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

a reply to: RedParrotHead

The point as I have said again and again is that is should stop denying it's history. The US is full of religious references, if one religious symbol is banned then isn't it only equality in action in banning them all.

originally posted by: Krazysh0t

originally posted by: theabsolutetruth
a reply to: Krazysh0t

The ten commandments statue also isn't promoting any religion that's the point. If you demand removing any religious references then remove them all, that's equality right?

Um no, it doesn't work that way. You either promote all or none. If the government is already promoting all, then there is no reason to remove anything.

To extend your logic, you agree with the government promoting all religions equally. You said PROMOTE ALL religions in your statement and said that it is ok for the government to promote all religions.

I thought you were for removal of religion entirely from the government and public arena.

You can't have one without the other, you either remove them all to be fair, just, equal and non-judgemental, or you remove none. Since I'm ok with sending the 10 Commandments statue to a church, temple or mosque. I'm being consistent when I say remove all religious symbols and writings, ancient and modern.

a reply to: grandmakdw

I am for the fair promotion of religion in government. Which means that the government promotes ALL religions equally or promotes no religions at all. There is no in between.

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus
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.

So the Supreme Court, in your opinion may recognize and promote all religions? As long as they are forcing people to look at and read about all religions on their building; and forcing them to look at statues representing ancient goddesses?

Please see PM

To add, sometimes I wish this was a Christian nation, but then I think. . . I like to drink. I swear. (I'm a pretty lousy Christian, to be honest) and do I want church 24/7/365?

So religion is not about faith.

My faith is a bedrock of my life.

Religion tends to gum up the works, though.

originally posted by: theabsolutetruth
The point of my comment that was disputed here is that the US was fundamentally built on Christian principles, fact.

It was not, the United States is not nearly as Christian as proponents claim and the Founders made great efforts not to let their personal beliefs interfere with the codification of United States law.

Start with this article.

originally posted by: grandmakdw
So the Supreme Court, in your opinion may recognize and promote all religions?

Recognition and promotion are two entirely different actions.


Self edit.

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: Logarock

Well 501(c)3 status is a privilege, not a right. It is a privilege with SPECIFIC rules regarding making sure the organization isn't political. So if a church wants to preach from the pulpit, they should give up the tax-exempt status. It's not like they'd be shut down or anything.

They should dump the 501(c) for churches and churches should want to do it. Then fight on other grounds, which as been done before in court that the church shouldn't have to pay taxes, nor should the press it they are not engaging in commercial enterprise.

The church as been operating under this for so long their constitutional fighting skills have atrophied.

For example you cant shut a press down for not paying taxes when the are not engaged in advertisement or using the right of press to make money.

Cant have separation if the state is collecting taxes.

originally posted by: RedParrotHead
a reply to: theabsolutetruth


The U.S.A. is not a Christian country. If so everyone would have to be Christian and there would be punishable laws against doing non-Christian things. And those barbaric punishments would be straight out of the Christian Bible...right? What should be the sentence for those found guilty of working on a Sunday? A fine, jail time, or death? That sounds pretty close to what ISIS wants/is making. Do you really want to live in that sort of place? I don't.

Not so. England IS an Angelican nation. Yet there is no punishment or fines for being Jewish or muslim or atheist.

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: grandmakdw

I am for the fair promotion of religion in government. Which means that the government promotes ALL religions equally or promotes no religions at all. There is no in between.

But in another thread you said quite clearly that all religions are awful and should be removed entirely.

Which is it?

originally posted by: TheSemiSkeptic

originally posted by: RedParrotHead
a reply to: theabsolutetruth


The U.S.A. is not a Christian country. If so everyone would have to be Christian and there would be punishable laws against doing non-Christian things. And those barbaric punishments would be straight out of the Christian Bible...right? What should be the sentence for those found guilty of working on a Sunday? A fine, jail time, or death? That sounds pretty close to what ISIS wants/is making. Do you really want to live in that sort of place? I don't.

Not so. England IS an Angelican nation. Yet there is no punishment or fines for being Jewish or muslim or atheist.

Um... England is JUST as secular as the United States. In fact, I think they are more secular... That was a pretty terrible comparison you made.

originally posted by: beezzer
To add, sometimes I wish this was a Christian natipon, but then I think. . . I like to drink. I swear. (I'm a pretty lousy Christian, to be honest) and do I want church 24/7/365?

So religion is not about faith.

My faith is a bedrock of my life.

Religion tends to gum up the works, though.

Well said. Faith and Religion are not synonymous.

Religion is Dogma.
Faith is Belief.

For a Christian nation the leaders and those with power from wealth seem to have no problems treating citizens in less than Christian ways. Unless those beliefs can be cherry picked when put into action.

originally posted by: grandmakdw

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: grandmakdw

I am for the fair promotion of religion in government. Which means that the government promotes ALL religions equally or promotes no religions at all. There is no in between.

But in another thread you said quite clearly that all religions are awful and should be removed entirely.

Which is it?

My personal opinions on religion don't matter when it comes to enforcing Constitutional law. I will ALWAYS let Constitutional law trump my personal opinions on a matter. The Constitution is fairer than my biased opinions.

originally posted by: Logarock

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: Logarock

Well 501(c)3 status is a privilege, not a right. It is a privilege with SPECIFIC rules regarding making sure the organization isn't political. So if a church wants to preach from the pulpit, they should give up the tax-exempt status. It's not like they'd be shut down or anything.

They should dump the 501(c) for churches and churches should want to do it. Then fight on other grounds, which as been done before in court that the church shouldn't have to pay taxes, nor should the press it they are not engaging in commercial enterprise.

The church as been operating under this for so long their constitutional fighting skills have atrophied.

For example you cant shut a press down for not paying taxes when the are not engaged in advertisement or using the right of press to make money.

Cant have separation if the state is collecting taxes.

True, paying taxes subjects one to the IRS.

Which we all know has targeted those who disagree with the government for persecution and oppression.

That would make the churches subject to being singled out for persecution and oppression and interference by the government and would clearly violate separating the government from religion.

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.

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: grandmakdw

I am for the fair promotion of religion in government. Which means that the government promotes ALL religions equally or promotes no religions at all. There is no in between.

I say no religion promotion at all....just respect the 1st amendment...."free exercise thereof"

originally posted by: Logarock
They should dump the 501(c) for churches and churches should want to do it. Then fight on other grounds, which as been done before in court that the church shouldn't have to pay taxes, nor should the press it they are not engaging in commercial enterprise.

Nowhere in the Constitution does it say that churches don't have to pay taxes. It just says that you are free to practice your religion no matter what it is.

The church as been operating under this for so long their constitutional fighting skills have atrophied.

The church appears to still be QUITE good at fighting the Constitution. Why else did it take so long for gay marriage to FINALLY be legalized?

For example you cant shut a press down for not paying taxes when the are not engaged in advertisement or using the right of press to make money.

The press pays taxes though... As well as there are no stipulations in the Constitution saying that the press doesn't have to pay taxes either.

Cant have separation if the state is collecting taxes.

Why not? Collecting taxes is collecting taxes. I wasn't aware that it was part of the Christian religion to not pay taxes.

a reply to: Kromlech


If for no other reason , it should be removed as it looks vulgar.

originally posted by: Logarock

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: grandmakdw

I am for the fair promotion of religion in government. Which means that the government promotes ALL religions equally or promotes no religions at all. There is no in between.

I say no religion promotion at all....just respect the 1st amendment...."free exercise thereof"

If we did that, then it would be illegal for state sponsored schools to teach religious history.