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.

 

You Decide: Is this "Freedom of Expression"?

page: 2
5
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 10 2015 @ 08:45 AM
link   

originally posted by: JuJuBee
Are we only allowed to "express ourselves", under certain conditions and by popular demand?


Actually, yes. There are limits on "free expression".



In the United States, freedom of religion is a constitutionally protected right provided in the religion clauses of the First Amendment.


Yes, but there are limits to that, too. Freedom of religion does not include religious symbols being displayed on government property.



Do people still remember what America was built on, and what has kept America from being under a dictatorship????


Yes. The Constitution. And the second amendment has WHAT to do with this story?




posted on Oct, 10 2015 @ 08:56 AM
link   
That reminds me of the time our neighbor put the fake person with a hat pulled down low sitting on the bench outside their house a few weeks before Halloween. Every day I would go by that house and see that dummy, so when Halloween night came and I went trick or treating with my friends, I wasn't scared of the dummy on the bench. My friends were scared, so I walked right up to it and started to say "see, it's just a dummy", when the "dummy" jumped off the bench screaming. I think I peed my Bride of Frankenstein's costume that night. It was hilarious. My friends and I laughed about it the rest of the night.

Who doesn't like to be scared at Halloween?

Yep, I'm much more scared of this country becoming a theocracy. Boooooooooooh!



posted on Oct, 10 2015 @ 10:42 AM
link   

originally posted by: Flatfish
a reply to: JuJuBee

The most disturbing part of your entire OP is the fact that you can't see the difference between this guys right to have the Halloween display in his yard, (private property) and your perceived right to display the Ten Commandments on Courthouse grounds, (public property).

That's scarier than anything this guy could ever hang in his yard!


I'm not sure if it's that some people can't see the difference or if it's that they don't believe in the difference. They have their vision of what America and Christianity should be and it's OK with them to use the Courthouse lawn and every other function of government to force their beliefs and code of behavior on other people wherever they are.

In other words, putting up the ten commandments on government property to tell people how to worship and using the government to dictate what you can display in your own front yard is all part of the same mind set.



posted on Oct, 10 2015 @ 10:55 AM
link   

originally posted by: boymonkey74
a reply to: LadyGreenEyes

So you would be okay putting it back and putting a satanist statue up? or a Hindu one? then the wiccans will want one, Jedis until you have no room for anything.
You happy with that?.

Does a satan statue promote a positive message?

Is there enough hindu's around to support the statue being there?

I think the wiccans could get a positive message together in some form and it should be accepted if it is positive.

Even if Satanist message is positive as they state there is still too much bs that comes with having such around in public.

The 10 commandments is overall positive and in congruent to the foundation of the country and our morals.

Find something with that type of message and it should have it's place.
edit on 10-10-2015 by deadeyedick because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 10 2015 @ 11:05 AM
link   

originally posted by: deadeyedick
The 10 commandments is overall positive and in congruent to the foundation of the country and our morals.

Find something with that type of message and it should have it's place.


It DOES have its place. ANYWHERE but a government building.



posted on Oct, 10 2015 @ 11:09 AM
link   
a reply to: Benevolent Heretic

That is an opinion.

Some believe that culture is gov.

Out of all the places that could use a reminder of the basic morals we all cling too the gov. buildings should be on top of the list.

Gov is in serious need of morality and common sense.

edit on 10-10-2015 by deadeyedick because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 10 2015 @ 11:12 AM
link   

originally posted by: deadeyedick
a reply to: Benevolent Heretic

That is an opinion.

Some believe that culture is gov.



Do you consider the Constitution an *opinion* as well? You know, separation of church and state and all...

Additionally, just because many *believe* something doesn't make it true.

Just sayin'



posted on Oct, 10 2015 @ 11:43 AM
link   

originally posted by: deadeyedick
Out of all the places that could use a reminder of the basic morals we all cling too the gov. buildings should be on top of the list.


A. We all have our own morals. I don't cling to your morals and you don't cling to mine.
B. Religion ≠ Morality



posted on Oct, 10 2015 @ 11:47 AM
link   
a reply to: Liquesence





separation of church and state and all...

Can you tell me what you think that statement means?

It is not a license to be dumb and stupid and lose all sense of morality because some religions are moral and gov should not resemble religion.

not meaning to dump on you personally but until we can decide on that definition then we are arguing meaningless debates.



posted on Oct, 10 2015 @ 12:04 PM
link   

originally posted by: deadeyedick
The 10 commandments is overall positive and in congruent to the foundation of the country and our morals.

Find something with that type of message and it should have it's place.


I can't believe you don't see the problem with this.

Who exactly is going to be doing the "finding" and deciding about what religious messages the government will endorse?

I'm going to take a wild guess that you won't want any Democrats doing it.
edit on 10-10-2015 by DelMarvel because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 10 2015 @ 12:06 PM
link   
a reply to: DelMarvel

I think that Americans went through that process a long time ago and the rest are still mad cause they had no good ideas.

I am all ears



posted on Oct, 10 2015 @ 12:07 PM
link   
a reply to: deadeyedick

I think most of us have given our view on what it means so many times, it get tiresome! gov't should be neutral when it comes to religion. they can't protect one religion beyond what they would protect any other, and they can't promote one above the others. it doesn't mean that our elected officials can't bring their sense of morality to washington and consider it when doing the jobs that they are there to do. but it does mean that they shouldn't be basing their decisions solely based on church doctrines free of any common sense either. in other words, if the only reason they have have for supporting something is "God says..." they are off bases!

look if the politicians who were holding office were moral, we'd have a moral gov't. as it is, they all claim to be moral, but can't even get through the campaign season without lying through their teeth! No religion owns a patent on morality, you don't need to be raised in a christian home to have a decent sense of morality. You really don't need any religion to understand what is moral what is not. and, morality far exceed the abortion issue, or gay marriage, or the other hot points that people want to talk about. it goes onto not coveting the peasant's shack when you are living in a 20 room mansion or taking the food away from the baby so you can have a new jet to fly around in. it means paying your employees a fair wage, not allowing your baking friends to defraud the people out of their savings.



posted on Oct, 10 2015 @ 12:12 PM
link   
a reply to: DelMarvel

well, the catholics won't want the protestants deciding, the protestants won't want the catholics deciding, and believe it or not, many christians will just go on living their lives and really feel that it's worth taking down the stupid monuments if it means that no one is deciding such things!



posted on Oct, 10 2015 @ 12:15 PM
link   
a reply to: deadeyedick

There is no debate. It's Oklahoma law. A Baptist minister brought a lawsuit saying it violated the state constitution. Not atheists, not heathens, not nasty left-wing progressives. A minister.

Oklahoma took down its 10 Commandments because of their state constitution, which reads:



SECTION II-5
Public money or property - Use for sectarian purposes.
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.
Article 2



posted on Oct, 10 2015 @ 12:15 PM
link   
a reply to: deadeyedick

We are not a theocracy. Yes, our government has laws because we need to keep the peace and have order. Making sure everyone gets into heaven is not the role of the government.



posted on Oct, 10 2015 @ 12:16 PM
link   
a reply to: dawnstar
Na the gov. should not remain neutral when it comes to a set of ethics that supports our morality.

Tell me which of the 10 commandments should the gov. remain neutral on?

Definitely not all of them and gov. should and does need the positive aspects of our society to be reflected in it's existence and if the majority of those aspects come from one certain religion then we definitely do not need to remove those aspects in an attempt to fulfill one interpretation of the phrase separation of church and state.



posted on Oct, 10 2015 @ 12:18 PM
link   
a reply to: Benevolent Heretic

As if a bunch of text could justify the act of removing a positive message.



posted on Oct, 10 2015 @ 12:20 PM
link   

originally posted by: deadeyedick
Tell me which of the 10 commandments should the gov. remain neutral on?


All of them. The laws against murder and theft do not come from the 10 commandments. And the other eight commandments are not relevant to law.


edit on 10/10/2015 by Benevolent Heretic because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 10 2015 @ 12:22 PM
link   

originally posted by: Benevolent Heretic

originally posted by: deadeyedick
Tell me which of the 10 commandments should the gov. remain neutral on?


All of them. The laws against murder and theft do not come from the 10 commandments. And the other eight commandments are not relevant to law.


You just say crap because you like the sound it makes.

That was one of your most dishonest post ever.



posted on Oct, 10 2015 @ 12:23 PM
link   
a reply to: deadeyedick

So, a constitution is "a bunch of text"?

And YOU may be of the opinion that the 10 commandments is a positive message, but those who don't share your religious beliefs do not share your opinion.



new topics

top topics



 
5
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join