Posted on 11/19/2002 8:36:24 AM PST by Dallas
The point is this: Does posting the Ten Commandments on public property violate the First Amendment?
Sure they do. It's called the Justice Department, under the direct control of John Ashcroft, who reports to the President. Let's hope the Justice Department puts it under a very low priority.
A calender does not represent laws handed down by God as believed in certain religions. Apples and Oranges.
I am sticking to a strict interpretation of the First Amendment here.
I too believe in the original intent of the passage in the 1st - which was to ensure America would not become a Theocracy and have a national religion like England.
What I ask is if the words "Thall Shalt not take the name of the Lord thy God in vain" is written on a tablet in a COURT HOUSE(that's the distinction), does that not imply that taking the name of the Lord in vain is a crime, punishable by the court?
You won't get any argument from me on that one. Zwingly tried a theocracy in Zurich during the Reformation. It was a disaster. Any theocratic government is doomed to failure. My assertion is that posting a religious document on public property does not equal a theocracy.
ONLY if it is codified into law. ONLY if it is in the law books rather than hanging on a wall.
Does the fact that this is posted on a COURT HOUSE imply that all Ten concepts are codeified in our law, and if one chooses to not believe in the Christian God, or doesn't keep the Sabath holy, then that person may find himself/herself in front of the court facing punishment?There's that. The counterpoint would be that one might find excerpts from the Code of Hammurabi or the Magna Carta posted as well. In a historical rather than a devotional sense, its permissable.
Now if the judge begins quoting the Commandments or other scripture in court, as a judge did in Cleveland a few years back, that's a different matter entirely.....
-Eric
I know no one is being forced to follow the commandments, and I do agree that their posting is not in violation of the 1st Amendment. All I simply ask is that when you have overtly religious "laws" posted in a court house, could that not imply that those religious laws are law of the land?
Why so? They put it in there in one piece, didn't they.
I'll go along with that.
Do we edit the papers of our forefathers to eliminate any reference to God?? I think not!!
I agree. None would bother me.
Is India considered Middle Eastern ?
Yes those are the objectives.
1) We have "One Nation Under God"; "In God We Trust"; Our individual rights are "God Given". I believe all men of faith worhsip the same God however they choose to approach it. However I will violently oppose an atheist government. Our rights are God-given they are not granted by men. That is a fundamental difference between our original government and socialism.
2)Public cursing and swearing is against the law in most places. It originates with that Commandment.
3) The Sabbath remains Holy as far as the Government and much of our government calendars are concerned (though it is under concerted assault). The Government does not work on Sundays (except essential services)
4) re: "graven images", I'm sure you agree the government has no business creating "graven images" of any God.
While the government justice system may have the 10 Commandments as a moral underpinning it does not mean that it forces others to follow a creed or doctrine. It does not stop you from making any graven image you choose. It does not stop you from cursing or worshipping the devil... but do it in your own church, on your own property.
Western Civilization is under attack. I for one am ready to defend it to the death, as were my ancestors.
Tell me what else in the 10 Commandments is none of the governments business.
Yes, this should be our rallying cry ..."THIS Granite Block"
'Ten Commandments' Judge Says The Monument Stays(CNSNews.com) - "I have no plans to remove the monument," said Alabama's "Ten Commandments Judge" at a press conference on Tuesday.
Alabama Supreme Court Chief Justice Roy Moore said he plans to appeal Monday's federal court ruling ordering him to remove the two-and-a-half ton granite monument he installed in a state government building one night last summer. The monument features a tablet on which the Ten Commandments are written.
In Monday's ruling, U.S. District Judge Myron Thompson said Moore had created "a religious sanctuary within the walls of a courthouse." He reportedly gave Moore 30 days to remove the monument, but at Tuesday's press conference Moore said "there is no order in existence at this time to remove the monument."
Moore insists that the Ten Commandments are the moral foundation of law. On Tuesday, he noted that the first sentence of the Alabama Constitution invokes the guidance of "almighty God," and likewise, he said, the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution had only one purpose - "to allow the freedom to worship that God upon which this nation was founded."
Moore said that he, like all judges, is sworn to uphold the state and federal constitutions. "Those constitutions are premised on the belief in God. I am bound by my conscience to acknowledge that God on whom [my] oath depends. I am committed to do my duty."
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.