Why should it be, FRuitLoOp? Because YOU don't like it? Or because you think there is some legal basis for "getting it out of government" (whatever you'd like that to mean)? If the latter, I'm sure everyone on this thread is all ears.
Fruity - Are you not "brainwashed" with the religion of secularism or animism or do you even understand these concepts?
Fuity and Rock are cut from the same mold......and IP address as well But I brought htis up before: WHo cares? too much time wasted on this subject by groups that have ulterior motives....the religious right and the left wing fanaticals who are trying to further erode all morals from society...What I 'd like to know is , what is it about the 10 commandments that is objectionable? Honor your God? who ever he/she is? No other gods before me? Don't commit adultery? This is already a law....isn;t this a religious law then? should;t it be removed? Don't be checking out your neighbors wife? Don;t kill? Honor your mom and dad? don;t steal??? Love your neighbor? I don't care to recall the rest but I don't know why the Atheists ( who in fact have become a RELIGIOUS CULT with their anti religion passion in my opinion) are so uptight..... But i still challenge the Alabama judge to put a statue of the prophet Mohammed on stte grounds and defend it the way he is this..
Just so there's no confusion, I cited those contradictory examples to show that religion has traditionally been very much a part of our government. This attitude that government should be cleansed of any religious expression is a relatively new invention, made possible by the influx of liberal judges who arewilling to use the judiciary to supplant the legislative process. Obviously, this is a profoundly undemocratic change, as the people can change course by voting in new legislators, but judges have lifetime tenure and cannot be removed. The traditional approach to this type of issue, not just religious ones but other contentious issues, was for the federal judiciary to defer to local authorities by calling them "political questions" or classifying them as "non-justiciable", meaning they were a no-go for judges. Judges recognized that a democratic people have the right to deal with the vast majority of issues without judicial interference, even though the outcome may not be what the judge thought best. Now judges feel it is appropriate for them to insert themselves into every dispute, no matter how remote from any proper federal or constitutional concern it may be. I wish someone would explain to me how anyone suffers any injury whatsoever from this 10 Commandments monument. If there was some evidence that Judge Moore was discriminating against atheists, that would be an issue. But how is anyone hurt by this monument? Thinking it is inappropriate or a waste of money or stupid to me is not a constitutional issue. I feel that way about a lot of the "art" I see littering public buildings.
I agree with you BUT....what about a Buddha statue on every fed. property?....How about the Koran unrolled on state ground?...where does it end or stop?....and who decides what get's put out?......despite my deep religious beliefs, i believe there should not be the 10 commandments or any other scriptures from any other religion on government grounds.
But isn't the whole point that our tradition of morally based law can be traced to the 10 Commandments? Not the Koran or the Prophet's life or teachings? In any event, I'd still say if he put up a statute of Mohammed it doesn't violate the First Amendment. It doesn't affect the kind of justice anyone in that court gets. It is merely an expression that something is worth reflecting on. And if the voters of Alabama disagreed, they have a remedy at the next election.
Let me clarify my point. First of all, I am only refering to federally funded abortions. In other words, using our tax dollars to take the lives of innocent unborn children. An by playing God, I am referring to the act of deciding who lives or dies. So when a woman gets an abortion thats my tax dollars that are assisting in that murder. How do you think I feel about that? So I don't think the government or any individual has the right to play God with my tax dollars.
Where does it stop? The Jews once built a golden cow out in the dessert....are we going to have statues for every religion icon? Does the KKK get to put a charred cross? Do devil worshipper get to put a horned figure? Come on...you have to admit that the 10 commandments was going a bit far....why not put up a statue of Say John Adams and Jefferson? we know there beliefs
I don't think anyone would disagree with the basic tenets of the 10 commandments. It is primarily a judeo-christian document, but it could just as easily apply to a religionless yet moral society (apart from the commandments concerning god himself). The problem that I see is localized interpretations of the first amendment from federal judges. Is this a first amendment issue? Does having this monument inside the courthouse affect or hinder justice in any fashion? It may not have a place within the courthouse, but the more pressing issue is the inconsistent treatment of religion by our government. Doesn't the use of "and god bless America" by a sitting president endorse a specific religion more so than having that monument in one courthouse? What's good for the goose is good for the gander, correct?
YES!!!! Imagine you go to the courthouse to stop an abortion, defend charges of ADULTERY ( Kobe?)....you don't think its a little skewed going in?