Atheists Demand NC Town Remove Ten Commandments From Town Hall
- Posted on February 9, 2012 at 8:37am by
Billy Hallowell
- Print »
- Email »
Atheists now have their sights set on Newland, North Carolina, where the secular Freedom From Religion Foundation has sent a letter demanding that the town remove a Ten Commandments plaque from a government office building. In a letter sent to town manager Brenda Pittman, the group said that a local individual saw the display, was offended and would like it taken down.
The letter, written by FFRF staff attorney Patrick Elliot reads, in part, “I’m writing…to urge you to immediately remove the Ten Commandments plaque from Newland Town Hall…Anyone entering the building for necessary government business will be confronted by it.”
Below, see an image of a portion of the letter, courtesy of GoBlueRidge.net:
GoBlueRidge.net has more:
The letter was brought to the attention of the Newland Town Council at Tuesday night’s meeting, and was distributed to the press. Town board members were incensed over the outside interference, and passed a motion to ask for the press to publish the letter, but took no other official action except to turn the matter—and the letter—over to the town attorney.
Ten Commandments plaque (Image Credit: GoBlueRidge.net)
If the plaque is not removed, precedent would indicate that the FFRF will continue its battle against it. Generally speaking, these letters are only the first step in a slew of tactics used to ensure that religious items are removed, taken down or altered so as to appease the group’s staunch stance on the separation of church and state.
Popular Stories
MSNBC Host Snaps in Heated Segment: ‘What in the World Is Riskier Than Being a Poor Person in America?’ 689 Comments
Does Misstated Marathon Claim Prove Paul Ryan Is Dishonest? (POLL) 658 Comments
‘Jumah at the DNC’ Speaker: ‘Muslims Visited America Prior to Columbus’ & ‘It Was a Muslim’ Who Guided Him to the ‘New World’ 524 Comments
Obama: RNC Like Watching ‘Black-and-White TV’ Because Romney ‘Did Not Offer a Single New Idea’ 361 Comments
Roseanne Barr: Most Billionaires ‘Violent Pedophiles’ & ‘Heartless’ Cocaine Addicts 322 Comments
Faith
This Is the Creationists‘ Response to Scientist Bill Nye’s Viral Pro-Evolution Video Claiming They Harm Children 201 Comments- Pakistani Muslim Cleric Accused of Framing Disabled Christian Girl in Koran-Burning Case Read More
- ‘Made Up Religion’: TV Historian Enrages Muslims, Receives Threats After Producing UK Documentary Questioning Islam’s Beginnings 221 Comments
Meet the Controversial German Imam Accused of Brutally Beating His Wife & Pushing Sharia Law Read More
‘Self-Proclaimed Messiah’ & Unification Church Leader the Rev. Sun Myung Moon Has Died — Here’s His Life Story Read More
Business
- ‘Imperial President’: In Case You Missed it, President Obama Issued This Major Executive Order Last Week Read More
- Germany’s Upcoming Court Ruling Will be Huge for the EU Read More
Ford Looks to Beat Toyota for Best-Selling Car in 2012 With This Model 147 Comments
Bernanke & QE3: Here’s What You Need to Know Read More- ‘Extortion’: Why Did the Labor Department ‘Drop the Hammer’ on Oregon Farmers? 300 Comments
Technology
- This Is the Creationists‘ Response to Scientist Bill Nye’s Viral Pro-Evolution Video Claiming They Harm Children 201 Comments
‘TaserDrone’: Hackers Weaponize Quadcopter With Actual ‘Shocking’ Technology Read More
Ever Heard of the Wild ‘Burning Man’ Festival in the Middle of the Nev. Desert? Here’s Your Primer Read More
Stanford Develops Technology ‘Better Than Steroids’ for Athlete Recovery Read More
Have You Pretended to Know What ‘the Cloud’ Is? You’re Not Alone Read More
Submitting your tip... please wait!
Comments (571)
LOTO
Posted on February 9, 2012 at 9:10am” I am not particularly religious..”
Report Post »When push comes to shove will you side with the muslims?
Somehow, I think you are more religious than you know.
Lesbian Packing Hollow Points
Posted on February 9, 2012 at 9:30amWhen push comes to discharging firearms, if the Musllims are the aggressors against me and mine, I’ll go down fighting, taking as many of the enemy with me as I can, defending those people and places that are dear to me and, if I am not successful in such defense, die as an Atheist.
It’s the height of arrogance on the part of Religionists to say things like “There are no Atheists in foxholes.” Have you missed the stories on The Blaze about Atheists in the military demanding official recognition co-equal with other faith traditions in the chaplain corps? I’m sure Muslims militants have a saying, “There are no non-Muslims in foxholes.” as well, believing in that irrational way that Religionists usually do, that once a person is confronted with pain and death vs. converting to the Religionist’s preferred religion, the person will just automaticly convert.
There are worse things in this world than death. Forced conversion is one of them. Assumed conversion is another.
Report Post »SamIamTwo
Posted on February 9, 2012 at 9:39amForce conversion aka Muslim…
Report Post »KAdams
Posted on February 9, 2012 at 9:52amSince when is atheism a faith tradition? It’s an ism. A system(Protestantism, Marxism, Capitalism). Christianity(notice no ism) is a state of being. Of being a Christian. Reality is the state of being real. The system exists outside of oneself, while a state of being resides within oneself. All ‘religions’ are systems… but not all systems are religions.
Report Post »MMSands
Posted on February 9, 2012 at 9:57amLPHP is living in a nice pretend place, and doesn’t seem to realize that aggression can and does take many forms.I‘d like to know how many people she’s actually killed to date before I‘ll take her word that she’d be anywhere near the front lines come actual hand to hand combat, though.
Report Post »People like LPHP need to consult dictionaries more often. Atheism and secularism have become a religion unto themselves, which is obvious from the dictionary definition of the word. If being coerced into conversion is so distasteful to LPHP, then she surely would find it distasteful to see secularism and/or atheism enforced anywhere.
MMSands
Posted on February 9, 2012 at 10:02amKadams, look up “religion” in the dictionary. A real one, though — not an abridged version. Atheism can be as much a religion as any other. Incidentally, I‘ve heard from Hindus that Hinduism isn’t a religion, but a philosophy. You don’t get to define words however you wish them to be defined. Sorry.
Report Post »KAdams
Posted on February 9, 2012 at 10:08amSorry, MM. I didn’t make it up, even though you’d like to think I did.
-ism: http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/-ism (Athe“ism”)
Report Post »-ity: http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/-ity (Christian“ity”)
bsat23
Posted on February 9, 2012 at 10:20amGod ,please forgive these people for they know not what they do!!!!!
Report Post »kryptonite
Posted on February 9, 2012 at 10:30amThese are not atheists. These are commie activists who want all religious belief systems to disappear. Atheism is the commie belief system; it replaces all religious belief systems with the ALMIGHTY COMMIE ELITE. The government feeds you (scraps), clothes you (in rags), dictates your every move, and shapes your thought processes. The almighty state is not a supernatural being, but it exercises the same kind of power as a theocratic god, since it imposes its belief system on the population Thus, both the communist and the theocratic state stifle religious liberties.
The major distinction between the two political systems is that the citizenry in a theocratic state, represented in the modern world by Islamism, has been brainwashed into believing that the god the religious elite uses to control them is real. Communism actively promotes atheism, while Islamism drills religious obedience and fanaticism, BUT the two systems are politically simpatico because the ultimate goal they BOTH share is to stifle FREEDOM OF RELIGION.
To understand why that is, you need to go to the root of all evil, which is spiritual. In the spirit world time ceases to be and eternity kicks in. Satan wants every human soul he can get, and the only way he can reap results is to take away a human being’s right to SEEK the one true living God. Thus FREEDOM OF RELIGION is your most priced freedom — believe it or not.
Report Post »PATTY HENRY
Posted on February 9, 2012 at 10:34amPEOPLE!!!! THE ATHEISTS have absolutely NO ground to stand on. They have NO proof that they are correct. There is no reason for the majority to be victimized by a minority who has NO PROOF that they are correct. THIINK ABOUT IT !!
Report Post »PATTY HENRY
Posted on February 9, 2012 at 10:37amSILLY argument: Atheists in the Military who are NOT under attack may be very brave. PUT them under attack and see who they call out for. NONE of you ATHEISTS have any proof whatsoever that GOD does NOT exist. NONE. There is a ton of evidence that HE DOES, of course. YOU can’t even connect your silly evolution chain…you can’t explain who caused the bang, you can’t explain how it stopped banging long enough to turn a grain of sand into an eyeball. YOU HAVE NO PROOF. BACK OFF.
Report Post »Inlightofthings
Posted on February 9, 2012 at 10:45amCan we call it what is?
Prohibition of religion…nothing short.
Report Post »The Jewish Avenger
Posted on February 9, 2012 at 10:53amHollowpoint here is a question:
If all of the husbands and God fearing men and even athiests that died in the last of the 3 wars and 4 conflicts that this country has sacrificed its men for, do you truly believe that this communist movement would even exist?
How many “free thinkers” dodged the draft?
How many youth told their parents and government to go screw when it was time to serve?
How many young have been raised with a REAL two parent value?
Fast forward 66 years from WWII. Where is the family values? Where is the community to help when help is needed? Even better WHO IS YOUR NEIGHBOR? Do you KNOW you neighbor?!!!
No, we really dont. Society has turned for the worse and the people feel now that this was the way it was meant to be. Sadly. they are only duped by the very people that we were told that we should trust instead of our elders, our clergymen and our family…. and if you explain it to them and get through to them, they are too shocked too angry and too confused to even know what to do next.
I truly believe that you will eventually die with a smoking gun trying to defend your family within the next 65 years, I guarantee that what you will hear “them” promise, what you think it will be, will be something you WONT want it to be in the end…
Just a thought.
Report Post »Athiest or not, from me, God Bless ya.
rox
Posted on February 9, 2012 at 10:54amI don’t believe “atheism” is a religion. Who do you worship? Where is your church? Who is your leader? I can feel sorry for you because you don’t have a religion. You just don’t want me to practice mine. MY religion will allow me to Pray for you.
Report Post »If a sign offends you so much, DON’T READ IT. Ignore it. Like we ignore yours.
Lesbian Packing Hollow Points
Posted on February 9, 2012 at 11:02am@ MMSands:
Where have you been the last 10 years, 4 months, 29 days?
The War on Terror, as the TSA and Homeland Security love to remind us, had brought the war home here. Everywhere is a battleground in the war on terror. Radicalized terror cells can crop up anywhere and can choose to attack almost anyone they view as being against them. But enough about the OWS movement.
Thankfully, though I own many guns, I’ve never yet been confronted with force sufficient to warrant their use. As they say, “Ted Kennedy’s car killed more people than have my guns.”
Report Post »Lesbian Packing Hollow Points
Posted on February 9, 2012 at 11:10am@ Patty Henry:
Atheists have no proof that we are correct? As opposed to what? Christianity? Where is Christianity’s proof that they are correct. As for minorities, did Jesus not say, in Matthew 7:13-14, “for wide is the gate, and broad is the way, that leadeth to destruction, and many there be which go in thereat. Because strait is the gate, and narrow is the way, which leadeth unto life, AND FEW THERE BE THAT FIND IT.” I think Jesus was admitting that Christianity would forever be a minority religion.
You should be very careful about spouting your anti-minority rhetoric.
Report Post »PubliusPencilman
Posted on February 9, 2012 at 11:12am“Christianity(notice no ism) is a state of being. Of being a Christian.”
I think you are forgetting Catholicism and Protestantism.
Report Post »turkey13
Posted on February 9, 2012 at 11:21amThe founding fathers only meant for us to recognize many relgions not one controlling the people and it didn’t start off with “We a few people.” We need to get our Congress off their duffs and write Legislation that states all major laws need to be voted on when we have the next major election. One is coming up in November. To stop all bickering put the church/government to rest by the ballot. Also the founding Fathers limited the length of term in office to stop the Congressmen from getting greedy and be influnced by the wealthy. Look at the elction , It willl cost obama a $ Billion bucks to buy the presidency. How about a law that says you can’t spend more than 10 $ million and put a cap of $5 million on Congress. this way some super great poor person with campaign contributions can run for office. Another law could be rioght beside iot that says all excess funds go to pay off the National debt. I’m a simple man and I think we need Simple laws written by anybody but a lawyer. Look at the health care law – you think iot says something and it says something else. If a law can’t be written on a max of 100 pages it needs to go back to the start anmd be redone. It’s crazy the health care law took 2200 pages and only a few folks read it – I remember Queen Nancy saying you have to vote on it to find out what is in it. Old Adolf made many laws that he made up on the fly and were never written down!
Report Post »KAdams
Posted on February 9, 2012 at 11:23amNo, Catholicism and Protestantism are systems. Systems congruent with, but not identical to, Christianity.
Report Post »Jinglebob
Posted on February 9, 2012 at 11:32amUgh…It’s Freedom of Religion, not Freedom from Religion.
Report Post »Lesbian Packing Hollow Points
Posted on February 9, 2012 at 11:43am@ Jingle Bob:
Of course freedom OF religion implies freedom FROM religion. In deed, the 1st Amendment mentions freedom from religion immediately BEFORE freedom of religion.
The right to speak is also the right to refrain from speaking.
The right to associate is also the right to refrain from associating.
The right to print is also the right to refrain from publishing.
The right to practice a religion is also the right to refrain from practicing any religion.
All arguments to the contrary are describing a world that is wholly untenable in reality.
When the government prints, it does not impinge upon my rights to print. When the government speaks, it does not impinge on my rights to speak. However, when the government worships a divinity, they do impinge on my rights to worship differently. It’s no wonder that people who choose to worship in the same way as the government are so defensive and protective of these impermissible government actions.
Report Post »SoupSandwich
Posted on February 9, 2012 at 11:49am@ LezHP
Report Post »Kudos to you on some levels, but… Why the need for the lesbian moniker? I mean, heteroPacking00buckshot? GayBobCarryingThrowingStars? What is the point? Why the point of affiliation at all? And, I will pray that you are not confronted with a foxhole conversion. Bad juju, not to mix metaphors.
Walkabout
Posted on February 9, 2012 at 11:56amThe Jewish Avenger
If all of the husbands and God fearing men and even athiests that died in the last of the 3 wars and 4 conflicts that this country has sacrificed its men for, do you truly believe that this communist movement would even exist?
____________________________________
Look at the bright side. The people that are left over to breed are … well … Bill Clinton!
An improvement in the genetic stock, don’t you think?
jk
Excellent point you made in your post.
Report Post »ModerationIsBest
Posted on February 9, 2012 at 12:01pm@KADAMS
Monotheism – The doctrine or belief there is only one God
Atheism – the doctrine that there is no deity
You may BE a Christian, but you are “practicing” monotheism. Christianity is a form of monotheism. Atheism is a statement of rejection from theisms.
ChiefGeorge
Posted on February 9, 2012 at 12:15pmDoesn’t the commandment that says “Thou shalt not kill” back up their case for abolishing the death sentence in this country. I have heard over the past 40 some years now the Bible and the 10 commandments being used to further the cause of the Left. Now we are at the point in which their power is now solidified and the mask of who they are has come off. We’ve been duped! Our parents and grandparents from the 60s-70s have been duped into giving up their power based on thoughtful arguments using the Bible as a basis for that argument. Now, they want both destroyed. Now its not even about separation of church and state, because now the State is butting its nose right into the church. Tell me its not so.
Rdiet…this is more hate speech right, I deserve to be vetted in public for what I have written?
Report Post »KAdams
Posted on February 9, 2012 at 12:16pm@Mod: Christianity was here before the isms. Christians were first called Christians, in Antioch, far before ‘monotheism’ was ever applied. Christianity defines monotheism, while monotheism in turn, defines the other systems.
Report Post »maccow
Posted on February 9, 2012 at 12:30pm@LPHP
You wrote
“The right to speak is also the right to refrain from speaking.”
And by your logic, the right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness is the right to kill, control, and make miserable.
“The right to associate is also the right to refrain from associating.”
Therefore the right to equality is also the right to enslave.
“The right to print is also the right to refrain from publishing.”
Leads to the right to ban, censure, and burn.
“The right to practice a religion is also the right to refrain from practicing any religion.”
And apparently its also the right to keep others from practicing their religion.
“All arguments to the contrary are describing a world that is wholly untenable in reality.” Why because you say so or have read this somewhere? There is no logic or basis in history for any good to come out of your nonsense.
Your arguments have lead to the sick world that is our current reality. How proud you must be.
When our rights do not come from God, when the collective and the elites, such as yourself, get to decide how the rights of the individual will be granted, then society is lost. The best, most good intentioned, wisdom of men is absolute foolishness when compared to the wisdom of God. All arguments to the contrary are describing a world that is wholly untenable in reality.
What about God scares you? What are you running and hiding from?
Report Post »ModerationIsBest
Posted on February 9, 2012 at 12:39pm@PATTY HENRY
There is evidence that a God doesn’t exist, but I can’t prove it.
There is evidence that a God does exist, but YOU CAN’T PROVE IT EITHER!
Please understand this!
Report Post »KAdams
Posted on February 9, 2012 at 12:42pm@Maccow: I think we’re seeing the emergence of a society with no basis in common sense.
Report Post »KAdams
Posted on February 9, 2012 at 12:58pm@Mod: What are you talking about? Of course there’s evidence God exists. It’s all around you, if you just open your eyes…. Take that eye… can you honestly say that the intricate independent system of the eye just happened to occur naturally? Can you seriously attribute the complexity of it to a sophomoric theory based solely on random chance? Really? Now that, my friend, is an extremely large ‘leap of faith’. Or take the bat… can you really say that the navigational sonar system that is seemingly inherent in bats ‘just happened, just because’? If so, that’s another pretty radical leap off the short random pier.. I’m more inclined to believe that God, being omnipotent, and therefor capable of anything, infinite in his wisdom and knowledge, made it that way because He‘s the only one who knows what he’s doing… You want to attribute the creation of humanity to the likes of Darwin and/or the Big Bang, when humanity, touting itself as the most advanced, most civilized organism ever, can’t even make his own hair grow, make himself taller, or make the size of his feet smaller, or bigger. So what you’re saying, is random chance is greater than you. Amoebas are greater than you, because from them something greater emerged..
Report Post »83plus
Posted on February 9, 2012 at 1:25pmIn context, the separation of church and state does not apply. The only connection between church and state is The Ten Commandments is in a building that houses government offices. The Church is not dictating to the State on law here and the state is not dictating to the Church on doctrine.
That group is only using it as a way to try to get it removed because they have an issue with it and the religion it represents.
Report Post »Benjamin Abruzzo
Posted on February 9, 2012 at 1:26pm@LezPHP
You said: “Of course freedom OF religion implies freedom FROM religion. In deed, the 1st Amendment mentions freedom from religion immediately BEFORE freedom of religion…. The right to speak is also the right to refrain from speaking…. The right to associate is also the right to refrain from associating…. The right to print is also the right to refrain from publishing…. The right to practice a religion is also the right to refrain from practicing any religion.”
Here’s where your logic breaks down. The Federal government is the only one who is restrained by the 1st Amendment. Schools, even public ones, are local government. Thus, they are covered by State Constitutions and local charters.
But even if they are covered by the 1st Amendment, here’s another flaw: The fredom to practice religion is covered, thus the freedom to not practices religion is also covered. It’s not the freedom of others to not practice their religion where you are.
So, the sign is actually fine as it isn’t a practice of a religion, it isn’t the federal government, it doesn’t establish a religion, and it doesn‘t force anybody to practice what’s written on it (which isn’t a religion).
And I’d like to see somebody try and practice the first Commandment. How many people will demand “I am your God”?
Report Post »Lesbian Packing Hollow Points
Posted on February 9, 2012 at 1:41pm@ Maccow:
Your arguments only make sense in a collectivist sense. The rights I outlined only make sense in an individualist sense.
“What about God scares you?” Nothing. I don‘t fear god in the same way that I don’t fear Santa Clause, the Easter Bunny, or the Tooth Fairy. Well… maybe not to much the Easter Bunny. There’s something sinister hiding behind those limpid eyes.
On the other hand, there are many of his followers that frighten me a very great deal.
Report Post »drphil69
Posted on February 9, 2012 at 1:46pm@***** –
Really? It is the height of arrogance??
Our Commander in Chief tops this on a daily basis!
P.S. How much ammo is enough?
Report Post »the wireworker
Posted on February 9, 2012 at 1:57pmthose that wish to diminish the role Judeo/christian faith played in our founding need to understand the difference between DOCTRINE AND DENOMINATION.
our country was founded upon the DOCTRINE of Christianity
the 1st amendment states that our government cannot make a law regarding a state sponsored DENOMINATION
Report Post »CorcoranC
Posted on February 9, 2012 at 2:26pmIf it offends them, so what? They have the right to be offended and I don’t have a problem with that. They do not have the right to violate freedom of speech or religion! I will be offended if they remove the Ten Commandments. The Constitution protects Freedom of Religion. Not Freedom From Religion.
Report Post »Bad_Ashe
Posted on February 9, 2012 at 2:55pm@LESBIAN PACKING HOLLOW POINTS
Sigh. The argument that there are no atheists in foxholes is no more arrogant than the majority of atheist claims regarding God’s nonexistence. Statistically speaking, while there may be atheists in foxholes, there certainly aren’t many of them.
Additionally, comparing a break from atheism for a general appeal to a higher power to converting to or from a specific doctrine is a false analogy. After encountering you on these boards for the last week or so, it’s more than clear that your logical coherency is inconsistent at best.
There is plenty of evidence supporting the existence of God in general, and Christianity in particular. That you are ignorant of this evidence, or simply reject it out of hand or due to evidentiary double-standard says more about you than it does the adherents of faith. Given this theological ignorance, I’m guessing that perhaps other factors such as your sexual identity inform your ideology much more than evidentiary arguments.
Freedom of religion only implies freedom from religion inasmuch as you are not forced into adherence, worship, or tithing by the government. We have discussed the historical meaning of “establishment churches” laid out by Jefferson and the Founding Fathers in other threads and yet you still perpetuate this same nonsense.
Finally, any affirmed right does not necessarily affirm the right of the inverse. This too is exceedingly poor logic on your part.
Report Post »Bad_Ashe
Posted on February 9, 2012 at 3:14pm@MODERATIONISBEST – It is true about evidence for God’s existence, but you need to take this argument one step further. Since neither assertion can be objectively proven to be true, it comes down to which evidence holds more explanatory power, and which evidentiary collection better defeats its supposed defeaters.
You‘ve made the claim in previous threads that you are not particularly versed on the arguments for or against God’s existence; does this mean that your atheism comes from a place of ignorance? This is not meant to insult, but is a genuine question.
I’ve seen you mention the Big Bang before, the Big Bang is actually a HUGE problem for atheists, and only a problem for Christians when they don’t understand how the Big Bang works. These adherents are speaking from a place of ignorance (at least on this specific topic), and atheists who appeal to the Big Bang are speaking from a place of ignorance as well. This is why many atheist cosmologists are trying to do away with the Big Bang model, due to its theistic implications.
This is just one example of a topic that reflects ignorance on both the theistic and atheistic side, and if one is not aware of these sorts of dynamics, how can they be arguing from a place of intellectual honesty?
I suppose my question is whether or not you are interested in being intellectually honest, or simply perpetuating your chosen worldview?
Report Post »its_time_to_arrest_our_government
Posted on February 9, 2012 at 3:20pmso they were offended show me where in our constitution it says you got a right to not be offended. Its time to stand up to these losers. these people make me sick the way they try and redefine the constitution to say things it dont say. Its time to stop putting up with these nuts and send them packing let them go live in Europe or hell even better.
Report Post »AxelPhantom
Posted on February 9, 2012 at 3:33pmNatural law is that which can be deduced through reason to be beneficial to both individuals and society.
The Natural Law (Declaration of Independence) is reflected in the 10 commandments, upon that our positive law (Constitution) was built. Philosophy is part of religion but is not religion itself.
Here, put another way….
In the first column are 7 things that go against Natural Law as determined by philosophers like Cicero and Plato and later confirmed by Locke and Hobbes. All of whom were known quite well by the founders. In the second is the remedy as proposed by the Catholic Church. In the third is the corresponding commandment.
Lust (sexual) – Chastity – Covet neighbor’s wife
Greed (material covetous) – Charity – Covet neighbor’s goods; home, donkey, ox
Pride (huberous) – Humility – Thou shall have no other god’s before me, honor thy father and thy mother, taking God’s name in vain, bearing false witness
Gluttony -Temperance – Day of rest
Wrath (anger, revenge) – Patience – Thou shalt not murder
Sloth (acedia) – Diligence – Labor for 6 six days
Envy (emotional covetous) – Kindness – Covet neighbor’s wife, man/maidservant, possessions
There is far more to the Ten Commandments than what you usually see summarized on “tablets” there is a whole set of asides that go with them in Exodus that support the argument for natural laws.
Report Post »The Third Archon
Posted on February 9, 2012 at 3:36pmLOL–people are scared of Muslims taking over the US? Why?! There are like ~130x as many Christians in the US as Muslims–they are MUCH more realistically likely to take over the US than Muslims.
Report Post »ConservativeCanucklehead
Posted on February 9, 2012 at 4:02pmThe Christians who enjoy the benefit of tax-funded displays of their faith seem to always ignore what I think is a very important part of Amendment One; that is, the right of citizens “… to petition the government for a redress of grievances.”
Report Post »I realize you have to read all the way to the end to find that bit, but it is there. And like I said, it seems to me it’s kinda important. No?
kryptonite
Posted on February 9, 2012 at 4:18pm@Lesbian Packing Hollow Points
Our Republic is in political turmoil because of people like you.
1) Our Bill of Rights was enacted for the sake of We the People, not for the government officials we elect to represent us. The govt. does NOT have First Amendment Rights. We are a Representative Republic, to wit,We the People delegate power, and the Bill of Rights protects us from any overreach by said officials into OUR freedoms. Thus, when ANY government representative invokes the leftist travesty of “Separation of Church and State” against any one or all of us, it is in flagrant violation of our governance and First Amendment Rights.
2) Legal rights are by definition actions that can be invoked. From a legal standpoint, the “legal right” to not exercise a legal right is an oxymoron. You may of course REFRAIN from exercising a legal right or in some cases you may WAIVE a legal right, but such actions are not legally stipulated. Thus, there is no such thing as “freedom from religion” stipulated in conjunction with “freedom of religion” in the First Amendment. Rather, it states that govt. cannot legally establish a theocracy or [through any other means] forbid the free exercise of religion by We the People. (CONT.)
Report Post »kryptonite
Posted on February 9, 2012 at 4:23pm@Lesbian Packing Hollow Points (CONT.)
Report Post »3) DESPITE the fact that the Declaration of Independence was unanimously adopted by the representative Congress of the thirteen states that constituted the United States of America in 1776, and that this docuument clearly establishes our SOVEREIGNTY based on laws of nature and of the GOD who CREATED both nature and man — human secularists now want to redefine our SOVEREIGNTY based on the laws of MAN WITHOUT GOD. That too is a travesty. The Ten Commandments Plaque is a historical record of the value system upon which our political system was founded. And I have news for you, Ms. Lesbian, ABSOLUTELY ALL political systems are founded upon a value system. Yours just happens to be different, and you want to superimpose- nay, destroy ours and replace it with your stinking one. How dare you. This is not about religion. If you don’t like our foundational value system, then MOVE to Europe where secularism prevailed. The secularist value system is contrary to our Judeo-Christian foundation. Let me clarify something else for you: Christianity is not a “minority religion” IN AMERICA, although you secularists and your communist pals are trying hard to make it so. We are not a theocracy — you can be an atheist — but if you keep shoving your secularism, communism and all the other imported cr@p down our throats we WILL fight you to the bitter end, and I promise you it will be bitter.
girlnurse
Posted on February 9, 2012 at 4:29pmLESBIAN: Muslims would hang you out to dry:
Report Post »http://www.jihadwatch.org/2012/01/uk-muslim-arrested-for-distributing-literature-calling-for-hanging-of-gay-people-says-he-was-just-do.html
PATTY HENRY
Posted on February 9, 2012 at 4:34pmPATHETIC: GOD created the UNIVERSE. EVERYTHING, even you. YOU pay Him back with DOUBT? YOU honestly think that Humans are somehow smart enough to Create a Universe as well??? TO UNDERSTAND now where it all came from?
Report Post »WHEN JESUS said the way is NARROW, it is because as CREATOR OF THE UNIVERSE AND ALL that is in it, HE KNEW that there would be only a few who would understand that they are NOT GOD, that they recognize they were Created, and they were (of their own free will) come to GOD, PRAISE GOD, THANK GOD. THE WHOLE UNIVERSE is NOT a MINORITY. POOR Pathetic, Lost, Loser. What part of “YOU HAVE NO PROOF” can’t you get?
PATTY HENRY
Posted on February 9, 2012 at 4:41pmI DO know there is a GOD. I hear from HIM, I see His great works. I see and know things that could not possibly be “coincidental” or accidental. YOU could see Him/Hear Him too but you are too controlled by Satan who blocks your access to your MAKER.
GOD is LOVE. YOU and I know that we don’t need LOVE to procreate. WE don’t need a Conscience to survive, even thrive. WHERE DID LOVE COME FROM? GOD.
Report Post »YOU don’t know what I KNOW. YOU haven‘t seen what I’ve seen. YOU haven‘t been where I’ve been. YOU prefer to believe in NOTHING…don’t try to force it on me. I BELIEVE IN GOD, I’m not trying to force it on you , but you will NEVER succeed and eliminating the CREATOR of the UNIVERSE. One day, when you die, you will know that I was right and what a sad day, you’ll have wasted your whole life and then will be “awake” for eternity, in the dark, with nothing…that you chose because of your PRIDE and your EGO.
ModerationIsBest
Posted on February 9, 2012 at 4:49pm@BAD
I think I said that I wasn‘t versed on all of those arguments for a God’s existence so I didn’t want to carpet bomb a wide array of ideas without a greater understanding of each one.
I did point out that some of those arguments extend to the thinking of, “well since I can’t see a way that this all happened, it must be {X}.”
While there are arguments/evidence like the Ontological, cosmological, teleological, object morality, there are also arguments/evidence to why those arguments aren’t necessarily the case.
My whole point(which you agreed on) is while both sides may have evidence to what they think is the proof or disproof of a God, neither side can actually prove that a God exists.
The difference is how we approach those arguments, and the possibilities that those arguments may be wrong, and our reaction if given substantial evidence that those arguments are wrong.
As I said, I am usually arguing and trying to provide evidence against a specific God, not a God in general. Those discussions are usually based around their scripture and never get outside of that realm. When I talk about evolution to a Christian, I am trying to provide that as evidence to counter their God, not a God.
In regard to my intellectual honesty(to which I would say that me admitting that I am not well versed in all arguments), I can only point to the mutual understanding that you and I came to when we both agreed that while we have our arguments and stance, we may
Report Post »ModerationIsBest
Posted on February 9, 2012 at 4:53pm“we may be wrong.”
Because we both agree to that, I believe we are both being intellectually honest with each other and anybody else who may be reading what we’re typing. Neither one of us talks of assurances, and anytime someone tries to claim that I think of myself as so smart, so right and so sure of myself, I am the first one to explain that while I have my position, I may be wrong. I just wish other people could come to that realization, but no, I get the assurance, arrogance and stubbornness that they accuse me of.
Out of everyone here who I have asked that favor of, to meet me in the middle, you are the only one who I would consider logical enough to come to that understanding and I appreciate you for that.
Report Post »kryptonite
Posted on February 9, 2012 at 5:13pmOops. Should read, “secular humanists”
Report Post »ModerationIsBest
Posted on February 9, 2012 at 5:18pmWhen talking to someone specifically about their religion, I can then give evidence to why I think their scripture is wrong, which would then give strong evidence that they’re wrong about their God, which in turn might bring them to call into question the existence of God.
Unfortunately, when things come along that give strong evidence that their God is wrong, there are a couple of typical responses.
“It‘s a hoax and you’re stupid“ or ”Well since my God created everything, [Argument X] fits in perfectly natural with what the Bible says“ despite that the church said and taught that ”The Bible says this about [X}”
If strong evidence comes out against argument X, well then religion can just go, “haha, told you stupid idiots. I can’t believe you fell for that.”
I could then talk about the morality of your God in the scripture. I can listen to how you describe your God to me, and then I can show you verses from your Bible that show he is not like you describe him.
When I do that, I get a couple of answers
Report Post »“Oh, well that only applied in the OT(Which means evil actions are okay as long as they’re ordained by God?)
“Well you just don’t understand.”
“Well who are we to understand the will of God?”
“Well who are we to judge God?(Uh, you judge him as Good!)”
“Well that’s just what I believe(Yes, and beliefs can be wrong)”
ModerationIsBest
Posted on February 9, 2012 at 5:30pmNot to mention that despite all Christians believing that Jesus died on the cross for their sins, they all have different views on their God’s creation and design.
Some believe in free will
Some don’t believe in free wll
Most believe in original sin, but I don’t think all Christians do.
Some have created alternate planes of existence, some haven’t.
Some people believe Jesus showed himself to Joseph Smith in America, some don’t(then again, I forgot they aren’t “real” Christians lol ok, cheap shot)
I mean, this is God’s creation and design, and you all can’t agree?
These differences are by no means Christian specific as the same applies to Muslims and other beliefs.
For the record, I am by no means saying there aren‘t Atheists who are so sure of themselves and go around asserting as fact that a God doesn’t exist. The difference is, we don’t think our evidence has any divine authority behind it.
You probably think Atheists are more pushy and sure of themselves, I probably think that religion is more pushy and sure of themselves(mainly because there are a lot more religious people then Atheists).
Report Post »Bad_Ashe
Posted on February 9, 2012 at 5:32pm@MODERATIONISBEST
We can both surely agree to the admission that God’s existence cannot be objectively proven or disproved, but this doesn’t necessarily affect the rest of my point to you. I can tell that you aren’t familiar with many (notice my qualification here) of these arguments for or against God’s existence, simply because you frame them as “God of the gaps” arguments. This is evidence that you simply don’t know them very well, as none of them qualify as such, no matter what untrained atheist blowhards contributing to Wikipedia might tell you.
Again, the question is not whether there is evidence for or against, which we both agree on, but which evidence is superior in explanatory power and which defeat their supposed defeaters. So how can one legitimately assess such evidence if they are unfamiliar with it? The question is not what can be proven as fact, but whether God’s existence is more likely than not.
When I speak of intellectual dishonesty in this case, I speak not only of admitting the reality of the debate, but also regarding assertions made from limited knowledge that expands beyond the scope of that knowledge. This would certainly represent a lack of due diligence, don’t you think?
So again, my question is whether or not you are interested in expanding your scope, or simply doubling-down on your current ideology?
Report Post »MarsBarsTru7
Posted on February 9, 2012 at 5:56pmAtheism is the religion of embracing oblivion. It is illogical, amoral, and is the refuge of all who flee accountability.
Report Post »Bad_Ashe
Posted on February 9, 2012 at 6:17pm@MODERATIONISBEST – As for your last two posts, I’m not sure if those were meant for me or not. I will admit that I find it odd that you believe disagreement regarding doctrine to be evidence of God’s nonexistence or the falsehood of a certain religion. This would be analogous to saying that because two people disagree on whether a nonstick pan is better than a stainless steel pan, that cooking pans do not exist at all.
The reason my posts to you focus on the existence of a general theistic God is because these are foundational arguments, without which there could be no theistic religions. Once that bridge is crossed, you can begin addressing the truth claims of various religions.
That being said, most of the objections you list here are theologically or philosophically inaccurate, or you are simply making a leap of logic in your conclusion. I’m willing to address some of these, but only after we’ve addressed my previous response to you.
Report Post »ModerationIsBest
Posted on February 9, 2012 at 6:36pm@BAD
I have done some research on those arguments but am not well versed, and again, never admit to be a great authority on that. I have no problem admitting that you seem to know more about this then I do. Then again….it doesn‘t prove you’re right…..which is my entire point.
My argument is, “what if we’re thinking about these things in an entirely wrong view(which is more what I meant when I was referring to when I said, “because I can’t understand this, it must be this.”
One argument I hear occasionally is, “Well we know the universe had to have a cause.” Well no, we don’t KNOW that. We think that, but maybe we’re thinking about it all wrong and that thinking may be wrong, which could then possibly eradicate the Cosmological argument.
Which is why in the other thread I talked about, “generally accepted principles” but how those generally accepted principles, could become no longer generally accepted principles.
If you would like to have a larger debate about each individual issue, I wouldn’t have a problem with that. I am always open to hearing new views and deeper meanings and understandings, but I don‘t think we’ll be able to come to any conclusion that holds any relevance, so I guess to answer your question, it could be both the former and the latter, lol.
I like hearing more things and learning more things, but I will always think those things could eventually be proven wrong, lol.
Report Post »ModerationIsBest
Posted on February 9, 2012 at 6:54pmIt just comes down to, I just want to live my life and be left alone.
Sadly, I can’t turn on the news without having a Presidential candidate wanting to force me and others to live around their specific belief in a God and creating policy and starting wars because they think God has certain rules and a specific plan.
I guess I kind of view it as, if people didn’t think that a God exists, I wouldn‘t have to say I don’t think a God exists. I wouldn’t have to reject the idea of a God, if people didn’t accept the idea of a God. Dunno if that makes sense though, lol. I think we hinder ourselves as a society by focusing on this issue so much when it comes to things like Stem cell research, etc.
When people refer to me about their God, I simply point out that there were other people who thought that their God was the real God, and you think those people were crazy and wrong. My discussions with people hardly ever get back to, “Is there a God?”
When a religious person approaches me, do they ask, “Do you think a God exists?” No, they come at me with their specific God and any discussions I have with a religious person almost never strives away from the idea that their God may not exist.
It’s why I have said on here before, “I don’t take my Atheism seriously” lol
Report Post »ModerationIsBest
Posted on February 9, 2012 at 6:58pmOr should I say, “hinder ourselves as a species by focusing so much on this.”
Report Post »kryptonite
Posted on February 9, 2012 at 7:44pm@MODERATIONISBEST
neither side can actually prove that a God exists.
—-
At a far less complex level, you have the certainty that these comments or any skyscraper or the car you own have makers. It would therefore make MORE sense to attribute the complexity of the universe to a Creator than to spontaneous generation or a cause you can’t even conceive. Yet, you discard common sense in favor of evolution –or do you apply that same rigor to evolution and oppose it being taught in schools as “science” instead of what it really is, namely, faith in a primitive theory that is not supported by modern genetics? Talk about the “hypocrisy of it all,” Mod.
God has laid out his case, and He has provided an overwhelming amount of circuumstantial evidence. The exquisite complexity of the expanding universe is sufficient proof of God’s existence. So says the Bible. It also says you will therefore have no excuse when you stand before God. Of course, you are free to disagree with the Bible. We do have free will, which means you can reject/ignore God’s evidence and pay the consequences.
Report Post »kryptonite
Posted on February 9, 2012 at 7:54pm@MODERATIONISBEST (CONT.)
Report Post »Regarding whether we can know God personally, again the Bible says God has placed “eternity in the heart of man” (Eccl. 3:11), although we see only “as through a glass, darkly” (1 Cor. 13:12), partly because of sin, but also because we can never fully apprehend God. We do know, however, that God is good because of Jesus. He came to show by example that God is love, so if you shut the door of your heart to him, you will continue to wander in the wilderness of your mind your entire life, even though inviting Jesus in is so very simple – too simple for your taste, obviously, since you refuse to take the first step and address God, and ask him with a sincere, humble heart to reveal himself to you if He’s out there.
Gold Coin & Economic News
Posted on February 9, 2012 at 8:34pm@Lesbian Packing Hollow Points
“There are worse things in this world than death. Forced conversion is one of them. Assumed conversion is another.”
Actually, there is something worse than death – dying as an atheist without knowing your maker. Eternity away from the True and Living God is not a pretty picture. It is the height of arrogance to thumb your nose at Him and think you know better.
Report Post »Gold Coin & Economic News
Posted on February 9, 2012 at 8:36pmThis is nothing but extortion from these thuggish groups. How long are Christians going to take this and let these atheists set policy?
Report Post »Grey Eagle
Posted on February 9, 2012 at 9:13pmIf people don’t like the Ten Commandents, then don’t look at them.
Report Post »ModerationIsBest
Posted on February 9, 2012 at 10:01pm@KRYPTONITE
I asked Jesus into my life.
I attended an evangelical church for 6 years. I sang songs and took notes
I read the Bible daily, and studied it.
I believed the Bible was true.
I prayed to God and accepted Jesus as my lord and savior and that he died on the cross for my sins.
I am now an Atheist, what do you say to that? It will probably be the same argument and accusation I have heard before, “Oh well you were never a TRUE Christian.”
What turned me away from Christianity? A myriad of things.
I tried reading the Bible with an open mind, and not just supposing that it was all true and from a good source. I was shocked at what I was actually reading. Looking through the Bible, it was clear “to me” that this was a book written by men who claimed they were inspired by God. All I read through the Bible was how evil, credulous, imperfect man is, and how we’re motivated by greed, fame, power and are susceptible to delusions and misapprehensions and then I thought, “well maybe the thing I learned about man throughout all of this book, applies to the men who wrote this book.”
Report Post »Asking my Pastor about my questions I then realized that he wasn’t making sense and making crazy rationalizations, justifications and interpretations.
I then took a glimpse at how I(and others) view people who use to believe Zeus was real, or any of the other Gods, and how we think their Gods were either fake, or not the “true” God and thought, “well maybe this God is
ModerationIsBest
Posted on February 9, 2012 at 10:33pm@Kryptonie
“Well maybe this God is fake too.”
I saw that there were people who believed in many God, then came a group that believed in one God. A group of people then believed in that one God, but thought that God took three forms in the God, the Son and the Holy Spirit. I then said, “Wow, that looks like they combined polytheism and monotheism. They took 1 God, and created 3 forms of him…..but all the forms are the same, yeah I can’t believe that.” I then looked at Jesus being crucified and realized that if I were to continuing believe that, I am saying that if given the chance to go back in time and to stop his death, I WOULDN’T do it because I had to believe Jesus died for my “sins.” I then wondered how that thinking is moral and deemed that I couldn’t think that it is. There were many other things that contributed to it but I”ll stop here.
How I went from not believing in the Christian God, to not thinking there is a God at all is I looked at how sure of themselves every religion is, and has been in the past and since I thought all those religions were wrong about their God, that then there probably wasn’t a God at all.
I just want to live my life to the best of my ability and I think religion hinders that ability. I think there are so many people that are concerned about the past history of their beliefs, and concerned about what happens after they die, that they come close to ignoring the here and now.
Report Post »Pontiac
Posted on February 10, 2012 at 1:47am@SoupSandwich
[I mean, heteroPacking00buckshot? GayBobCarryingThrowingStars? What is the point?]
Ahahaha! Those are some good names!
[And, I will pray that you are not confronted with a foxhole conversion.]
Anyone that has time to think about god in a conflict has time to get themselves shot.
Can’t read anymore, off to bed I must go…
Report Post »Bad_Ashe
Posted on February 10, 2012 at 2:13am@MODERATIONISBEST
I have a Master’s Degree in Science and Religion, and one in American History, so I’m pretty well versed on this stuff just by benefit of study, but just because a topic isn‘t your academic specialty doesn’t mean you can’t be an expert on it. I know guys who barely graduated High School who can run circles around me on this stuff . So yes, I agree that credentialism or advanced study of a topic doesn’t necessarily make someone right.
The causality of the universe is an interesting topic to bring up. You’re right, we can NEVER know for sure that the universe has a cause, but based on our current evidence we can say that it’s pretty likely. For example, in 2003 Borde, Guth and Vilenkin were able to prove that an expanding universe (such as ours) could not be infinite in the past, which means that our universe did have a beginning. This benefits philosophical arguments by allowing us to apply the universe to a first premise stating that everything which begins (important word choice) to exist has a cause.
Could evidence someday come down the pike to overturn that? Sure, maybe. But it’s no more or less likely than new evidence coming down the pike to overturn Neo-Darwinian evolution, or any other concept for that matter, scientific or otherwise. If we were to apply your argument universally, then we would simply never assert anything at all, for concern that it will someday be overturned.
We have to work with what we have.
Report Post »Bad_Ashe
Posted on February 10, 2012 at 2:19am@MOD – I appreciate you want to live your life and be left alone, but the problem (as I’ve mentioned before) is that you live in a predominantly Christian culture. Removing Christianity from the public square is in practice no different than trying to remove the NFL from the public square.
Since the majority of our candidates, and the majority of the electorate were raised in this culture, how can you realistically expect them to abandon this framework when they govern or vote? It’s simply part of who they are.
On a side note, you mention stem cell research as being hindered by religion, I tend to disagree. Opposition to federal funding is not necessarily a religious idea, and science has no inherent right to pull at our pursestrings. Secondly, the ethical arguments regarding embryonic stem cells have led to cutting edge research in somatic cell reprogramming, and modified skin cells, etc. But I digress…
Your discussions typically don’t get back to “is there a God” because most people don’t understand foundational argumentation. Additionally, the people you interact with aren’t clever enough to say “Yes, I believe other gods exist.“ The ”many gods, one God” position is quite useful, and one that I personally hold to.
I respect you for admitting that you don’t take your atheism too seriously, but you seem to take it seriously enough to go posting on comment boards about the topic, and so we find ourselves in our current position, lol.
Report Post »ModerationIsBest
Posted on February 10, 2012 at 3:01am@BAD_ASHE
I don’t want people to stop being religious, and I personally don‘t care about religious symbols on private property I don’t even go to the limits to say that religious symbols on public property are unconstitutional. I do think that religious symbols on public property provide an on-going framework that religion keeps trying to push on people. People on here talk about progressives and their tactics, but what they don’t seem to understand is that those tactics can work for anything, even Christianity. Small nudges over time to create lasting change.
As I have said before, I’m in my late 20s, and always just assumed that things like “Under God” and “In God We Trust” were in our motto and pledge, when they are relatively recent additions. My fear is, things like this will ultimately lead to people then supporting politicians that want to govern the nation based on a religious belief(already happened). You have people who say there is no religious test for office, yet I think 70% of people want their President to share their beliefs.
We have a candidate right now who talks of “comporting the civil law with a higher law.” That kind of talk frightens me and makes Santorum a person I can‘t vote for despite how much I disagree with Obama’s policies. Give me any one of the other 3 in the general election, and I can at least stand them despite some of their views regarding their faith, just not Santorum.
Be well.
Report Post »Guardog44
Posted on February 10, 2012 at 11:55amI think we need to tattoo the Ten Commandments on all atheists. just kidding
Report Post »PATTY HENRY
Posted on February 10, 2012 at 12:42pmQUICK ANSWER TO ATHEISTS who seek to IMPOSE their will on the rest of us: NO.
YOU have no proof whatsoever that GOD does NOT exist. We don’t care if YOU exist, however, and don’t try to impose our views on you. YOU may NOT impose your views on US. GROW UP, realize that you are doing the job as minions of evil, Don’t come to our churches; don’t celebrate our holidays; don’t bow your head when the rest of us do. WE know that GOD is real. In our lives HE has proven Himself. WE pity you. We wish your human ineptness and pride weren’t so overbearing as to keep you from one of the greatest joys – if not THE greatest joy – of living. But we are not going to try to force you to “believe” . But the answer for you : NO.
Report Post »kryptonite
Posted on February 10, 2012 at 4:24pmMod,
Report Post »Thanks for sharing your experience. I’ve known a few similar cases, although each person is unique so one can’t generalize. Two were brothers who were close and for a time on fire for the Lord. From what you told me, I am puzzled that you don’t talk about what your relationship with Jesus was like. I experienced the presence of God even before I prayed the “sinner’s prayer.” There have been times when I have gotten angry at God, at the Church in general, etc., but I can‘t doubt God’s existence when I have *known* his presence, the work of the Holy Spirit in me and through me, his miracles, his power, even his sorrow. You may have known God, but just from reading your comment it seems like you acquired religion and that is strange. There doesn’t appear to have been any joy in your walk with the Lord either. Were you ever baptized, i.e., submerged in water after you received Christ? Did you get the baptism of the Holy Spirit? Do you or your family have a past in the occult? There are many questions. Wish I could talk with you. Since that is not possible, I will pray, Mod. Atheism is a sad state. Life is tough, and God can and will be by our side through all the trials and tribulations. Then there’s eternity. I have experienced a little of that too. Eternity without God is hell – literally. God bless you.
PubliusPencilman
Posted on February 10, 2012 at 5:15pmPatty Henry,
How terrible for you that you feel someone is IMPOSING their beliefs on you! The problem is that your argument boils down to the idea that somehow an empty wall imposes its values on people, while a wall with the Ten Commandments on it is somehow completely neutral.
I thought you folks like to claim common sense? Your “up is down” argument is so counterintuitive that it really makes me wonder if you think at all.
Report Post »ModerationIsBest
Posted on February 10, 2012 at 6:05pm@Kry
Why do you feel the need to say Atheism is a sad state? Are you trying to force your view of Atheism on me? Or did you mean that you just view it‘s sad that I don’t think a God exists.
If it’s the first, let me tell you, I am not sad. I am happy and fine. I view the world more beautifully now that I”m not shackled by what I think is utter nonsense. Everything is more beautiful to me because I know that I will die, so I can cherish it now.
I want to be left alone and not have religion forced upon me. Public displays of religion don’t personally offend me, I just don’t like that they are serving as a foothold for things like “In God We Trust” to get passed in the 50s, and “Under God” added into the Pledge as well. I think we are inching closer to a theocracy as evident by the support for Rick Santorum. I view that as troublesome and something I don’t want to head to as it will infringe on my freedom when i have, “Civil law comport with a higher law.”
Report Post »copatriots
Posted on February 10, 2012 at 10:44pmMad props, BAD_ASHE! Your knowledge and communication skills are most impressive! As, I am sure you noticed MOD displayed youth and willful rebellion there at the end. He reminds me a bit of Elihu in Job. I think he’ll go far some day. Meanwhile, please keep posting. We all have much to gain from your gift of wisdom.
Report Post »copatriots
Posted on February 11, 2012 at 12:59amSo, MOD, if you don‘t like religious affirmations added in the 1950’s, what’s your take on anti-religious things added in the 1970′s? What does “civil law comport to a higher law” mean to you specifically and how would returning to that standard, which is embedded in most Americans, negatively influence you life?
Report Post »kryptonite
Posted on February 11, 2012 at 6:22am@ModerationIsBest
Are you trying to force your view of Atheism on me? Or did you mean that you just view it‘s sad that I don’t think a God exists.
—
Relax, Mod. I can’t force my views on you. You are in full control of your faculties and your computer. I explained my statement. Maybe you misunderstood “sad state” to mean “sad person.“ ”Sad state” refers to your standing with God, not to your attitude toward life.
I went back and reread your comments, and I must say that the way you speak of your experience as a Christian sounds more like an agnostic experimenting with Christianity than conversion proper. Conversion means you have been won over by God. I don’t know of any born-again Christian (not even those who later departed from the faith) who approached the Bible with the skepticism you say you felt when you received Christ. Instead of getting angry at Christians who say you were never truly converted, be a little more honest with yourself and think about how you come across when you share your religious experience with others.
If you want God to disappear, you will lose America the Beautiful as well. We are who we are because of God. Get rid of him and you get Obama or Muhammad or both. Things will get so bad, you’ll have to turn to God, and you don’t want that to happen, do you? :)
Report Post »watchmanwatch
Posted on February 9, 2012 at 9:07amWell you can not please all the people all the time… It is our right to have it in view as it is their right to turn their head and not read it or pay attention to it… There are things in this world i do not like every day; if it is not life threatening to me or others; life goes on as usual… Do I whine…no… I just go on about my business and do the best I can. More of this “ entitlement mentality” what about me… whaaaaa……. cry babies…
Report Post »dry it up atheists as there are more important issues on the horizon… where is the money going to come from to pay our debt and keep the retired ones in food, medicine, along with the sick, poor, and truly needy ones… Do not get distracted people; this is petty BS…
PubliusPencilman
Posted on February 9, 2012 at 11:19am“It is our right to have it in view”
“More of this “ entitlement mentality” what about me… whaaaaa……. cry babies…”
So… you are claiming a right that no one said they actually have, yet they are the one’s who hav an entitlement mentality? Ha!
Report Post »NHwinter
Posted on February 9, 2012 at 12:03pmBack to screaming about separation of church and state. Where are they crying out for separation of church and state with Obama’s new directive that Church hospitals, etc. have insurance to cover birth control, etc. They only use that, and it is not in the Constitution, when it is convenient for them. I am so sick of everything that is going on in America and this administration to destroy this great Republic and America.
Report Post »watchmanwatch
Posted on February 9, 2012 at 12:04pmFirst learn to spell it will make your point more valid… “They” must think they have a right to impose their wants and desires on the masses; if this was not true there would not be a 10 commandment issue but I think some will complain regardless of the issue; you can not please everyone… But the masses do care and they are the majority; like many will say; if you do not like where you live…. move …. I like where I live and am willing to fight to make it a better place for all; not just the few that want to demand their rights or wants be more important than the majority…
Report Post »NHwinter
Posted on February 9, 2012 at 12:08pmps – I demand the 10 Commandments be left up. Should I send a letter with my demands too!
Report Post »spirited
Posted on February 9, 2012 at 3:21pm@NHWINTER:
A letter is a good idea.
>Send it by Certified Mail
Report Post »Blazen420
Posted on February 9, 2012 at 9:06amMaybe we should consider these athiest terrorist because of their extremism. Thats what they will be accusing people who won’t go along with them.
Report Post »StonyBurk
Posted on February 9, 2012 at 9:22am1776 Fast Day Sermon by John Witherspoon “…whoever is an avowed enemy to God, I scruple not to call him an enemy to his country.” Political Sermons of the American Founding Era 1730-1805 ,Ellis Sandoz Editor Vol 1.p554 -see also America’s God and Country:Encyclopedia of Quotations ,WmJ.Federer Ed. Amerisearch ,2000pp703-04 note225.IF not terrorists the atheist certainly is an enemy-or a liar.
Report Post »momrules
Posted on February 9, 2012 at 9:03amWho is funding the FFRF? They have lawsuits going on everywhere and lawsuits are expensive which is why most cities and small towns bow to their demands but FFRF seems to have an unending supply of money.
FFRF’s tentacles are everywhere. I don’t buy this “anonymous” or “lone” resident complaint to them anymore.
Report Post »Anonymous T. Irrelevant
Posted on February 9, 2012 at 9:16amThey are from Madison, WI if that tells you anything. Probably belong to unions, too.
Report Post »The Third Archon
Posted on February 9, 2012 at 3:46pmMostly lawyers, the membership, a lot of whom put in hours for little or no charge because they are ideologically committed to the mission of the FFRF–they believe in the legal principle of non-Establishment, and thus many of them are willing to devote personal time and legal skills to its cause. That’s a large help, having a community of lawyers as membership dedicated to your cause and willing to expend personal wealth, labor, and time in advancement of that cause. It’s also why the ACLU is so powerful and in so many places seemingly at once–they have over a million members, all lawyers. Lawyers, not surprisingly, aren’t universally amoral as they are often depicted–many of them have very firm convictions about the public good and a passionate determination to serve the actualization of this good.
Report Post »landman1
Posted on February 9, 2012 at 4:43pmI‘d bet that if you attended one of their meetings you’d encounter the best dressed, best smelling, fancy hairdo, lip gloss, glitter bomb tossing, eye shadow wearin’ folks ever…..and I bet the girls ain’t bad either.
Stay away from me you atheist pigs. You have your hands full in Madison trying to bring down the duly elected Governor for attempting to get your state back to solvency. Newland, NC was settled by God fearin’ folks who like it just fine that the 10 commandments adorn the courthouse walls and I hope will not tolerate intimidation.
Report Post »skiz
Posted on February 9, 2012 at 9:02amChristians have to STAND! Seperation of church and state is a myth. The 1st ammendment states that government should stay out of religion. It does not say religion should stay out of government. What the founders where saying is the government cant tell you that you have to be catholic or you have to be muslim it does not mean you cant put up the ten commandments in a public building. This country was founded on christianity and the reason we came here in the first place was to get away from a form a government that told us how to pray and who to pray to. It is just common sense! Secularism is going to kill this coutry and I think for people like FFRF are doing it on purpose.
Report Post »Godfather.1
Posted on February 9, 2012 at 9:33am@skiz
“This country was founded on christianity and the reason we came here in the first place was to get away from a form a government that told us how to pray and who to pray to.”
Yet, you think it is ok for the government to put Christian symbols in a town hall. Essentially, the government is telling you to follow the Ten Commandments, a religious code, by having them hanging on the wall of the town hall building.
What do you think “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion” means? It means that the state cannot promote religion which is exactly what it is doing by placing the Ten Commandments on the wall.
This country was founded on Christianity? Really? I guess that is why the Constitution clearly says that it was founded upon Christianity, right?
Report Post »Jedidavid
Posted on February 9, 2012 at 9:55amGODfather. IT does clearly state that it is founded on Christian believes. Doesn’t the Decleration of Independence state that we are endowed with unalienable rights by the creator? If God doesn’t give us the rights, one of which, freedom OF religion (not from) then where do they come from? If from man then that means they can be taken away.
If you really believe this country was NOT founded on Christian beliefs then you do not accept the constitution, you do not recognize the country.
Report Post »sonseeker
Posted on February 9, 2012 at 10:02amThe first aendment has nothing to do woth the state, it is entirely about the fed.
Report Post »KAdams
Posted on February 9, 2012 at 10:05amExcuse me, Godfather. I must disagree. If the emphasis on the plaque was purely Christian in nature, then maybe you, and all the other atheists would have a valid argument. If the Lord’s Prayer, for example, was prominently displayed, or the Serenity prayer. However, and I do not believe the plaque is there to MAKE YOU do anything. It is simply informing you that the laws of the land are based, in principle, on the concepts outlined by the ten commandments. You could probably petition, however, to have the first and second commandments removed, but I think you would look foolish.
Report Post »Lordchamp
Posted on February 9, 2012 at 10:07amYou are evidently ignorant of our history. Our history is filled with huge amounts of evidence that we are a Judeo-Christian Country. That is undeniable except by someone who just refuses to see and acknowledge it. History is also filled with many societies that have failed when they strayed away from the morals and ethics instilled by Judeo-Christian teachings. Regardless of what faith you profess, it is about the basic teachings. Morality, being kind to one another, not stealing, not killing, all things taught within the Ten Commandments and other places. When those teachings are not followed society falls apart.
What is so wrong with anyone, including Government encouraging it’s people to be and act as good citizens?
Where and how does that break any law to include the Constitution?
Those things in the Ten Commandments are Nature’s Laws and can easily be translated into any religion. They are not promoting any particular religion although they might have been attached mainly to Christianity.
If you are an atheist, do you not still want to be a good person? A good citizen? I would assume most would answer yes.
So how would it be bad for you to live by the Ten Commandments?
That is where we are losing it as a Country. We have not try direction of right and wrong any longer. Just the single act of living according to the Ten Commandments would make us all so much better as people and a Country that the change would be immediate and immense.
Report Post »goodwater
Posted on February 9, 2012 at 10:33am@Godfather! – definition of Congress = “the supreme legislative body of a nation and especially of a republic.” Where on earth is the term “town hall” in this definition. The people who were elected to oversee the community needs of Newland are not “Congress.” There is another phrase in that 1st amendment which reads “ or prohibiting the free exercise thereof.” What do you not understand about this phrase in the 1st amendment. The people of Newland has every right to place what ever plaque or sign on its townhall walls.
Report Post »Godfather.1
Posted on February 9, 2012 at 10:33am@sonseeker
Have you heard of the Fourteenth Amendment? You know, the one where the Bill of Rights were applied to the states.
Report Post »PubliusPencilman
Posted on February 9, 2012 at 11:17amJediDavid,
“Decleration of Independence state that we are endowed with unalienable rights by the creator?”
Now, the founders were very intelligent men, and in this case, they have clearly made the reference to God so generic as to include no specific form of worship or belief system. Your argument rests on the absurd assumption that when the Founders deliberately use vague terms like creater and “nature’s God,” that they actuall mean specifically the Christian God. Of course, they didn’t say that, so your argument is completely groundless.
Report Post »ModerationIsBest
Posted on February 9, 2012 at 12:34pmThou shalt have no other gods before me – Oops, there goes that one
Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image, or any likeness of any thing that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth:- Oops, 0/2
Thou shalt not take the name of the Lord thy God in vain; for the Lord will not hold him guiltless that taketh his name in vain. – Last I saw, we don’t have any laws against this
Remember the sabbath day, to keep it holy.- Haha yeah right and miss our sporting events?!
Honour thy father and thy mother: that thy days may be long upon the land which the Lord thy God giveth thee. – Yeah this gets broken all of the time, and yet no law for it
Thou shalt not kill.- Hey, WE GOT ONE! WOOHOO
Thou shalt not commit adultery. – Oops, we’re back here again are we?
Thou shalt not steal. – Oh, okay We’re back on track here
Thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbour. – Oops, no law
hou shalt not covet thy neighbour’s wife, nor his manservant, nor his maidservant, nor his ox, nor his ass, nor any thing that is thy neighbour’s. – Oops, no law against thought crime…yet
Fact is, the majority of these 10 commandments are ones that concern God, not human laws. I‘m GLAD our law isn’t based around the 10 commandments, there are tons of stuff that the 10 commandments leave out(maybe because God was too busy focusing on himself?)
It’s a joke to say our laws are based on the 10 commandments,
Report Post »KAdams
Posted on February 9, 2012 at 1:01pm@Mod: I’ve already responded to this, please check it in another post. Page 2 or 3.
Report Post »KAdams
Posted on February 9, 2012 at 1:08pm@Mod: No, there’s many more laws, laws of purity, women and sacrifice. Levitical law was for the purpose of the survival of Israel, as they wandered the wilderness. The Torah boasts 613.
Report Post »ModerationIsBest
Posted on February 9, 2012 at 1:30pm@KADAMS
Exactly, if you’re going to talk about “conceptual” crap, that’s fine.
The problem is people think that our laws were BASED around the 10 commandments, which is just flat out untrue.
It’s more of that Christian “nudging” to get more and more people to fight for a Christian theocracy, so much so that we have a candidate for President saying, “Civil law should comport with a higher law” as well as saying, “I’m going to talk about something no President ever has talked about, and that’s the dangers of contraception…..and I mean, i hear even some Christians say, oh well contraception, that’s okay. No it’s not okay. It’s a license to do things in the sexual realm that are counter to how things are supposed to be….”
You can find the whole video on youtube and his statements start around the 17:36 mark of a 44 min long video.
Who is this guy to tell anybody else that “contraception is wrong” and what is he talking about in “how things are be supposed to be?” When will this guy and other people that people who don’t believe in the Christian God, AREN’T subject to whatever you think that law stipulates.
Would you expect to be forced to conform your life around what Allah says? Do you even care what Allah says when it comes to this stuff, and the afterlife? No, you don’t. Well that argument extends to your God as well. I don’t care what you think your God says about anything.
Report Post »KAdams
Posted on February 9, 2012 at 1:31pm@Mod: What’s perjury, but bearing false witness against thy neighbor? Sorry, but the ten commandments don‘t define neighbor as ’the unit or family living immediately adjacent to your domicile’.
Report Post »Benjamin Abruzzo
Posted on February 9, 2012 at 1:37pm@ModerationIsBest
Interesting list that discounts the 10 Commandments… but they are really rules to live well by, guidelines that are universal. Have you tried calling them this:
RULES TO LIVE WELL BY
Report Post »- Don’t let possessions, politicians, teachers or salesmen sway you from the truth or from doing the right thing
- Don’t hold material things more important than ethics
- Don’t insult others or be cruel in word or action
- Set aside a day to rest and reflect on your actions and how to better yourself
- Respect your elders and heed their wisdom
- Don’t kill without just cause, mainly only in protection of yourself or others
- Don’t cheat or make false promises, keep the promises you do make
- Don‘t take what isn’t yours without permission
- Don‘t make claims that aren’t true, especially of others
- Be happy with what you are able to achieve honestly and happy for other’s and their honest achievements
ModerationIsBest
Posted on February 9, 2012 at 2:00pm@KADAMS
Last I read, the 10 commandments didn’t say “You shall not bear false witness against your neighbor……only in a court of law.”
Rumors and lies are spread all of the time without legal action taken against the person spreading the rumors or lies.
Report Post »KAdams
Posted on February 9, 2012 at 2:31pm@Mod. No, they don’t read that way to me either… which is why the law is based on the commandment, not the other way around. When you speak of basing a concept off of another, it’s some similarity that you are taking. i.e: Thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbor. The similarity: no lying; applied to: the oath and the court of law.
Report Post »KAdams
Posted on February 9, 2012 at 2:34pm@Mod: And slander and/or libel would be what?
Report Post »ModerationIsBest
Posted on February 9, 2012 at 2:39pmHere we go again.
Report Post »KAdams
Posted on February 9, 2012 at 3:00pmThat‘s all you’ve got? I’d say slander/libel/perjury cover the false witness commandment. You don’t agree?
Report Post »ModerationIsBest
Posted on February 9, 2012 at 4:32pmMy response was to “That’s why the law is based around the commandment.” I thought we’ve already gone over this.
Fine, you want to count that as one too? Be my guest, I don’t care, we won’t agree. Then take out all of the 10 commandments that are irrelevant to our rule of law. Keep the ones you believe we passed a law based around, get rid of the rest, and put up a plaque stating, “the modified 10 commandments” which consists of the 2 or 3 of the 10 that are actually relevant to our society and our rule of law.
I can’t believe in we are in 2012 and are still discussing this stuff. I long for the day where Judaism, Christianity, Islam, Mormonism, are viewed like we view “God’s” like Zeus, Odin, Apollo. Sadly, I won’t be alive to see it.
Report Post »skiz
Posted on February 10, 2012 at 8:54am@godfather~ It seems everyone has done very well explaining that you dont know much about this country and it’s history. Which is the PROBLEM! Maybe you attended a public school like most of us. But some of us questioned of the teachers and learned the truth.
Report Post »Putting a sign with the 10 commandments on it in a public building does not mean you have to follow or become a member of that religion. If a muslim or jewish sign or symbol is hung in a public building I am in no way offended. That thought would not even enter my mind. Why? Because I am strong in my own faith and others have the right to choose their religion.
Christianity! Really! “One nation under God”, “rights given by our CREATOR”. DUH!
This is the problem we have these days , like you, people tend to think because there is a sign or symbol in a public place that automatically means religon is being pushed on you. It’s not!
Keep government out of religon, not religion out of government. I do not understand how praying in a public place or having religious sybols up is offensive. Get a life!
teddyc73
Posted on February 9, 2012 at 9:00amOk, this is really getting out of hand. We need to fight back against these people as hard as we can. I am sick and tired of the atheists setting the agenda. Christians need to get a back bone NOW.
Report Post »Blazen420
Posted on February 9, 2012 at 9:00amWho are these people and why do we never see their faces? These organizations remind me of the Klan. A minority group try to tell the majority what to do.
Report Post »dynaflow
Posted on February 9, 2012 at 8:57amIt is not their choice. They will burn in Hell along with O’dumbo!!!!!!!!!!
Report Post »smithclar3nc3
Posted on February 9, 2012 at 9:02amTime for the town to stand strong and put it to a vote of the people in the town. Drive the heathens out .
Report Post »teddyc73
Posted on February 9, 2012 at 9:02amYou know dude, I dont support this president and think he is destroying the country but injecting him into ever single thing and changing his name into stupid insults is really juvenile and not helpful. It lowers you to the level of those on the left. At least show respect for the office if not the man.
Report Post »KAdams
Posted on February 9, 2012 at 1:15pmHe said ‘O’dumbo’ which is mocking the person. If they had said ‘Usurper-in-Chief’ well, maybe still the person. It’s hard to respect the office when the one who holds it betrays the people. Kind of like the Pope, you know?
Report Post »Notorrius
Posted on February 9, 2012 at 8:56amI think all americans should send a letter to this town Saying that we DEMAND they keep it up. If the Majority of Americans do this this stuff will stop.
Report Post »randy
Posted on February 9, 2012 at 9:10amMayor, Valerie Jaynes
mayor@newlandgov.com
Town Manager, Brenda Pittman
townmgr@newlandgov.com
I just did!
Report Post »Godfather.1
Posted on February 9, 2012 at 9:35am@Notorrius
This may be news to you, but the majority cannot approve of something that is unconstitutional. That is, unless it is to create a Constitutional Amendment.
Report Post »Jedidavid
Posted on February 9, 2012 at 10:01am@God father How is it uncocstitutional to display one’s beliefs? I thought we had the freedom of religion? Why do your percieved rights of freedom from religion trump EVERYONE’s freedom OF religion.Believe it or not Chri9stianity is the majority religion, if atheism became the majority, then I guess we wouldn‘t have God in our country and we’d be like every other country. And not the greatest country in the world.
Report Post »KAdams
Posted on February 9, 2012 at 10:13am@Godfather:
Please show me where it’s unconstitutional?
Report Post »Lordchamp
Posted on February 9, 2012 at 10:20amGodfather state your case.
How is displaying the Ten Commandments unconstitutional?
We’re waiting.
Report Post »Lucy Larue
Posted on February 9, 2012 at 6:19pmOffer financial support too!
Report Post »You need to understand that FFRF is as cowardly and wanton as the ACLU!
There are only 704 citizens in the entire town…,to include les enfants!
These are the towns they go after. they know beforehand that they cannot afford a costly lawsuit.
Pontiac
Posted on February 11, 2012 at 12:01am@Jedidavid
[How is it uncocstitutional to display one’s beliefs?]
I’ll assume you meant “unconstitutional”.
It’s not unconstitutional for one to display “one’s” beliefs.
However, when did a Government building become an individual with individual rights?
[Believe it or not Chri9stianity is the majority religion]
Believe it or not this is not a christian theocracy and minorities still have rights. You seem to have a progressive streak in you. You do not car about Individual rights, you only care about Collective rights which is completely counter to the founding principles of this nation.
[then I guess we wouldn't have God in our country and we’d be like every other country.]
If you want god so badly in government try living in Iran or Saudi Arabia. It’s not really different than the moral servitude Christian want to force on others.
@Lordchamp
[How is displaying the Ten Commandments unconstitutional?]
-The first two commandments violate the Free Exercise clause of the First Amendment.
-The third commandment is a clear abridgment of the freedom of speech.
-The fourth commandment is an encroachment on the Establishment Clause.
I don’t think government should be displaying anything subversive to the constitution.
Report Post »Feel free to display them on your personal property, just don’t display them on public property.
mr.goodvibe
Posted on February 9, 2012 at 8:56amThese atheists act like the meer sight of anything religous will start them on fire like a vampire in sunlight.
Report Post »right
Posted on February 9, 2012 at 9:35amWe should be so lucky:)
Report Post »Pontiac
Posted on February 11, 2012 at 12:20amThese Christians act like the mere* absence of anything religious* on government land will send them on a path of sin and debauchery.
Report Post »jedi.kep
Posted on February 9, 2012 at 8:56amFreedom OF not freedom FROM!
Report Post »Red1492
Posted on February 9, 2012 at 12:07pmSo you’re going to force me to be a christian? How are you any better than this group of Atheists.
Report Post »drago
Posted on February 9, 2012 at 8:54amIsnt it past time, to put the fear of God into these idiots.I am anything but religious, but, i do have faith, i also have a realistic view of whats evil, and how i will handle it, if it rears its ugly head to me personally……
Report Post »DeavonReye
Posted on February 9, 2012 at 9:22amPlease continue. I’m interested in knowing what you will do. . . . and how it will “put the fear of god in them”.
Report Post »ModerationIsBest
Posted on February 9, 2012 at 12:36pmIt’s time we put the fear of God in them and show them how peaceful our faith is……by force!
Report Post »KAdams
Posted on February 9, 2012 at 1:11pmNo. If people don’t want to hear, that’s fine.
Matthew
7:6″Give not that which is holy unto the dogs, neither cast ye your pearls before swine, lest they trample them under their feet, and turn again and rend you.”
As Scripture is holy to a Christian, once rebuffed, why bother? After that, it’s between you and God. If God didn’t force me to accept Him, why should I try and force you?
Report Post »ModerationIsBest
Posted on February 9, 2012 at 2:26pmThen stop voting for candidates who want to pass legislation based around their belief.
Report Post »KAdams
Posted on February 9, 2012 at 2:39pmWhat, do you think I’m stupid? As if my vote actually counted. Our officials aren’t elected, they are selected.
Report Post »kentuckypatriot
Posted on February 9, 2012 at 8:54amDon’t they have anything better to do than harrass govt buildings? Hmm, gives me an idea… maybe I should put something religious up in my PRIVATE business. Let’s see who has the !@#$ to say something to me.
Report Post »riverdog1
Posted on February 9, 2012 at 5:32pmyou are free to put up religious material in your private properrty and people are free to comment on it. the goverment cannot put up religious material in goverment space. it is really simple.
Report Post »Lucy Larue
Posted on February 9, 2012 at 6:22pmKENTUCKYPATRIOT,
Report Post »They are EVIL. This is deliberate. They say they are Atheists. NON!
They have anarchy as their goal!
confederacyofdunces
Posted on February 9, 2012 at 8:53amI dare them to have a trial with a jury of North Carolinians. I call NC the land of a thousand churches (in each town). There is no way that NC residents will allow these creeps to prevail. I’ve lived here 8 years and can say that these people are serious about religion, and the Churchs influence in their daily lives.
Report Post »The Faithless look to threaten small towns who can hardly afford costly legal battles.
We need to create a religious freedom fund to counter this well funded progressive anti Christian dogs.
Bring it on!
smudgercat17
Posted on February 9, 2012 at 9:45amI’ve lived here all my life. The faithful are as vocal in opposition to this sort of thing as you might think. We’ve been thru this before – removal of the Commandments, Christmas displays, a prayer before Counsil meetings, etc., and, as vocal and determined the public opposition is, the governmental body involved always caves to the obnoxious minority of outsiders. Makes me sad to call NC home sometimes…..
Report Post »BMroxy
Posted on February 9, 2012 at 8:51amNotice they letter says “to protect the constitutional principal of separation of government and religion.”
(yet one more “group” casually changing a word here or there to suit their cause?)
The constitution actually says we each have freedom of religion, not freedom from religion.
I think they meant separation of church and state. What I would like to know is the following:
Did a church order or put that plaque of the ten commandments up on that wall? Does the plaque anywhere on it promote a specific church? Is the town hall receiving any benefits from that church by displaying that plaque? Is the town hall giving “special” funding of some sort to that same specific church due to the plaque displayed?
If no church had anything to do with the plaque being on the wall then there is no need for it to be removed because there was no violation of separation of church and state, not if you fully understand the true concept of separation of church and state, the way it was meant to be utilized in our country.
Report Post »Locked
Posted on February 9, 2012 at 8:59am“Notice they letter says “to protect the constitutional principal of separation of government and religion.”
(yet one more “group” casually changing a word here or there to suit their cause?)
The constitution actually says we each have freedom of religion, not freedom from religion.”
You are the one mistaken here. They said “the principle” not the wording. You’re arguing the wrong premise. Also, a principal runs a school; a principle is the truth or meaning of the words.
Report Post »BMroxy
Posted on February 9, 2012 at 9:08amIf the best you can do this morning is to correct my typos or grammer errors for me, well then thank you for that. It is always a pleasure to have an editor correcting my mistakes for me. It actually saves me the trouble of having to go back and correct them myself “after” I have woken fully and had some coffee. I have many writings that need editing so if you are game let me know and I will shoot some of them your way for your correcting. I even have a red pen I will let you borrow, so that you can slaughter my writes in red if you would like to use it. Again, thank you ever so much!
Report Post »Miyegombo Bayartsogt
Posted on February 9, 2012 at 9:11amAt first, I am inclined to agree with your assertion. Any Christian judge should be able to put up quotes from his mythology on display. It seems as harmless to allow this Ten Commandments as it would be to allow a Muslim judge his favorite Koranic quotes posted on the courtroom wall or the Hindu file clerk who wants a life-sized statue of Vishnu in a working fountain of fresh milk in the courthouse lobby or even allowing pagans animal sacrifice in the cafeteria. It makes everyone feel good and moist and Bambi-like when everyone’s belief system is accommodated. Problem is there are some taxpayers who might want their public buildings uncluttered by chanting Buddhist monks and their oppressive incense smoke. If we Americans really want to play with our myriad religions, we can, but at the same time the toys and tools of our various belief systems should be kept inside our houses and private places of worship.
Report Post »BMroxy
Posted on February 9, 2012 at 9:23amMiye…
Given I don’t agree with most the content in your reply. Here’s an idea. It’s a town hall so then let the town take it to vote, and the only people who get to vote are the residents of that town. To be part of the vote they must provide legitimate proof of residency such as paid property taxes for 2011. It’s a town hall so then it should be a decision reached by the legal local residents of that town.
That may be a good idea given the residents of the town seemingly had no issue with it before this “group” moved in on them.
Report Post »Locked
Posted on February 9, 2012 at 9:30am@Bmroxy
“If the best you can do this morning is to correct my typos or grammer errors for me, well then thank you for that.”
I think you did not read the rest of the post. Your argument was that the separation of church and state is not in the wording of the Constitution. Theirs was that it is in the principle of the 1st amendment. You’re both right; it‘s just you’re not arguing the same thing.
Principal/principle is just one of those pet peeves of mine, like your/you’re, or their/there/they’re. No offense intended, just trying to spread education :-)
Report Post »BMroxy
Posted on February 9, 2012 at 10:06amLocked when I am going to get a nobel prize for something I write in an online news source comment section, you let me know, because I wish you to be my editor beforehand on it so that it is all spiffy and perfect for presentation. My pet peeve is when someone turns to little writing errors as a play to attack a commentor. Sometimes content does out weigh an error. Obviously despite my error you knew exactly what I meant anyhow or you wouldn’t have had a go back at me on it. I don‘t get paid to make sure it’s perfection in comment sections online. I’m sure you meant no harm, but now that we understand each other’s pet peeve, I am sure that in the future when you see comments from me you will clearly get that I don’t care about your pet peeve. I don’t come in comment sections looking for someone to make me proficient in my education. That is what schooling for and you are NOT my teacher. That being said don’t correct my little writing errors as a form of attack upon me and I shant make you look a fool for doing so such as I just did in replies. Be kind and good day.
Report Post »KAdams
Posted on February 9, 2012 at 10:19am@Locked.
I have to disagree. The only ‘seperation’ you’re thinking of is in legislature. There are 3 branches of government. The Executive, the Legislative, and the Judiciary. The First Amendment clearly states, “Congress shall make no law regarding the establishment of religion, nor the free exercise thereof.” There is nothing barring either the Executive Branch, nor the Judiciary Branch, from displaying things like, say, the ten commandments. The First Amendment does not say, “The Government”, it says “Congress”.
Report Post »KAdams
Posted on February 9, 2012 at 10:23amOops. Another pet peeve of Locked, I’d bet… either/or, niether/nor.
Report Post »BMroxy
Posted on February 9, 2012 at 10:28am@ Kadams
Bingo! We have a winner!
Report Post »BMroxy
Posted on February 9, 2012 at 10:32am@Kadams (since I guess I am suppose to use the little @ thingy before a unsername)
I think “your” just picking on Locked now…
Be nice… : )
Report Post »Locked
Posted on February 9, 2012 at 10:35am@Kadams
“I have to disagree. The only ‘seperation’ you’re thinking of is in legislature. ”
Incorrect. The Supreme Court has ruled that there is indeed a separation, and it extends to all organizations that receive funding from the government (ie, schools, public land, etc). Whether you agree or not is of course a different matter. But whether there is a separation is not a point of debate.
@Bmroxy
Apparently my corrections struck a nerve, and I’m sorry you were so offended. Again, my point was that you’re arguing the wrong point; the group said the principle, while you’re arguing the wording. I believe you know this, as when you say things like “the way it was meant to be utilized in our country,” you’re committing the same error as Kadams; placing your personal opinion over that of the court. There is no doubt that a separation of church and state exists, and is violated through selective displays of one faith over another in government-funded or owned property.
For the record, I think the FFRF is a bunch of nosy busybodies and the 10 Commandments plaque hurts no one. I‘ll let the courts decide if it’s unconstitutional, though.
Report Post »Locked
Posted on February 9, 2012 at 10:44am@Kadams
Two more issues with your idea that only the legislative branch is responsible for separating church and state: first, this is displayed at a town hall, a legislative branch. Second, it’s “church and state;“ the ”state” part of which includes all government functions. The establishment clause‘s principle of separation of church and state doesn’t say “church and legislature.”
Report Post »KAdams
Posted on February 9, 2012 at 10:54am@Locked:
Considering that at the time of the writings, there weren‘t any institutions receiving such government funds as to require a designation of ’government sponsorship’. In reading some of the Supreme Court cases, I feel that they overstepped in making such a ruling, because they themselves, in said ruling have violated the separation clause. A ruling that prohibits one, prohibits all, would you agree? In effect, while not legally ratified/signed into law as legislation, the Supreme Court rules from the bench.
Report Post »KAdams
Posted on February 9, 2012 at 10:56amActually, the town hall is all 3. In some cases, it’s also the police station.
Report Post »BMroxy
Posted on February 9, 2012 at 10:58am@Locked
Report Post »Yes it struck a nerve indeed. I had a head injury in 2008 that onset a form of, I don’t know a form of dyslexia I guess? It effected my ability to even count out money correctly to the point I had to have someone else do it for me. It took my kids twenty minutes one day to convince me my car was mine, even though I was standing right “their” staring at it, because to me it didn’t look like my car. It was difficult. For “quiet” some time, I would write things, and I might mean to type door, but would type knob instead. Do you “no” what kind of struggle that can be to overcome, because I DO and as a writer, in the middle of writes that I planned on having published. It traumatized me fully, “given” I have been writing since well before I ever hit my teens. So Then hit a nerve? YES INDEED YOU DID. I have come “along” way since the injury and then some creep like you online comes at me like that? I have choice words for you, but I will keep them to myself using my better judgement in dealing with you. This is the last reply “your” going to “recieve” from me. “Their” are times when it is best to just ignore “other’s,“ who ”effect“ you negatively and in this situation I am well willing to ”except“ ”your“ Correct in my errors but a complete annoyance that I will ”know” longer ever personally acknowledge on the blaze comment section again. :) Good day.
Locked
Posted on February 9, 2012 at 11:00am@Kadams
“A ruling that prohibits one, prohibits all, would you agree?”
Yes, that’s been the ruling set by the Supreme Court. Hence when we have situations like these (and for example, the RI school that took down the school prayer banner), there were two potential ways out: either allow all faith systems to have an equal opportunity to show their faiths, or allow none.
Goes back to the playground rules: if you can’t share with the other kids, no one gets to play with their toys. I find it distressing that so often people would rather tear religion down than coexist with other faiths; this is the reason I find FFRF wrong. They would rather tear things down than allow other belief systems to participate.
Report Post »Locked
Posted on February 9, 2012 at 11:04am@Bmroxy
I’m sorry for your injury, and I hope you recover all of your cognitive faculties in the near future. Your snappish replies notwithstanding, I wish you the best with your situation. Good day to you as well.
Report Post »KAdams
Posted on February 9, 2012 at 11:32amMy point then, Locked, is that the Supreme Court should have recused themselves, or dismissed such cases themselves as unconstitutional, as bringing the case, not founded in law, but in personal affront or against stated beliefs is itself violating the separation clause… Again, it goes back to an individual doing some research about the town they are moving to. Most people are concerned about the schools their kids are sent to. Besides, look at the fruit… Private, religious educational institutions consistently produce better educated children, would you agree?
Report Post »Locked
Posted on February 9, 2012 at 11:51am@Kadams
“Private, religious educational institutions consistently produce better educated children, would you agree?”
I’m honestly not sure, as I haven’t looked hard enough into research; I have heard such things, though. I was lucky enough to attend one of the best public schools in the US (well, within the top few hundred at least).
I‘d imagine there’s a correlation between private schools and more successful students. However, correction doesn’t equal causation, and the causes are likely varied. Private institutions require payments above whatever families pay in taxes. Families that can afford that payment are usually in secure jobs and have a higher education level than average. They would also impress upon their children the need to succeed, in repayment for their tuition. The school would likely be able to use these extra funds to supply better classroom supplies and programs; furthermore, they can refuse students who would bring down their standards or averages.
So, it’s not necessarily that private institutions create better students; it’s that better students are drawn to them, and by requiring higher standards the schools can shuffle the weaker students off into the public schools.
As for the SCotUS denying these cases, I agree that would be a fair idea. For better or worse though, we have the situation we have now.
Report Post »KAdams
Posted on February 9, 2012 at 12:26pm@Locked: If said parents are affluent as you say, yet still hold to an atheistic belief system, why would they send their children to a private religious institution?
Report Post »Locked
Posted on February 9, 2012 at 12:35pm@Kadams
“f said parents are affluent as you say, yet still hold to an atheistic belief system, why would they send their children to a private religious institution?”
Ah, I misread what you said, seeing it as private and/or religious. I’m not sure what atheism has to do with it; all the points I made above still stand. If tuition is required, parents demand results from their children. With extra funds, the school can purchase more equipment and provide more effective programs. And if a child is underperforming, they can be kicked out to the public school system. So private schools, religious or otherwise, have tools to pick out only the best, richest, and brightest, while public schools need to accept everyone. It’s a stacked deck that cannot be broken down simply into “private/religious schools make for better students.”
I’m not sure where the school issue came from though. This seems more of a discussion for the “How do you teach values in a secular society?” article than one about the 10 commandments in a town hall.
Report Post »KAdams
Posted on February 9, 2012 at 1:28pm@Locked:
Just that, in a private religious institution, the children would continue to be raised in the nurturing and admonition of the LORD. They would also be more understanding of the law, both as it applies to their faith, and in the civic sense.
Report Post »Schooling in a given area a lot of times is a consideration when moving to a new town. Just goes back to preliminary research… if the city you’re looking to move to seems to display overly religious symbols, and you’re an atheist, then maybe you shouldn’t move there.
weneedrubio
Posted on February 9, 2012 at 8:51amI can find someone that objects to anything that is put up on any wall of any courthouse in America, does that give them the right to force it to be taken down? We will remain in a constant state of re-fighting every little battle in the country, destroying any ability to move forward, if we don’t eliminate this childish political correctness trend. Our courts are backed up to an alarming degree and all these thinned skinned, self worshipping narcissists should SHUT THEIR PIE HOLE!!!!
Report Post »KickinBack
Posted on February 9, 2012 at 8:51amOnce again, the word of God strikes fear in the unclean.
Report Post »Miyegombo Bayartsogt
Posted on February 9, 2012 at 9:49amActually, I’m certain no one not delusional has ever heard the word of God. That fact is a common problem faced by people who would have others believe they have some high-speed internet cable plugged directly into the mind of the Almighty and thus their utterances have divine power over their fellow, unwashed primates. No words carry any divine stamp. You can insist if your do if you must, but my words are every bit as much ‘the word of God’ as any you’ve got.
Report Post »KAdams
Posted on February 9, 2012 at 11:35amYou can’t even spell correctly, and you want me to take your word as God’s? Haha.. hahahahahaha. ha.
Report Post »RightPolitically
Posted on February 9, 2012 at 8:50amThis crap has to stop. Listen, I’m not a particularly religious individual, but it’s about time society stops allowing itself to be bullied by the “vocal few.” Nowhere in the U.S. Constitution does it say that a citizen has a right to not be offended….. Nowhere! They need to get over themselves. And the display of religious symbols on public property is not the “establishment” of religion, just its acknowledgement of one of many belief systems.
Report Post »copatriots
Posted on February 9, 2012 at 8:48amAh…..another day, another example of atheists wanting to remove all things Judeo-Christian from America’s history and culture. Wait…..didn’t I say the same thing yesterday.
If only those pesky 10 Commandments weren’t such good standards and principles to live by…….
Report Post »chasbronson
Posted on February 9, 2012 at 8:48amTell them like Texas to go to hell.Oh Thats right they are.
Report Post »Gonzo
Posted on February 9, 2012 at 8:47amIt will all come down to how much the city wants to spend in legal fees to keep them up. With America strapped for cash, the militant atheists are having a field day.
Report Post »marhee9
Posted on February 9, 2012 at 8:51amThat’s a great point. Along with radical liberal groups like the ACLU, we are spending millions each year. Why do people keep giving money to these outfits? I’m so sick and tired of atheists. If you don’t like religion, good for you, but get out of my face about it.
Report Post »http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9GEYAbSoYxs
randy
Posted on February 9, 2012 at 9:06amShould not cost them a single penny. Just ignore any court orders like the one Obama just ignored by not showing up for his court date in Georgia. And when OBAMA sends his civilian army to that town to forcefully take it down. the christians in that town should make a human shield around the sign.
Report Post »Let the people have their voice again! FU Obama, Holder, Pelosi, Reed and the rest of you commie pigs!
Gonzo
Posted on February 9, 2012 at 10:57amObama plays by another set of rules than the rest of us Randy.
Report Post »old white guy
Posted on February 9, 2012 at 8:47amtell them to just go away. our morallity and law is based on the ten commandments.
Report Post »bpodlesnik
Posted on February 9, 2012 at 8:46amLeave it up.
Report Post »Walkabout
Posted on February 9, 2012 at 11:57amI guess FFRF is for murder, for envy, for theft, etc, etc, …
Report Post »Wayne
Posted on February 10, 2012 at 7:07pmAMEN, if you don‘t like it than don’t look at it. the things I don’t like I stay away from. like you the DEVILS deciple.
Report Post »UBETHECHANGE
Posted on February 9, 2012 at 8:45amI think a full audit of FFR is in order. Follow the money to the DNC and Soros and expose these communists!
Report Post »65Mustang
Posted on February 9, 2012 at 8:45amIt’s good to know that atheists think they have the right to demand anything. They will bow to God on the Day of Judgment and they will not like were they will spend eternity.
Report Post »Gonzo
Posted on February 9, 2012 at 9:02amI would guess that a lot of atheists don’t like this anymore than we do. You get a militant few that put them all in a negative light. It would be nice to hear them stand up against these attacks, if they are out there.
Report Post »Hrothgar
Posted on February 9, 2012 at 10:31amGonzo: As an agnostic I find atheist groups to be completely bogus and no better than the mob. I’ve read the 10 Commandments many times and yes they are good rules to live by, should you choose to. I personally have no problem with any religious script, idol, picture or what have you being posted anywhere in my town, county, state or country. Christians should be proud to have moral codes to live by and I salute them for that.
Now I can play a devil’s advocate. From the point of the atheist I can see where they may find this “offensive” or “unconstitutional” and maybe it stems from one specific commandment in particualr, “…thou shalt have no other gods before me…” Now, from the perspective of the atheist, I can see where they’re maybe some sort of “unconstitutional” grounds. They could simply state that because this is in the 10 Commandments and being posted in a government building, does show some religious preference on behalf of the government.
Regardless, I feel that the town should have a vote to determine this and personally if I were to be a resident I would vote to keep it up. It appears to be a community fixture and promotes unity and why would any decent man want to destroy that?
Report Post »