Secularists strike at Mississippi town (Jackson: city hall, living, atheist)

[eastmemphisguy]

Originally Posted by Listener2307

Did they break a law?
What law is that?

Can you find a statute?
If they did, let's call 911 and have them all arrested.

Better than a statute. I can cite the First Amendment to the US Constitution. I suspect you and the Supreme Court differ on the meaning of the amendment, but I'd defer to the Supreme Court on legal interpretation over an anonymous stranger on the internet. They ignored established court rulings and are now crusty because somebody noticed. It's funny how the "law and order" conservatives are the same ones who routinely try to delegitimize our judicial system.

[An Einnseanair]

Originally Posted by Mississippi Alabama Line

Kind of hard when your whole democracy was founded based on a Christian worldview.
Is that so hard for anti-Christians to understand?
I'm not spouting a Christian agenda here. I'm simply giving you facts. In 1776, the founding fathers never in a million years anticipated any other religion influencing our government except Christianity. Our entire democracy is based upon it. And mark my words, your religion/worldview WILL be at the center of your government. It has to be. Democracy was not just floated out of thin air. If you remove the Christianity, then atheism and agnosticism will take its place, or even islam, depending on the majority of the population.

I am a devout practicing Christian, and I am a strong believer in a strict separation of Church and State. Anybody of any religion should be allowed to live anywhere in this country. A local government that discriminates based on religion, even subtly by flying the official symbol of a specific religion, would not allow that. If an American town was majority Muslim would it be proper for it to fly the Islamic flag over the courthouse? Would a Christian forced to appear in that court (say, a traffic violation) want an Islamic flag flying over the area? Same thing.

Since you love facts, here are a few:

1. This is not a Christian Nation. A few of the founding fathers were devout Christians, a few were Diests, but most were non-practicing non-demonimational Christians with Diest leanings (https://global.oup.com/academic/prod...cc=us&lang=en&). Jefferson was a founding father and a Diest who re-wrote the Gospels of the Bible in a way that kept the morality and lessons but removed most of the miracles and divinity. It's called The Life and Morals of Jesus of Nazareth, and is available for $4.99.
2. Religious participation was at a low point at the time of the revolution. Most historians estimate about 10-30% of the population attended regular church services during and immediately after the war. It wasn't until the Second Great Awakening in the 1790's (well after the revolution and after the Constitution was written and adopted, and arguably fueled as a direct result of the new government being strictly secular) when religious attendance grew greatly.
3. The first treaty signed by a President of the United States (John Adams, in 1796) was the Treaty of Tripoli with the (Muslim) Barbary Pirates. It was approved by the full US Congress. It included Article 11, which states:

   Art. 11. As the Government of the United States of America is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion; as it has in itself no character of enmity against the laws, religion, or tranquility, of Mussulmen (Muslims); and as the said States never entered into any war or act of hostility against any Mahometan (Mohammedan) nation, it is declared by the parties that no pretext arising from religious opinions shall ever produce an interruption of the harmony existing between the two countries.

4. You don't need to threaten most decent people with eternal punishment in hellfire to make them act right. Almost all major world religions have a variation of the Golden Rule as a core teaching (Do unto others as you would have them do unto you), plus many other laws and rules dictating that adherents be decent people similar to the Ten Commandments. You don't have to live in a Christian society to know that murdering and stealing are bad. Countless lawful and "good" civilizations existed before Jesus of Nazareth was even born, and many still exist in non-Christian areas.
5. No, US Democracy was not floated out of thin air; nor was it founded on any religion. It was created by borrowing various principles from several secular governments, from English law (after removing the Monarchy and official state religion there) to Greek Philosophy. It drew heavily from the writings of the Philosophes of the 17th century. They (Hobbes, Voltaire, Rousseau, Locke) questioned the necessity for a strong monarchy or ruling theocracy, proposing that humans have the innate ability to govern themselves.

[Listener2307]

Originally Posted by eastmemphisguy

Better than a statute. I can cite the First Amendment to the US Constitution. I suspect you and the Supreme Court differ on the meaning of the amendment, but I'd defer to the Supreme Court on legal interpretation over an anonymous stranger on the internet. They ignored established court rulings and are now crusty because somebody noticed. It's funny how the "law and order" conservatives are the same ones who routinely try to delegitimize our judicial system.

You may be able to cite it, but you can't arrest anyone in Rienzi for a violation.
And that's a fact.

“Congress shall make no Law respecting an establishment of religion or prohibiting the free exercise thereof…”
So, does flying a flag equate to Congress making a law?

Well, no it doesn't.
In order to find that a flag hung in Mississippi is in violation, you must first find that the city of Rienzi is, by extension, the Congress of The United States and has made a law.
Jake MacAulay - Should a Mississippi Town Have to Remove a Christian Flag?

The mayor of Rienzi was simply intimidated into submission.

FWIW: I'm not much of a Christian. Don't go to church. Didn't even know there was such a thing as a Christian flag. But I ain't intimidated all that easily, either.

[An Einnseanair]

Originally Posted by Listener2307

I didn't even know there was a Christian flag. I had to look it up.

Yep, first thing during Vacation Bible School was Pledge to the US flag (ironically, that was written by an atheist fascist in the 19th century without the phrase "under God"), followed by:

I pledge allegiance to the Christian Flag, and to the Savior for whose Kingdom it stands; one brotherhood uniting all Christians, in service, and in love.

-----

Originally Posted by Listener2307

You may be able to cite it, but you can't arrest anyone in Rienzi for a violation.
And that's a fact.

“Congress shall make no Law respecting an establishment of religion or prohibiting the free exercise thereof…”
So, does flying a flag equate to Congress making a law?

Well, no it doesn't.
In order to find that a flag hung in Mississippi is in violation, you must first find that the city of Rienzi is, by extension, the Congress of The United States and has made a law.
Jake MacAulay - Should a Mississippi Town Have to Remove a Christian Flag?

The mayor of Rienzi was simply intimidated into submission.

No need to invoke the US Congress. The 14th Amendment (and various lawsuits in the early 20th century) incorporated various rights listed in the Bill of Rights onto the States. Other lawsuits (mostly in Federal court) have carried the rights on down as far as the local town level. You can't use any taxpayer money, even local taxpayer money, to support any religious institution. Nor can you allow any religious institution to freely use public-owned space unless you open up the space to all religions.

No criminal law was broken, so no arrest and no jail. That part's true. The suit would be filed in civil court claiming a violation of rights. They would have to 1) find a "victim" and, more importantly, 2) prove that the town violated the victim's rights by flying the flag. About the only way anyone could be a "victim" is if they claimed their tax dollars helped to pay for the religious symbol. Almost no chance of winning. HOWEVER, it would be very expensive for a podunk MS town to defend against such a suit. So the town caved.

[Listener2307]

Originally Posted by jwkilgore

I am a devout practicing Christian, and I am a strong believer in a strict separation of Church and State. Anybody of any religion should be allowed to live anywhere in this country. A local government that discriminates based on religion, even subtly by flying the official symbol of a specific religion, would not allow that. If an American town was majority Muslim would it be proper for it to fly the Islamic flag over the courthouse? Same thing............

You have changed the subject.
Discrimination was never the topic.

[Brucifer]

Originally Posted by Mouldy Old Schmo

An organization forces a small town without deep pockets to capitulate by threatening a lawsuit over a harmless symbol that resonates with at least 99 percent of the local population. It is called punching down.

Harmless symbol? Who determines what is harmless? If the town flew a United Nations flag over the park, wouldn't that be offensive to some?

"What does that have do with anything? It's about the Christian townsfolk honoring Christian veterans on taxpayer soil and being bullied into not being able to do that."

I purposely broke that quote above because you didn't actually say it, but it's what the standard response is going to be.

[Brucifer]

Originally Posted by Listener2307

You have changed the subject.
Discrimination was never the topic.

Discrimination against other religions. Granted, most local Rienzian veterans are probably Christian, but if the park is dedicated to all American veterans, why not a Jewish one? Why not the Flying Spaghetti Monster?

Why not try addressing the whole post instead of cherry picking?

[Listener2307]

Originally Posted by Brucifer

Discrimination against other religions. Granted, most local Rienzian veterans are probably Christian, but if the park is dedicated to all American veterans, why not a Jewish one? Why not the Flying Spaghetti Monster?

Why not try addressing the whole post instead of cherry picking?

Because once someone said the subject was about discrimination, the post was meaningless. That's not the subject.

As was pointed out, Rienzi could probably prevail against the lawsuit, but the cost would be ridiculously high.

[Brucifer]

Originally Posted by Listener2307

Because once someone said the subject was about discrimination, the post was meaningless. That's not the subject.

As was pointed out, Rienzi could probably prevail against the lawsuit, but the cost would be ridiculously high.

If it's not about law, nor about discrimination, what exactly is it about? Are you proposing that a Christian version of Sharia law is acceptable?

Does the Church pay for the upkeep of the park, or do the taxpayers?

[Listener2307]

Originally Posted by Brucifer

If it's not about law, nor about discrimination, what exactly is it about? Are you proposing that a Christian version of Sharia law is acceptable?

Does the Church pay for the upkeep of the park, or do the taxpayers?

It's not against the law.
No one has been discriminated against.

So it's really about a group in Madison, WI, and how they want the world to run.
Go talk to "Freedom from Religion Foundation"