died rejected and despised by the nation that had once revered him as "the father of the American Revolution." To this day, many mistakenly consider him an atheist, even though he was an out spoken defender of the Deistic view of God. Other important founding fathers who espoused Deism were George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, Benjamin Franklin, Ethan Allen, James Madison, and James Monroe.


A Christian Nation? Since When?


Back in the 1930s, business leaders found themselves on the defensive. Their public prestige had plummeted with the Great Crash; their private businesses were under attack by Franklin D. Roosevelt’s New Deal from above and labor from below. To regain the upper hand, corporate leaders fought back on all fronts. They waged a figurative war in statehouses and, occasionally, a literal one in the streets; their campaigns extended from courts of law to the court of public opinion. But nothing worked particularly well until they began an inspired public relations offensive that cast capitalism as the handmaiden of Christianity.

The two had been described as soul mates before, but in this campaign they were wedded in pointed opposition to the “creeping socialism” of the New Deal. The federal government had never really factored into Americans’ thinking about the relationship between faith and free enterprise, mostly because it had never loomed that large over business interests. But now it cast a long and ominous shadow.

Accordingly, throughout the 1930s and ’40s, corporate leaders marketed a new ideology that combined elements of Christianity with an anti-federal libertarianism. Powerful business lobbies like the United States Chamber of Commerce and the National Association of Manufacturers led the way, promoting this ideology’s appeal in conferences and P.R. campaigns. Generous funding came from prominent businessmen, from household names like Harvey Firestone, Conrad Hilton, E. F. Hutton, Fred Maytag and Henry R. Luce to lesser-known leaders at U.S. Steel, General Motors and DuPont.

In a shrewd decision, these executives made clergymen their spokesmen. As Sun Oil’s J. Howard Pew noted, polls proved that ministers could mold public opinion more than any other profession. And so these businessmen worked to recruit clergy through private meetings and public appeals. Many answered the call, but three deserve special attention.




top topics



 
9
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join