Replies

I see your point. The elephant in the room that no one wants to touch is woman in the work force. This has led to a decline in the traditional family in two ways, lower wages for everyone in the workforce because of more labor; and two; making it esier for woman who may have stayed in so-so marriages (not abusive, or horrible marriage) to get a divorce.

Just because I don't believe in a god does not mean that I don't see the value in many of the religious/philosphy books written by man.

"Just because I don't believe in a god does not mean that I don't see the value in many of the religious/philosphy books written by man."

...exactly. That's what I've seen from all who say that they are Atheist, conservative and really appear to mean it by fiscal policy. Most of our social programs are now social engineering programs against traditional family structure brought to us by those who hate monotheism and have personal problems with family. Such programs can only be supported by socialist government policies. Therefore, fiscal conservatives should oppose them.

And although I've been a believer from childhood, I'm against having any government Christian monument. Even George Washington made way for Jews and put his words into at least one letter that I recall.

As for the Ten Commandments in a government monument, though, I only see one problem with it. Different bibles have different versions of those Commandments. For example, the Romans did away with the second Commandment a long time ago. So which version would we use? The only really authoritative version would be that from the Torah, copied many times in each generation, word-for-word, from Moses' time until now. But most of our country, Romanized as it is (even once-Protestant churches), would reject that only truly preserved version. So although it's doubtful that any real conservative would have a problem with the Ten Commandments (keeps religious people in line), which version would be agreed upon?