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

originally posted by: Seamrog

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus


Either way, silly argument.

Nope - totally relevant point.

A societal segment that is attempting to scrub any trace of religion from the public square that turns to a tyrannical court to run roughshod over the states totally misses the point that even the court, in its tyranny, recognizes and acknowledges the religious foundations of the laws it chooses to distort for political whims.

Sorry you missed it.

I know you aren't interested in actually denying ignorance and learning something for once, but I'll try anyways. Read this:
Snopes - E-mail describes religious symbols and references in U.S. capital buildings and the words of America's founders.

The representations of Moses described above both present him in a context in which he is depicted as one of several historical exemplars of lawgivers, not as a religious figure. (This is why, for example, the Supreme Court of the United States in 2003 rejected appeals to overturn a decision ordering the removal of a monument to the Ten Commandments from an Alabama courthouse: they ruled that the monument did not present the Ten Commandments in a context other than as quotations of Biblical verse and was therefore deemed an unconstitutional state endorsement of religion.)

The depiction referred to here is a sculpture entitled "Justice the Guardian of Liberty" by Hermon A. McNeil, which appears on the eastern pediment of the Supreme Court building. (The eastern pediment is the back of the Supreme Court building, so this sculpture is not something one would see "walking up the steps to the building which houses the Supreme Court." The front entrance is on the western side.) The sculpture was intended to be a symbolic representation of three of the Eastern civilizations from which our laws were derived, personified by the figures of three great lawgivers: Moses, Confucius, and Solon (surrounded by several allegorical figures representing a variety of legal themes)

McNeil described the symbolism of his work thusly:

Law as an element of civilization was normally and naturally derived or inherited in this country from former civilizations. The "Eastern Pediment" of the Supreme Court Building suggests therefore the treatment of such fundamental laws and precepts as are derived from the East. Moses, Confucius and Solon are chosen as representing three great civilizations and form the central group of this Pediment.

The two other lawgiver figures (Confucius and Solon) are not "facing [the] one in the middle" (i.e., Moses) as claimed above — all three of the lawgivers are depicted in full frontal views, facing forward. (The allegorical figures who flank the three lawgivers are indeed facing towards the middle, but they are looking in the direction of all three men, not just Moses.) The two tablets Moses holds in his arms are blank, without inscription.

As you enter the Supreme Court courtroom, the two huge oak doors have the Ten Commandments engraved on each lower portion of each door.

The doors of the Supreme Court courtroom don't literally have the "Ten Commandments engraved on each lower portion." The lower portions of the two doors are engraved with a symbolic depiction, two tablets bearing the Roman numerals I through V and VI through X. As discussed in the next item, these symbols can represent something other than the Ten Commandments.

As you sit inside the courtroom, you can see the wall right above where the Supreme Court judges sit a display of the Ten Commandments!
The wall "right above where the Supreme Court judges sit" is the east wall, on which is displayed a frieze designed by sculptor Adolph A. Weinman. The frieze features two male figures who represent the Majesty of Law and the Power of Government, flanked on the left side by a group of figures representing Wisdom, and on the right side by a group of figures representing Justice:

I don't care if the U.S. is 99.9% Christian(and it's so, so far from that). Separation of church and state is necessary for the structure our country was built under.

Hang the commandments in your place of worship or your home if you like. No biggie. Wear it on a shirt if you feel like it. Tattoo it across your chest for all I care.

I'd even be fine if there was a multi-denominational piece in a park if it held the primary tenets of all religions (and non-belief systems) in some sort of display. Of course, then one gets into the issue of placement and suggested importance from that. Just roll some dice to determine that.

But really, let's keep any one particular tenet from gracing our governmental and public school buildings.

originally posted by: reldra

originally posted by: theabsolutetruth
a reply to: Kromlech

It isn't enforcing belief in anything. There are plenty of things that could be removed from American societies under such rules, like advertising, tv shows, statues.

Silly PC nonsense, it will bite them back. I have written plenty about my opinions on Christianity but it is the basis of American laws, and America is a Christian nation.

America is not a Christian nation, never has been. There is good info on that in an installment of NLBS.

Well it was never supposed to be a theocracy. After the revolution measures were taken to insure that the state couldn't recognize and official branch of Christianity as the British did by simply restricting the government from interfering with the "free exercise thereof" and "regarding the establishment".

But yea the nation was almost totally christian in religion. Christianity had major influence on society and government, elected officials ect. America was a nation largely founded early by persecuted christian sects from Europe. America was so christian and had so much respect for Christianity that many things were not questioned constitutionally for many years.


Although early on James Madison fought against some of the left over practices that were present before the revolution. For example clergy in some states living off the tax dollar. He even asked if they had learned nothing about the corruption of the church and government under the old system. Tax dollars supporting denominations, preachers ect in some sect.

a reply to: Logarock

Yes, we know that Christian influence seeped into the government from the fact that the country is majority Christian. THAT is what we are trying to fix now with rulings like in the OP. Except Christians pretend like they are being persecuted for reevening the religious playing field in the government like it was originally intended to be.

originally posted by: Logarock
America was a nation largely founded early by persecuted christian sects from Europe. America was so christian and had so much respect for Christianity that many things were not questioned constitutionally for many years.

Such as?

originally posted by: gottaknow
I don't care if the U.S. is 99.9% Christian(and it's so, so far from that). Separation of church and state is necessary for the structure our country was built under.

One strong lesson that a country like ours needs to remember and should have taken note of were the examples in the bible of the corrupting effects of the ruling families of Israle being in full control politically of the priest and professional profit class, er prophet class. Or the other way around. It was major corruption and political corruption.

Then we can go to the history of Europe and see the absolute madness that took place when the government recognizes and official church or even religion in the cases of Muslim countries.

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus

originally posted by: Logarock
America was a nation largely founded early by persecuted christian sects from Europe. America was so christian and had so much respect for Christianity that many things were not questioned constitutionally for many years.

Such as?

Well like the Ten Commandant on government property flap.

a reply to: Logarock

Keep in mind that many of the Christian influences that seeped into our government are a result of the Christian nation movement and a desire to separate us from the atheist USSR in the 1950's. It's not like they were with us from the beginning.

originally posted by: Logarock
Well like the Ten Commandant on government property flap.

The bulk of those are from the mid-20th century onwards.

a reply to: JAK

Presumably that was directed at me.

It isn't promoting anything, it is just there, like a piece of art or literature, people can make of it as they choose, that is the point, there are all sorts of things that should be banned under the rationale of it being removed, such as the pyramid and all seeing eye on the dollar bills, those represent ancient Egyptian religion, same for obelisks, it even says ''IN GOD WE TRUST'' on $, I bet that's a Christian God seeing as it is the Christian word for God. Is that not 'offensive' to atheists. There are billions of things that stem from religious texts to iconography used in the US, are those being banned also? How about buildings showing religious iconography? The star of David, is that being banned from public sight?

You can't celebrate diversity unless there is diversity. America pretending it's history as anything other than it was is really stupid.

Does anyone have an issue with the actual commandments?

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: Logarock

Yes, we know that Christian influence seeped into the government from the fact that the country is majority Christian. THAT is what we are trying to fix now with rulings like in the OP. Except Christians pretend like they are being persecuted for reevening the religious playing field in the government like it was originally intended to be.

Well it didn't really seep in at the beginning. It was in the water they drank and the air they breathed.

The only thing originally intended was to keep the government from establishing an official branch say like what the Anglicans were to England for so long and thus keeping other sects of christianity from being persecuted by the official branch and thus the government. The 1st amendment is also interesting in understanding this. Some folks make on this site are always on about christians feeling persecuted but the 1st amendment demonstrates that the press and free thinking christians were persecuted by the Crown and the official church back then. Even today we see things and hear noises about christians being forced by the state to be made to do certain things, in clear violation of the 1st amendment and by folks claiming what they call a resent constitutional rectification of their standing.

If the USA was a "christian nation" it would be a bible flavoured ISIS.

a reply to: theabsolutetruth

How much do you know about the history of why those things are where they are exactly? Because your reading suggests that you don't know why they are there and just want them to remain because of tradition. For instance, the pyramid on the dollar isn't promoting Egyptian religion. It is a symbol that represents enlightenment.

originally posted by: beezzer
Does anyone have an issue with the actual commandments?

Well that one commandment..."You cant have any other gods before me". Thats going to cause problems these days.

originally posted by: Logarock

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: Logarock

Yes, we know that Christian influence seeped into the government from the fact that the country is majority Christian. THAT is what we are trying to fix now with rulings like in the OP. Except Christians pretend like they are being persecuted for reevening the religious playing field in the government like it was originally intended to be.

Well it didn't really seep in at the beginning. It was in the water they drank and the air they breathed.

The only thing originally intended was to keep the government from establishing an official branch say like what the Anglicans were to England for so long and thus keeping other sects of christianity from being persecuted by the official branch and thus the government. The 1st amendment is also interesting in understanding this. Some folks make on this site are always on about christians feeling persecuted but the 1st amendment demonstrates that the press and free thinking christians were persecuted by the Crown and the official church back then. Even today we see things and hear noises about christians being forced by the state to be made to do certain things, in clear violation of the 1st amendment and by folks claiming what they call a resent constitutional rectification of their standing.

Christians aren't forced to do anything in the state these days, except when they try to use their religion to be intolerant in public. In private, they are free to be as intolerant as they want.

Plus persecution of Christians in the past is EXACTLY why the 1st Amendment was written as it was. There never was any intention to set the 1st up to favor Christianity but not any particular denomination. It was always setup not to favor any religion, because the founding fathers understood that religion and government don't mix, no matter which religion. Saying it was setup to favor non-denominational Christianity is just Christian Nation movement revisionist history. No serious historical scholar believes that though.

originally posted by: roadgravel

It really comes down to this - you either put up a monument to every single faith and show that you represent all of your electorate, or you remove all religious symbols from government. There is no in-between.

There it is. But then people would also fight over that bit of equality.

Most likely the SAME people.

originally posted by: beezzer
Does anyone have an issue with the actual commandments?

I listed four of them earlier in the thread that would be an issue to any non-Christian. Perhaps go back and reread the thread.

Good. Now maybe we can work toward removing the words "In God We Trust" from the currency.

And remove "Under God" from the Pledge.

a reply to: ScientificRailgun

To be honest, the pledge should be removed altogether. Forcing children to recite a pledge to their country every day in school is political brainwashing.