Public Atheist Monument Across from 10 Commandments

Originally posted by AfterInfinity
reply to post by Annee

 

What threat does religion pose to our government at this time that such stringent measures are necessary?

How about the fact that you, Afterinfinity, as an admitted atheist are banned from testifying in a court of law or being elected to public office, including as an elected judge or sheriff, in some US states?

The constitutions of these seven US states ban atheists from holding public office:

Arkansas: "No person who denies the being of a God shall hold any office in the civil departments of this State, nor be competent to testify as a witness in any Court."

Maryland: "That no religious test ought ever to be required as a qualification for any office of profit or trust in this State, other than a declaration of belief in the existence of God; nor shall the Legislature prescribe any other oath of office than the oath prescribed by this Constitution.”

Mississippi: "No person who denies the existence of a Supreme Being shall hold any office in this state."

North Carolina: "The following persons shall be disqualified for office: First, any person who shall deny the being of Almighty God."

South Carolina: "No person who denies the existence of a Supreme Being shall hold any office under this Constitution."

Tennessee: "No person who denies the being of God, or a future state of rewards and punishments, shall hold any office in the civil department of this state.

"Texas: "No religious test shall ever be required as a qualification to any office, or public trust, in this State; nor shall any one be excluded from holding office on account of his religious sentiments, provided he acknowledge the existence of a Supreme Being."

An eighth state constitution discriminates against atheists by affording special protection to theists only.

Pennsylvania: "No person who acknowledges the being of a God and a future state of rewards and punishments shall, on account of his religious sentiments, be disqualified to hold any office or place of trust or profit under this Commonwealth.

en.wikipedia.org...

reply to post by windword


...Isn't that unconstitutional?

Is it possible that the expressed belief is not as great as the ethics which it (God) instills.?

Originally posted by AfterInfinity
reply to post by windword

 

...Isn't that unconstitutional?

Isn't the 10 Commandment monument, the Mount Soledad Cross, the cheeerleaders' banner unconstitutional?

Answer: Yes. Yet these kind of blatant violations are still happening.

Everyone of those statutes needs to be challenged in a court of law to be officially removed. who's going to spend the time and money to go to court to do that? Organized atheists, that's who!

Originally posted by Pinocchio
Is it possible that the expressed belief is not as great as the ethics which it (God) instills.?

The original 10 Commandments are far better. And states "honor the gods [lower case]. However, like the ancient symbol the cross -- everyone knows in our timeline that both the cross and 10 Commandments of the bible are intended for a specific religious belief.

Forcing religion in government (whether by monument or high school banner) is not about belief or ethics. It is about control. It is about swaying the government to be controlled by a specific religious belief. As how the judge was affected in ruling Christian verses are OK in a government school.

Let us now turn to the Ten Commandments of Solon (Diogenes Laertius, Lives of Eminent Philosophers, 1.60), which run as follows:

The man I am talking about is Solon the Athenian. Solon was born, we believe, around 638 B.C.E., and lived until approximately 558, but the date in his life of greatest importance to us is the year he was elected to create a constitution for Athens, 594 B.C.E. How important is this man? Let's examine what we owe to him, in comparison with the legendary author (or at last, in legend, the transmitter) of the Judeo-Christian Ten Commandments. Solon is the founder of Western democracy and the first man in history to articulate ideas of equal rights for all citizens, and though he did not go nearly as far in the latter as we have come today, Moses can claim no connection to either. Solon was the first man in Western history to publicly record a civil constitution in writing. No one in Hebrew history did anything of the kind, least of all Moses. Solon advocated not only the right but even the duty of every citizen to bear arms in the defense of the state--to him we owe the 2nd Amendment. Nothing about that is to be found in the Ten Commandments of Moses. Solon set up laws defending the principles and importance of private property, state encouragement of economic trades and crafts, and a strong middle class--the ideals which lie at the heart of American prosperity, yet which cannot be credited at all to Moses.

1. Trust good character more than promises.
2. Do not speak falsely.
3. Do good things.
4. Do not be hasty in making friends, but do not abandon them once made.
5. Learn to obey before you command.
6. When giving advice, do not recommend what is most pleasing, but what is most useful.
7. Make reason your supreme commander.
8. Do not associate with people who do bad things.
9. Honor the gods.
10. Have regard for your parents.

Forgot link: www.infidels.org...

reply to post by windword


So, instead of asking for your own constitutional rights to be preserved.. you would rather attempt to take it away from others?

Perhaps I misunderstand your point, would you mind clarifying?

reply to post by windword

Isn't the 10 Commandment monument, the Mount Soledad Cross, the cheeerleaders' banner unconstitutional?

Answer: Yes. Yet these kind of blatant violations are still happening.

Everyone of those statutes needs to be challenged in a court of law to be officially removed. who's going to spend the time and money to go to court to do that? Organized atheists, that's who!

There's a huge difference between a lawn ornament and a public office.

reply to post by Serdgiam


An individual has the right to express their religion in any way they, legally, choose. An elected official, an appointee or a government employee can't legally use their position to show preference to any religion during the course of doing their job. It's not that hard to understand, it's not brain surgery!

Originally posted by AfterInfinity

There's a huge difference between a lawn ornament and a public office.

A lawn ornament?

Interesting how you go from emotional to such a benign descriptive.

reply to post by AfterInfinity

There's a huge difference between a lawn ornament and a public office.

Not if that "lawn ornament" is on government property and that lawn ornament promotes a certain religion and was authorized by a public official.

reply to post by Annee

A lawn ornament?

Interesting how you go from emotional to such a benign descriptive.

Have you learned nothing from what I've posted so far? The monument is nothing more than a lawn ornament. What it is beyond that is determined by who is looking at it. You see it as a threat to our constitution. I see it as an opportunity to work on an collaboration process that encourages acceptance of religion as a cultural facet, rather than attempting to muffle something that will never go away. We ascribe meaning. That monument changes based on what meaning we give it, and that affects the opportunities we take from it. I see a positive opportunity, and others a negative opportunity. I think this monument has revealed a lot about our nation as a whole.

reply to post by windword


That doesnt even come close to answering the question I asked, though perhaps I didnt ask it clearly enough. Apparently it is more complicated than you give it credit.

Meh. Religion and its opposition seems to foster some interesting things. I tend to want to steer clear of zealotry regardless of what mask it decides to wear. Lets see what you make of the following statement;

"A true atheist remains silent on their lack of belief inherently."

reply to post by Serdgiam

"A true atheist remains silent on their lack of belief inherently."

I only discuss my atheism on these forums, with other atheists, and with the closest of friends. Other than that, I'm pretty quiet about it. I just keep a low profile when religion is mentioned. I might add a few notes, but I don't commit myself to any party. Especially if they start getting offensive about it. I then tune them out or walk away.

Originally posted by AfterInfinity
reply to post by Annee

 

A lawn ornament?

Interesting how you go from emotional to such a benign descriptive.

Have you learned nothing from what I've posted so far? The monument is nothing more than a lawn ornament. What it is beyond that is determined by who is looking at it. You see it as a threat to our constitution. I see it as an opportunity to work on an collaboration process that encourages acceptance of religion as a cultural facet, rather than attempting to muffle something that will never go away.

Really pathetic if that's your platform.

Threat? Oh I see you're back to emotions.

It is a violation of separation of church and state. And NO - it is NOT just a lawn ornament.

Originally posted by Serdgiam

"A true atheist remains silent on their lack of belief inherently."

What BS.

Atheism means one thing only: lack of belief in a god.

How and what each individual atheist things or believes beyond that is their own personal philosophy.

Remain silent? For what purpose?

reply to post by Annee

Really pathetic if that's your platform.

Pathetic? I'm sorry, what's pathetic about it? Atheism seems to be one of the most persecuted "religions" in this nation, aside from Islam. And if I'm going to support the freedom of atheism, it's only fair that I extend the same support to all other religions as well...provided they do not endanger lives or interfere in legislative process.

Threat? Oh I see you're back to emotions.

Is that an actual response, or just a jibe? I can't tell, honestly. Maybe you could use a few more words next time and do me the honor of actually explaining your comments. Although I must say it's ironic, considering the response you gave just above.

It is a violation of separation of church and state. And NO - it is NOT just a lawn ornament.

Because of what it means to you? Tell me, how do you feel about it? That's the right word, isn't it? Oh wait...that would entail emotion. But isn't emotion involved in processing all explicit data? We have information and our reactions to it. Or don't you react? Of course you do. You're reacting right now. Why? What is prompting such a response? Could it be...emotion?

Which is all beside the point. Without ascribing any meaning to it whatsoever, it's a lawn ornament. No more different than putting an angel painted with the prayer of St. Francis on a principal's desk.

Originally posted by AfterInfinity
reply to post by Serdgiam

 

"A true atheist remains silent on their lack of belief inherently."

I only discuss my atheism on these forums, with other atheists, and with the closest of friends. Other than that, I'm pretty quiet about it. I just keep a low profile when religion is mentioned. I might add a few notes, but I don't commit myself to any party. Especially if they start getting offensive about it. I then tune them out or walk away.

Thank you for your honest response!

Do you speak of your atheism directly, or more on the topics that revolve around it? From my own philosophy, I struggle to understand how one could speak on something that has a null value. At least within reason/logic. I have yet to speak to someone on the topic that doesnt get emotional, defensive, and start to play the victim card. Makes actual discussion quite difficult. I gave up on speaking with the religious long ago, so you can take that as a compliment.

Originally posted by Annee

Originally posted by Serdgiam

"A true atheist remains silent on their lack of belief inherently."

What BS.

Atheism means one thing only: lack of belief in a god.

How and what each individual atheist things or believes beyond that is their own personal philosophy.

Remain silent? For what purpose?

If you would mind, in that quote where it says "remain silent," what do you perceive that to mean?

Would you mind not getting defensive or emotional about it? I dont mean any disrespect with that, it just makes logical discourse difficult.

reply to post by Serdgiam

A true atheist remains silent on their lack of belief inherently

First of all, just to be clear, I'm not an atheist, as I do believe in a spiritual hierarchy and in reincarnation.

That being said, Christians and other evangelical persuasions are committed to "spreading the word" and converting followers. Atheists have no such mantra.

Atheists, as rule and in my opinion, only speak up when confronted with a religious proclamation, which they then reject. There is first a claim that gods exist, followed by a rejection of that claim.

As a non-believer in the Christian and biblical versions of god, I came to my conclusions through the rejection of what I'd been told was true and embraced what I perceived to be true.

Originally posted by AfterInfinity
Tell me, how do you feel about it? That's the right word, isn't it? Oh wait...that would entail emotion.

I don't do ridiculous.

We are a secular government. We have separation of church and state. End of discussion.