In order to participate in the GunBroker Member forums, you must be logged in with your GunBroker.com account. Click the sign-in button at the top right of the forums page to get connected.

Ten Commandments-Removed by the Feds

salzosalzo Member Posts: 6,396 ✭✭
edited March 2002 in General Discussion
Yesterday a Federal Judged ruled that a plaque on a chester county courthouse containing, among other things, the ten commandments, had to be removed.Apparently, an old atheist got really offended by the presence of the plaque, so she called the ACLU, who took the county to court. The county, by and large wanted the plaque to stay, but the Judge said it was to be removed because it violates "seperation of church and state."Now this is a clear violation of the first amendment "free exercise" clause.What would happen, if the county thumbs their nose up to the judge, and say they will not remove the plaque. What happens then? Does the county get thrown in jail? Does the Federal government send an army here to remove the offensive plaque?I find it curious that no one will ever just say "No" when the government orders them to remove Religious material. I cant imagine that the "penalty" for exercising religion even when the government says they cannot do so, can be too severe.It just seems to me, that the Federal government has to be controlled, and this seems like a perfect oppurtunity to tell the government "NO".
Happiness is a warm gun
· Share on FacebookShare on Twitter

Comments

  • gunpaqgunpaq Member Posts: 4,607 ✭✭
    edited November -1
    The Ten Commandments are out of the court house because people really don't give a damn. They were posted in an out of the way area and in such a manner, as a historical document not an instrument or endorsement of a religion, that they offended only those with an axe to grind. I find it quite amusing with all the wealthy high powered politicians,lawyers, and wealthy politically active citizens in the county no one as an individual or collectively will simply say "NO". The story will make good copy in the Daily Local for a while and then go away as people forget, just like September 11th.
    Pack slow, fall stable, pull high, hit dead center.
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • Shootist3006Shootist3006 Member Posts: 4,171
    edited November -1
    One of the things that bother me in the arguments about the separation of church and state is that, in attempting to provide such separation, the state has indeed established a "state religion". Religion is a system of belief, normally a belief in God. Isn't atheism also a system of belief; a belief in the non-existence of God? By allowing the atheists to remove every sign where the state recognizes the existence of God, isn't the state making atheism the state religion? I would like to see some lawsuits where the state is sued for FAILING to post the 10 Commandments because such a failure is an example of establishing the state religion of atheism. Comments?
    Quod principi placuit legis habet vigorem.Semper Fidelis
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • badboybobbadboybob Member Posts: 1,658 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    Good post Shootist. Maybe we could get the American Communist Lovers Union to sue on that idea.
    PC=BS
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • 223believer223believer Member Posts: 128 ✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    This is a stupid post. Any moron with half an understanding of American legal tradition and modern political thought understands very clearly that in America the government is supposed to leave religion alone, and is especially supposed to avoid ANY appearance of endorsing a particular religion. Posting the ten commandments endorses them and religions that use them in their teachings. Consider the state of various countries throughout the world, and the ones that have governments that endorse religions and / or discrimminate against religions are invariably the most repressive and despotic you will find. Read Andrew Sullivan's excellent recent article in the New York Times magazine about how the success and freedom of America--and the totally screwed up nature of most Muslim countries-stem in large part from their attitudes towards religion.You might want to educate yourself a bit more and ponder the rammifications of what you endorse.
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • Shootist3006Shootist3006 Member Posts: 4,171
    edited November -1
    Saxon, I think you missed the point of what I was saying. By failing to allow any evidence of the existence of God (be that Christian, Islam, Buddha. whatever) the state HAS ESTABLISHED a state religion; that religion being atheism. If religion is belief, then the belief that there is no God is in itself a religion! By denying all reference to God, the state is fostering the religious belief that God does not exist; the state has therefore established a state religion.PS your BTW must be aimed at someone else, has no bearing on anything I said
    Quod principi placuit legis habet vigorem.Semper Fidelis
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • 223believer223believer Member Posts: 128 ✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    Saxon, you have a fine mind. I enjoy reading what you write.
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • daddodaddo Member Posts: 3,408
    edited November -1
    Wasn't this country and our constitution based on the belief of God? "Certain alienable rights by our creator"? Isn't "In God we trust" on our money? Do we not take an oath on the Bible so help us God to tell the truth? Isn't the only seperation of government and religion the fact that the government cannot tell anyone what religion to beleive in? Is the showing of the 10 commandments going to hurt anyone? Look around and you will see a lot worse!
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • He DogHe Dog Member Posts: 51,593 ✭✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    Shootist, while religion my include a system of belief (but religion is certainly more than that, isn't it?), not all systems of belief are religions. Atheism is not a religion. and not all atheists are unreligious, they simply are not Theists.
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • daddodaddo Member Posts: 3,408
    edited November -1
    I fail to see where displaying the 10 comandments is "forcing" anyone. Like a bad TV show- you may look at it and complain or change the channel.
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • 25-0625-06 Member Posts: 382 ✭✭
    edited November -1
    Saxon and 223: I may be wrong about this, but I believe that the Constitution says the state (government) shall not establish a religion. I do not think they meant that we can not post the 10 Commandments in public places, and say prayers before ballgames. After all, what does our paper money say? IT has always griped me that we are supposed to be a country ruled by the majority, and yet, these single individuals can force their stupid and idiotic ways on the rest of us. My feelings are that if they do not like our ways, shut up and get the HELL out.
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • turboturbo Member Posts: 820 ✭✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    It is true that religion is a philosophy based on a belief in a god.And there is, afterall many religions in this world and therefore many gods according to these religions.Agnostics plainly reject the possibility that there maybe any gods at all, while Atheists simply confess there is no one godas held to be by theistic religions.Both of these groups agnostics and atheists have a common philosophical thread that bindsthem, it's called "humanism". Humanists prevade our public schools, colleges and universities as teachers and professors who, consider themselves elitests, and have desiminated there humanistic philosophical religion under the guise of modern education, they are the ones who believe that autonomous , self centered man is able to solve the problems of man independent of any god."Take a strong clue from secular humanist publication that say..."the battle for the hearts and minds of children is being fought in the classroomns. The new religion of humanism will win the battle for the children over the rotting corpses of Christianity"... quote from an Article: Humanists Declare War Against Christian FaithThe US Supreme Court has ruled that humanism is a religion. Liberalism embraces this philosophical belief system, since there can only be real liberation, only, if one can only throw the reigns of an authoritian God from off his shoulders, an what better way than to declare his or her independence from him, this ultimately is the LIBERALS declaration.Humanists believe christianity is harmful and are prepared to use and are using, the power of the Federal Government, public schools and the media to elect more humanists senators, congressmen, governors, judges to continue there anti-moral, anti-family and anti-american trends they have pushed for over 60 year.Most of the media and many of the organizations that get the greatest amount of coverage in our press and on TV, like NOW, ACLU, SIECUS, NEA, The Gay Task Force, to name a few, manipulate well meaning persons sense of fairness, by promoting group rights, and special treatment of thses groups, all the while pushing their agenda of a global government under one leader. They are the ones who are spearheading a movement in this country to join other forces working outside the US to form a one world government.If you have wondered why this country has experienced such a left leaning liberal agenda in this last generation this is the reason.The Libratarian Party is a party today who is attracting many decent moral americans, who claim to be of the christian persuasion, what they do not realize is that this party is rife with extreme humanists, who hate christians and mere mention of God, they push freedom from government, while really promoting, freedom from authority, especially from a GOD, they push for legalization of drugs, while ignoring the addictive nature of alcohol, and this being our number five contributor to the cause of death in this country. Can you imagine what the legalization of drugs combined with alcohol use would do to this country?It' is for this reason, this country is experiencing perillous days, where America as we knew it is fast becoming a memory in the minds of the WWII generation.Remonving the ten comandments from the public's mind is a small thing compared to what they really want to do with this country.If you have wondered whats wrong with whats ailing this country?, they are the reason.SKEPTICAL?? Go to your search engines, and type: I shared with you an article on this subject a few weeks back.PS Other links: www.christianparents.com/hmsumiii.htm [This message has been edited by turbo (edited 03-09-2002).]
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • v35v35 Member Posts: 12,710 ✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    It's interesting that our founding fathers didn't settle these issues 200 years ago. Were they not smart enough?Perhaps they didn't recognize the legitimacy of agnostics and athiests in presupposing the existence of God. It's the practice they were addressing not the belief.While the Constitution is the perfect living document this omission must be a glaring defect, or is it?
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • 25-0625-06 Member Posts: 382 ✭✭
    edited November -1
    Well, Saxon, it puzzles me why you do not object to the Commandments being removed and you are an ordained minister, if I recall one of the above posts. At least in America, we still have the right to disagree, so far, but I often wonder when that is going to stop. Until then, I guess we can agree to disagree.
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • daddodaddo Member Posts: 3,408
    edited November -1
    Saxonpig; I was responding to the comment that the posting of the 10 commandments was "forcing" one to beleive in that religion,And that We have a free will to choose whatever religion we want. I myself am not religious(or a member of a certain church), but a Christian beleiveing in God and the Holy Book. I find religion seperates man from man, and man from God due to the hatred, judgements, murders, that occur as a result(as you can see on these posts). I make no judgments to those of different religions and expect the same from them. If we could just put these needless problems aside and love oneanother as we are suppose to- I think we could get along just fine.
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • IconoclastIconoclast Member Posts: 10,515 ✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    Jumping in where angels fear to tread . . . oops, wrong opening line, eh? LTS - I, too, find it amusingly ironic that every witness is required to swear an oath incorporating in word or object a belief in a deity &/or a particular branch of religion when any other reference is an anathema to these ACLU mushbrains. Then there's the phrase in the Pledge of Allegiance, "under God," . . . . As an atheist myself, the few times I've been in the situation, it was all I could do to keep a straight face. Before the true believers attempt to smite me, I do want to go on record as saying I have no problem personally w/ 99% of the incidents that send the ACLU types into orbit. If we swear in officials on Bibles, open our legislative sessions w/ prayer, what harm does it do to have a minute's silent prayer at the start of the day in a public school? If a given child wants to take that opportunity instead to review for the math exam or consider dealing w/ hormonal overcharge, who's to know and who should care? Well, in any case, most everything I would say has already been said, and at least as well, by other posters. Saxon, I commend you for the clarity & quality of your comments - some of the best I've seen in any venue on this subject.
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • OtomanOtoman Member Posts: 554 ✭
    edited November -1
    Im am just a dumb old guy from Kansas but it seems to me that if everyone followed the Ten Commandments, and the Golden Rule this world would be a much better place? Do I follow the ten commandments all of the time? No! But I try.
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • thunderboltthunderbolt Member Posts: 6,041 ✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    When the founding fathers were writing allthose documents, they spent a lot of time praying first. The idea was to prevent a state religion (as in England)with the government running the church. They were nottrying to run God out of everything. Why is it that God was prayed to in schools across the country for decades until around the 60'sor so? The Constitution didn't change, but the Supreme Court went liberal.
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • daddodaddo Member Posts: 3,408
    edited November -1
    I agree with ottoman.
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • 223believer223believer Member Posts: 128 ✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    Reading over all of these posts sure does make me shake my head. It's so funny that people who so vehemently insist on keeping their second amendment rights sacred are so quick to run roughshod all over first amendment rights. I also laugh at how so many people on this board * and criticize the federal and local government and their efforts, but then turn around and want them to start pushing religion. If the way you worship and your relationship with God is so important to you, wouldn't you like to keep the government out of it?
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • k.stanonikk.stanonik Member Posts: 2,109 ✭✭
    edited November -1
    Does this mean we should change the wording on our currency. cant in god we trust be construde as a religious statement
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • salzosalzo Member Posts: 6,396 ✭✭
    edited November -1
    Ive been away for the weekend, and have not sat down and read through all of the posts, but I can certainly see that most of you have absolutely no idea what you are talking about. First of all, the founders did not envision a state without religion-they envisioned a FEDERAL GOVERNMENT staying out of religious affairs. The first amendment specifically adresses congress, and it specifically says congress cant establish a religion, and congress cannot prohibit the exercise of religion. The foirst amendment cannot be applied against the states-it deals specifically with Federal Interference.The fact that a county court house displays the ten commandments is an exercise of religion, and congress is prohibited from not allowing the free exercise of religion. Therefore, telling a county court house the can not display the ten commandments, is a violation of the "free exercise" clause of the amendment. Only when a court dreamed up the "seperation of church and state" dogma did the "not establish" part of the first amendment become binding on any government. You might think that is peachy, but it ignores the "free exercise" clause. I just assume we do not ignore the clauses that we do not like, and I just assume an amendment that deals specifically with congress(feds),deals specifically with the body that it mentions. And to sit here and say "the founders did not want any religion in ANY government in the United states" is plain wrong, and completely revisionist history. Do some homework before you preach with the ACLU crowd.
    Happiness is a warm gun
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • Bushy ARBushy AR Member Posts: 564 ✭✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    Freedom of religion is just that.If I was a Muslim,or a Buddist,or a Hindu,should I have to go to a court room and see a Christian creedo on their wall? Does it mean that if I don't read the bible I will not get a fair trial? Maybe those different religions "ten commandments" equivalants should be posted also? Some should not preach at all and let all those who want to believe or not believe what ever they want in my opinion.
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • salzosalzo Member Posts: 6,396 ✭✭
    edited November -1
    "READING OVER ALL OF THESE POSTS SURE DOES MAKE ME SHAKE MY HEAD. IT IS SO FUNNY THAT PEOPLE WHOSO VEHEMENTLY INSIST ON KEEPING THEIR SECOND AMENDMENT RIGHTS ARE SO QUICK TO RUN ROUGHSHODALL OVER FIRST AMENDMENT RIGHTS" -223 Believer223- You better go do some homework, because you do not know what you are speaking of. May I suggest that you start by actually reading the first amendment in its entirety, and read ALL of the words, and not just the words that your friends in the ACLU read. It is obvious that you are influenced by those types. You find it amusing that those who defend the second, are not defending the first. The truth is, they are defending the first, and it is you who are guilty of ignoring, and not honoring the first amendment.If anyone did decide to not allow the Federal government the authority and power to remove that plaque, that would be DEFENDING the first amendment, which clearly says the Federal government is prohibited from doing so. You have it backwards.
    Happiness is a warm gun
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • gunpaqgunpaq Member Posts: 4,607 ✭✭
    edited November -1
    Where the Ten Commandments were posted in the Chester County Court House one would need a tour guide to point them out unless they were stumbled upon. I have worked doing deed research for years in the court house and never knew they were there untill I happened upon them quite by chance. Is this a religious issue or a cultural issue? Owning, using and passing down a firearm is a cultural issue in the area of Chester County where I grew up and untill recent years many of those of that "gun" culture could really care less about the Second Ammendment. Living by a set of standards or a "Golden Role" such as suggested by the Ten Commandments is also a cultural issue in this area since people do, or atleast used to, agree with those standards, for the most part in principle, and do try to live by them and not by a religious dictate. Was an individual or group of individuals so personally offended to the extent that their life, liberty, and puruit of happiness were grossly infringed upon that they could not bear the sight or knowledge that the Ten Commandments were being displayed in an obscur location in a public building for eighty years or was this an outside group or individual with a political agenda that called for the removal of the Ten Commandments? Why not take the Bibles out of the court rooms? - Because it is not a hot political topic thats why, the same as getting God off our money. If it makes good copy and gets your name or cause out there in the public eye then go with it with all the conviction of a fanatic and you will succeed because the resolve of the American general public is weak - thats why the Ten Commandments are coming down. Why has anyone not offered a compromise or a solution such as a $15.00 curtain over the Ten Commandments plaque that could be withdrawn for viewing by persons who would not be offended or perhaps a $5.00 disclaimer plackard stating that the Ten Commandments plaque was a historical artifact and not an endorsement of any particular religion? If something is important to a particular culture, a people, or a community they will fight to keep it, but like I said this is a cultural issue and not a religious one and it is obvious that it is not important to the present Chester County culture to keep the Ten Commandments plaque posted in the Court House. I hope that our gun culture does not follow the same path, but it will, since many gun owners in Pennsylvania are supporting Ed "I won't take your deer guns" Rendell for our next governer.
    Pack slow, fall stable, pull high, hit dead center.
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • 25-0625-06 Member Posts: 382 ✭✭
    edited November -1
    .223 and Saxon, I have a question for both of you. Why is it all right for some idividual to trampel on my rights? I do not agree with either of you that posting the 10 Commandments is promoting a religion. However, I feel very strongly that these people are trampling on our rights by taking away our rights and freedom of expression when they demand that such things be removed. Salzo and Otto have it right and you two are wrong. If you do not think you are wrong, look at the direction this country has taken since these rulings have started being made. Do you, Saxon, who are an ordained minister really approve of that?
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • salzosalzo Member Posts: 6,396 ✭✭
    edited November -1
    What is truly interesting, is the fact that no one really considers the constitution when they speak against the first amendment. I am sure that Saxon and others truly believe they are speaking from a Constitutional perspective, but they are not. They are completely misguided in their belief that the first amendment prohibits "religious expression" from all and any government, be it state, local, or federal. That may be the way that the courts have "interpeted" it after the ratification of the 14th amendment, but that does not make it right. Granted, the meaning has changed from the original intent of the first, but you should not speak about the Founders prohibiting religious expression, or state supported religions. Because it is just not true. The state of Massachusettes, and the State of Pennsylvania, both collected taxes from the people that were distributed to the church. If the intent of the founders was as Saxon and others have described, that would have been a violation of the first amendment. Those actions from those states were NEVER qustioned by the Federal government on first amendment grounds, because the Founders knew that the first amendment was binding on the Federal government, and not the states.We seem to have forgotten that the intent of the bill of rights was a guarantee to the states that the newly created Federal government would not interfere in these areas. It was not some "Bill of Rights" that was created to be used by the Federalk government to Police the states. That is exactly what the ratifiers were seeking to avoid. They wanted the Federal Government to be subservient to the states. Of Course, that is not the way it is today, but that does not change history, specifically, the false notion that the founders inended to "police" the states with respect to religion.All one has to do, is read the clause in its entirety:"CONGRESS shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, OR PROHIBITING THE FREE EXERCISE THEREOF"(notice the capitalized words). Does not say the states shall make no law, does not say counties shall make no law, it says CONGRESS shall make no law. And when Congress(via the FEDERAL courts) prohibits a county from displaying a plaque because it is religious, that is violating the Free exercise thereof of religion.The intent of the first was not to guarantee that minorities would not be exposed to religion that they did not believe in, the intent was to prevent CONGRESS from making laws with respect to religion. Dont take my word, read the amendment.
    Happiness is a warm gun
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • billmillerbillmiller Member Posts: 2 ✭✭
    edited November -1
    Gentlemen, and Ladies!Having lived in Canada for almost twenty years, and seeing what an "Areligious" country is like, I really don't like to see any anti-Christian views win out over our basic beliefs! This country was founded, built, and defended by Christians. Yes there were some others here, but we are letting them take over! In Canada, Christians are very much in the minority, and you have to go there to see what it is like. No "Christ" in christmas, no christian radio stations, and white, anglo-saxon, protestants are dead last! Our "Neighbors to the North" are now a non-christian country. Less than three percent go to church more than once a year!In summary, I won't give up my gun, or my GOD!
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
Sign In or Register to comment.