Public display of the Ten Commandments

[brokenbrainwave]

a quick synopsis
In Chattanooga, TN today the county commisioners voted to take down the Ten Commandments today from the courthouses instead of appealing a Federal Judges ruling finding their actions unconstitutional. My question is not of a religous issue per se' but of a freedom of speech issue. Would not most agree the US is primarily Christian, maybe not practicing, but believe in Christianity in general. In that case, how can it really be violation of the good folks that do not believe in Christianity civil liberties? Plus since the commisioners are voted in by their constituents, would they not be a direct reflection upon their communities values? In that case would the ruling by not be a violation of the communities civil rights?

 

[bluntforcemama]

I think posting the commandments is a direct violation of freedom of religion and a gross intolerance of other religions besides Christianity. They're about to step over the line that violates our basic freedoms as defined by the first ammendment. Next, they'll probably try to segregate the "other religions" from Christianity. Leave it to the deep South to fuck up the constitutional interpretations.

 

[RawHumor]

I think posting the commandments is a direct violation of freedom of religion and a gross intolerance of other religions besides Christianity. They're about to step over the line that violates our basic freedoms as defined by the first ammendment. Next, they'll probably try to segregate the "other religions" from Christianity. Leave it to the deep South to fuck up the constitutional interpretations.

You need to re-read his post. They've voted to TAKE DOWN the Ten Commandments.

 

[brokenbrainwave]

I think posting the commandments is a direct violation of freedom of religion and a gross intolerance of other religions besides Christianity. They're about to step over the line that violates our basic freedoms as defined by the first ammendment. Next, they'll probably try to segregate the "other religions" from Christianity. Leave it to the deep South to fuck up the constitutional interpretations.

hmm with your last line are you not personally showing a gross intolerance? Keep in mind I am merely playing devil's advocate here.

 

[bluntforcemama]

Actually, I was talking about posting it in the first place. I do have a gross intolerance, but only from experiencing other people's stupidity. I'm a direct relation to a southern grandfather who disowned his oldest son because he believed in evolution and became a teacher.

So, Humor, still feeling smart? I think you need to read it again.

 

[Dixon Carter Lee]

The first 11 words of the Contstitution of the United States, before, even, expressing the notion of free speech: "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion..."

By posting the Ten Commandments in a government building you are clearly violating the spirit of the First Amendment by sanctioning a religious doctrine. It doesn't matter that the religious doctrine is adopted by the majority, or that it espouses common moral principles, it IS a religious doctrine (namely the dogma of the Jewish and Christian God). By posting it you are officially placing one religion over another, and therefore make access to the government available to exclusion.

The Ten Commandments has no more place on display in a government building than does a page from the Koran, the Gita, or Jonathan Livingston Seagull.

 

[bluntforcemama]

Thank you, DCL. I owe you a favor of the sexual, blue-light special type.

 

[J.B.]

I'm with Myst & DCL. What about those non-christian religions?? Having the 10 Comandments posed in a Goverment building is an obvius violation of seperating church & state. Because the 1st amendments allows freedom of religion we have to respect that not all of us practie the same religion. & the US can not show preferance of 1 religion over another.

I gew up in the Christian faith that doesn't stop me from thinking that it's about time they took down those comandments. Sorry.

 

[brokenbrainwave]

the seperation of church and state is the second most controversial part of the constitution (right behind are we really required to pay income taxes to a Federal Government).

Thank you for your responses, and for the record, I dont really care if they are up or down..actually the fact they were up kind of made me a tad happy because it is like giving the finger to all those that scream you have to be Politcally Correct.

plus I figured it was time for something non sexual...just to spice things up a bit, LOL

 

[RhumbRunner13]

The First Ammendment.

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

It would be argued that a state entity displaying any religious material would be seen as, if not establishing a specific religion, at least biasing the beliefs of the citizenry. An order for a government building to have no religious displays does not interfere in any way with your rights to worship, even in that building! The easiest solution seems to be that in any government held building, no display of religion should exist unless it is there by an individual expressing personal religious beliefs such as wearing a cross or displaying the Commandments on his or her briefcase.

RhumbRunner

 

[Dixon Carter Lee]

the seperation of church and state is the second most controversial part of the constitution

I'm sorry, but what? The phrase is not "controversial", it's fundamental. I think what you meant to say was the individual cases regarding the application of the statute are in themselves each subjectively controversial.

 

[brokenbrainwave]

I'm sorry, but what? The phrase is not "controversial", it's fundamental. I think what you meant to say was the individual cases regarding the application of the statute are in themselves each subjectively controversial.

then why is it the only time it is mentioned in those exact words are in a letter written by Thomas Jefferson?

 

[RawHumor]

They're about to step over the line that violates our basic freedoms as defined by the first ammendment. Next, they'll probably try to segregate the "other religions" from Christianity. Leave it to the deep South to fuck up the constitutional interpretations.

This is the part of your post I was questioning. If they've already voted to remove the sign/plaque/whatever that was bearing the 10 Commandments, then how are they about to step over any line?

 

[bluntforcemama]

By merely posting it in the first place.

 

[Dixon Carter Lee]

then why is it the only time it is mentioned in those exact words are in a letter written by Thomas Jefferson?

That was 200 years ago. At the time mentioning deep sea fishing rights in the Constitution was controversial. There's nothing controversial today about separation of church and state, only about various interesting cases and how they apply to the statute. You can't bring up Jefferson. To be "controversial" now you have to actually be debating the inclusion of the phrase. They did that already in Philadelphia when the thing was written. Controversy done.

 

[RhumbRunner13]

Let us all realize.....

The First Ammendment guarantees our freedom from religion, and our right to practice our chosen religion without government interference.

Rhumb

 

[J.B.]

Re: Let us all realize.....

The First Ammendment guarantees our freedom from religion, and our right to practice our chosen religion without government interference.

Rhumb

thought this should be pointed out once again.

 

[Shy Tall Guy]

Would not most agree the US is primarily Christian, maybe not practicing, but believe in Christianity in general.

The most popular religion in the US is Christianity - but what of it? Despite what some Christian leaders and conservatives would have us believe, the US was not founded on the basis of any religion, Christian or otherwise. One of the basic principles was the separation of religion and state, to prevent a government mandated religion.

In that case, how can it really be violation of the good folks that do not believe in Christianity civil liberties?

The posting of the Ten Commandments, especially the first four which are specific to Judaism and Christianity:

1. I am the Lord your God who brought you out of slavery in Egypt.

2. You shall have no other gods but me.

3. You shall not misuse the name of the Lord your God.

4. You shall remember and keep the Sabbath day holy

The rest of the commandments could be treated as generic and germane to general society, but can you imagine the stink if only those 6 were allowed to be posted?

Plus since the commisioners are voted in by their constituents, would they not be a direct reflection upon their communities values? In that case would the ruling by not be a violation of the communities civil rights?

We are not a democracy - we are a representative republic. We don't get to vote on what the state religion would be, we don't (or shouldn't) get to vote on what "community values" are (unfortunately, we do).

The basic premise of our form of government is that we all have basic Natural Rights or liberties, and that as long as we do not infringe on other people's Natural Rights, we can do and believe as we wish. The government cannot and should not make any laws/regulations beyond that, and the government should not be posting scriptures from any religion that show a tendency towards the establishment of that religion as mandated by the government.

I could find scriptures or sacred writings from a number of religions that could at the least superficially meet that criteria, however, the safest course is to just not go down that road at all. I doubt, that with all our current protections, safeguards and freedom of speech, that posting the Ten Commandments is going to take us down the road to establishing Christianity or Judaism as the state religion - not even a few feet. However, it hasn't been that long since this was indeed a distinct danger in the US, and as I said, it is just safest not to go there at all.

It is interesting that we do have laws that do indeed respect the establishment of religions; the "state" currently decides which religions are valid and which aren't for purposes of qualifying as non-profit orgs for taxes. I believe that this should be abolished; the "state" has no business engaging in such social engineering. Religious orgs should have to pay taxes just like any other org; they incur the same costs. The same goes for tax breaks/subsidies for anything society and the "state" have decided is good for society, such as tax breaks for homeowners, families, subsidies for farmers, etc. - this is all socialism and it just mucks up the economy and society.

 

[android1966]

On US currency there are the words "In god we trust". It does not say "In god\gods\ancestor spirits\any other not beforementioned system of belief we trust" this clearly means a monotheistic belief, you can rule out judaism and the muslim faiths as both these ban the name of god appearing on any disposable item and used banknotes are burnt are they not. Also (and I admit I am not certain) dosn't your oath of allegiance say something along the lines of being one nation under god. I would have to agree with the thread starter that while the US may not have an official state religion, christianity is the de-facto religion that your whole nation is founded upon.

 

[J.B.]

On US currency there are the words "In god we trust". It does not say "In god\gods\ancestor spirits\any other not beforementioned system of belief we trust" this clearly means a monotheistic belief, you can rule out judaism and the muslim faiths as both these ban the name of god appearing on any disposable item and used banknotes are burnt are they not. Also (and I admit I am not certain) dosn't your oath of allegiance say something along the lines of being one nation under god. I would have to agree with the thread starter that while the US may not have an official state religion, christianity is the de-facto religion that your whole nation is founded upon.

Yes it does. Those two are the most obvious contradictions. And honestly I think they shouldn't have been added in the 1st place. this isn't something that was placed by our founding fathers this was added in the 1950's when our government was on it's conservative swing.

 

[Weird Harold]

was added in the 1950's

Wrong!

From: History of the Motto
"In God We Trust"

The motto IN GOD WE TRUST was placed on United States coins largely because of the increased religious sentiment existing during the Civil War. Secretary of the Treasury Salmon P. Chase received many appeals from devout persons throughout the country, urging that the United States recognize the Deity on United States coins. From Treasury Department records, it appears that the first such appeal came in a letter dated November 13, 1861.

The Congress passed the Act of April 22, 1864. This legislation changed the composition of the one-cent coin and authorized the minting of the two-cent coin. The Mint Director was directed to develop the designs for these coins for final approval of the Secretary. IN GOD WE TRUST first appeared on the 1864 two-cent coin.

Display of the Ten Commandments or any other religious text does NOT constitute establishment of a "State Religion" -- only an act of congress or consitutional ammendment can establish a "State Religion."

The Ten Commandments and the words "In God We Trust" on our currency is only an acknowledgement of the Judeo-Christian Ethical values our laws are derived from.

The Constitution does NOT say, "The Supreme Court shall rule that no religious expression is permitted," Nor does it say, "The Supreme Court shall establish atheism as the de facto religion by suppressing all religious expression in public buildings."

 

[J.B.]

Wrong!

From: History of the Motto
"In God We Trust"

Ouch!
Serves me right for not double checking my facts.

 

[Shy Tall Guy]

Also (and I admit I am not certain) dosn't your oath of allegiance say something along the lines of being one nation under god.

The pledge of alliegence is nothing official, it was not written until we had been a republic for almost 120 years (1892), and then it was written by a private citizen, not enacted by any law. Personally I have never liked it. No official oath I can recall having ever taken had any mention of God in it.

christianity is the de-facto religion that your whole nation is founded upon.

Christianity is the most popular religion, but I disagree that our country is founded solely upon its principles. A number of our governing principles fly in the face of Christianity, not the least of which the one we are discussing here.

 

[kotori]

Ouch!
Serves me right for not double checking my facts.

I think you were thinking of the phrase "under God" in the Pledge of Alliegence to the Flag. That was added in the '50s, lobbied for by the Knights of Columbus (I think--probably others as well).

 

[Guest]

I'm having some cookie problems, so I have to "guest" it for a bit.

The Founding Fathers separted church and state, not God and State. God was always intended to be a part of the country, and He is mentioned throughout our oldest documents ("...with a firm reliance upon Providence" etc.) There is a difference between the Government invoking "God" and invoking "Jesus", "Buddah", "Mohammed" or "Elvis". The Ten Commandments are not common religious dogma, they are specific to certain sects. The Government is quite free to put "In God We Trust" on our money or even "God's Bitchin!" on the side of the Lincoln Memorial if they like. It's the singling out of which God that the Founding Fathers brilliantly forbid.