http://www.cnn.com/2005/LAW/03/02/scotus.ten.commandments.ap/index.html

...because they pay "tribute to America's religious and legal history." I dunno. Do you think such displays, on government property, are promoting religion or just historical remembrance? But there are so many other "religious" aspects and statements in the public. Hmm.

That's a load of bull. That's on the same degree as christians saying atheists have no morals. Laws against murder and theft were there far before christianity existed. They exist in other cultures and other religions. The legal system isn't based on the ten commandements in any way. It's based on basic logical rules that are nessessary for life amongst society. Every single nation on earth has them.

American law is based off the Christian tradition, hence God's law.

While what you say is true, Western society is rooted in a Christian tradition with a legal system based on Christain tradition.

No, it's actually true. It's saying that IF the assertion is made, then it's endorsement. It isn't actually making that assertion. I agree with you, but I also agree with what you quoted. It IS endorsement, and it's wrong.

I interpret the ten commandments being displayed on public property as being a SYMBOL of law. Just b/c its there does not necessarily mean that there is a religious connection.

Western laws are rooted in the Napoleonic Code which was based on Roman Law. I dont think the Romans had the 10 Commandments sitting around.

You never know

They could've asked that Jesus fella if he knew them...

While it may be true that US law is rooted in Christianity, I believe the constitution says something about "seperation of church and state" and "freedom of religion". Putting the 10 commandments up is pretty much an endorsement of Christian beliefs to the exclusion of other religions. I wonder if they would consider putting up something from the Koran instead? (Or any other religious text)


I'm just a stupid Canadian, don't flame me if you think I'm wrong.

the christians aren't the only religion that follows (or say they follow) the Ten Commandments.

Let us not forget the Jews. Who pretty much run the media of our nation.

So, it is not so much endorsement as admission.

No. Neither seperation of church and state nor freedom of religion really apply. Maybe freedom of religion would apply if there was a sign that said "You must accept these commandments as the holy written word of god before entering this building". Maybe seperation of church and state would apply if there was a sign saying "to enter this building you must put money in this box which will promptly be transferred to the nearest Christian Church." But as it stands, with the ten commandments just kind of on display... neither clause really applies.

And everything you just said is irrelevant until someone puts up text from the Koran too.

but freelancer! that would be endorsing terrorism:P

Eh, it's a touchy subject. And, unfortunately, they're not going to be able to please everyone.

This just in, everyone else's Gods have the same laws as Christians. Morons outraged over nothing, stay tuned for updates.

It's on display at a New York police department.

Here.

This reminds me of back in december when some people came to my friend's (baptist) church, and criticized them for having a nativity scene on display in the front, saying they need to move it in back for non-christians. wtf?

We've had a purposely secular government since the beginning. The US legal system has nothing in common with any Biblical legal system. And while some tiny fraction of the staggeringly large number of Biblical laws are in common with US law, they also happen to be in common with every set of laws ever. It's significant that the Ten Commandments, which is as terse and generally applicable as it gets, shares only three laws in common with the US (no killing, stealing, or lying in court).

That, and there has yet to be presented a good reason to spend taxpayer money on an ugly block.

Separation between Church and state is a very good law, and was made so that the church does not control the state or visa-versa. Any one who reads about the middle ages will know that that is a a bad thing. However, all this whining about people having the the commandments on state property is a big fat waste of time. I mean who the heck cares, unless your out on some kind of anti-Christianity agenda? As long as it's not being built with government money, it doesn't really matter. People are just looking for ways to be offended.

You know what, I agree with Obi.

*Hell freezes over*

Take out the "wosrship one god" bit and the "idolitry" stuff, and there is very little religious context to the Commandments.



The Roman Empire did adpot Christianity as its official religion at some point.

They are COMMANDMENTS. The whole point of them is to command you.

Also Im pretty sure western law has it's origins in the Code of Hammurabi, not the Ten Commandments.

Except for, you know, the VERY FIRST COMMANDMENT.

This says it better than I ever could.

[to BobTheMasher] I think he was generalizing...

You do realize our government is majority rules, right? So basically, I think that if the majority of people want it, why not? It's not harming anyone...

And the majority of people probably do want it, seeing as how 65 some odd per cent of people in the US are Christian.

riggity wrong. The majority rules, but cannot infringe upon the rights of the minority. Welcome to America.

What was being infringed upon?

The right to practice or not practice whatever religion we wish without persecution by the state. If the state begins to endorse a religion or demand that you obey God (as in the commandments), as is implied by putting them in the place where citizens are to be judged, that right is infringed.

Except it's not forcing religion on anyone, it's forcing law on them. Where we get the laws is irrelevant.

And that is where the two sides are going to disagree. What says it is/isn't implied.

Then why put them up in the first place, if that is where we got them? And if it isn't where we got them, then they REALLY don't need to be up there.



I don't really see it as forcing, either, but regardless, one of the laws that is being forced or implied is "Thou shalt have no other gods before me."


Further, for you religious people: Does it make you uncomfortable to NOT have the ten commandments displayed in whatever room you're in, especially a court of law?

Becuase if your answer is even close to "No", then you need to understand that it DOES make people like me a little bit uncomfortable. So why must you insist that they stay? What is it helping to have them there? What purpose does it serve?

Please, someone, answer those questions.

Separation of church and state was created by our founding fathers to ensure that the CHURCH would be protected from the STATE. Not the other way around. In no way did the founding fathers intend for the church to be cut off from the government.

Now for some supporting evidence:

The reason America was founded... the Puritans came over because the English church, which was tied with the state, did not allow them to practice their beliefs. So, with this freedom of religion in mind, separation of church from the state was adopted when America was founded. Most if not all of the founding fathers were Christian, if I remember my history correctly. Their intent would not have been to let the state impose upon the church.

In fact, I'd go as far to say that the government is BREAKING the separation rule by (what I perceive as) it's misinterpretation of the rule.

(I picked up some argument tips from my Philosphy class, I decided to try them out. ;))

BobTheMasher: What if I were to say that people like you make me uncomfortable? Think about that, now. :p

Bob, what the flying monkey **** are you talking about?

I think the key issue here is: STOP COMPLAINING YOU WHINY SACKS OF CRAP.

It doesn't make anyone uncomfortble, and anyone who is doesn't deserve to live.

I'd say the case will fail because the Ten Commandments on a government building is an aknowledgement of our roots as a nation, not an endorsement of religion. If it were an endorsement, they'd be the basis of our laws.... so saying goddamn would be outlawed... and it's not.

What? No. The idea was to prevent the state from adopting a state religion, like was the case in England at the time.

So, basically, you're argument is that the founding fathers are giving me a big "**** you" and that I'm not american? I don't want to put words in your mouth, but i think what you just said is "This country is not for you." Somehow I doubt that's the spirit that was intended.

I was by no means intending to say that they HAD to be taken down because they make me uncomfortable. I'm simply saying that it has no real effect other than that, so what use is it? It'd be the kind, charitable thign to do to avoid the situation by taking them down or never putting them up. To respond to your statement, if we were having this discussion at, say, a coffee shop, and you were serious and said "People like you make me uncomfortable." I'd probably leave...assuming that I had nothing to gain from staying anyway. Get it?

Please please please say that this was meant to be a joke...

You do realise that the Constitution says absolutely nothing about a seperation of church and state, right?

The only place I know of it being stated was in a letter written my Jefferson -- and as far as I know, there is no actual law.

</DEVILSADVOCATE>

What? (directed at Bob)

The actual amendment says:




It's really only come to mean "seperation of church and state" in he last 50-60 years.