Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Many people add the caveat "Conservative/Fundamentalist" Christian. As a Messianic myself who beliefs in Yeshua and God, I have no problem with what Christianity was supposed to be. My objections are to this 19th-20th Century joke of an organized movement called "Fundamentalism" that opposes intelligence, education, and rationality in favor of allegorical myths, judgement, condemnation, and self-righteousness.
That brand of Christianity is quite destructive and very anti Christ. All my oppositions to Christianity are based on the extremist version of it, not the religion as a whole.
That would depend on the context of the display. If the religious display is solely for the purpose of advocating one particular religious belief, then yes, it should be removed. If the religious display is for the purpose of including all religions, or had a completely non-religious context, then no.
A perfect example of a religious display that, when taken into context, has absolutely no religious intent is the mural displayed within the US Supreme Court building. That mural depicts Moses holding the Ten Commandments, but he is included among depictions of other "law-givers" from other cultures, including non-religious law-givers and law-givers from other religions. Obviously (at least it should be) the mural, when taken into context, has absolutely nothing to do with government advocating for a specific religion.
Then why tell the judge who posted the ten commandants in his courtroom to have it removed? You could go out down the hall and see the ten commandants on the wall.
By the way who were these other law-givers? Other cultures?
I get people knocking on my door to try to get me to go to their church nonstop. Anyone else have that happen? I'm not religious and don't believe in any god and never will and never will I go to their church. They are determined though and always friendly and I am friendly to them.
Then why tell the judge who posted the ten commandants in his courtroom to have it removed? You could go out down the hall and see the ten commandants on the wall.
By the way who were these other law-givers? Other cultures?
I think the context part of Glitch's statement might have something to do with it.
The 10 commandments taken by themselves do not give context as to why they're there - whereas the mural that incorporates it into something not having to do with the advocacy of a particular religion does not rise to the level of government endorsement of religion.
Check out County of Allegheny, that's a very good case for putting it in context. There's also the Lemon test.
Then why tell the judge who posted the ten commandants in his courtroom to have it removed? You could go out down the hall and see the ten commandants on the wall.
Because of the context, as I said. Just because it is a religious display on government property does not automatically mean it must be removed. As long as the context of the religious display is not advocating a particular religion, there is no problem. A judge that posts the Ten Commandments in his court, in the absence of any other context, is advocating a specific religion, and that is a no, no. Now if that judge were to include similar phrases from the Hindu Vedas, and from the Muslim Koran, and from other religious texts, then it would (or should) be obvious that the judge is not advocating for a specific religion, and it should be allowed.
Because of the context, as I said. Just because it is a religious display on government property does not automatically mean it must be removed. As long as the context of the religious display is not advocating a particular religion, there is no problem. A judge that posts the Ten Commandments in his court, in the absence of any other context, is advocating a specific religion, and that is a no, no. Now if that judge were to include similar phrases from the Hindu Vedas, and from the Muslim Koran, and from other religious texts, then it would (or should) be obvious that the judge is not advocating for a specific religion, and it should be allowed.
How does one know if it is advocating or not? The Ten Commandants is Jewish/Christian after all.
I get people knocking on my door to try to get me to go to their church nonstop. Anyone else have that happen? I'm not religious and don't believe in any god and never will and never will I go to their church. They are determined though and always friendly and I am friendly to them.
I get telemarketers phoning me all the time and I will never want what they are selling. Some will though.
It's disturbing how the mainstream media have practically declared war against a certain group of peaceful Americans. If they slandered Jews or Muslims in the same manner as they do Christians would that be acceptable? Why the double-standard?
If christians were all that peaceful and benign, they wouldn't constantly be attempting to legislate their questionable version of 'morality' into law, thereby oppressing a lot of people.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
