mnealtx 0
Recommended Posts
mccurley 1
Not an American and also not involved in religion.
But what is wrong with a display of, or a belief in following things like the ten commandments?
What is wrong with Thou shall not kill etc?
I think you can run your country seperate from your diverse group of religions and still honour the basic underlying rightness of most religions.
Don't kill, dont steal, don't rape, etc all good religious doctrines which one can follow and be a good person for with out going to church every sunday, or synagogue, or mosque, or what ever.
Your fore fathers may have quite correctly feared the possibilty of religious persicution etc.. That didn't mean they didn't follow church doctrine in thier day to day lives.
But what is wrong with a display of, or a belief in following things like the ten commandments?
What is wrong with Thou shall not kill etc?
I think you can run your country seperate from your diverse group of religions and still honour the basic underlying rightness of most religions.
Don't kill, dont steal, don't rape, etc all good religious doctrines which one can follow and be a good person for with out going to church every sunday, or synagogue, or mosque, or what ever.
Your fore fathers may have quite correctly feared the possibilty of religious persicution etc.. That didn't mean they didn't follow church doctrine in thier day to day lives.
Watch my video Fat Women
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eRWkEky8GoI
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eRWkEky8GoI
WrongWay 0
QuoteQuoteIt would be if GWB was allowed to change the constitution without others consent.
And since he's not, what's your worry?
Good point!
Wrong Way
D #27371 Mal Manera Rodriguez Cajun Chicken Ø Hellfish #451
The wiser wolf prevails.
QuoteNot an American and also not involved in religion.
But what is wrong with a display of, or a belief in following things like the ten commandments?
What is wrong with Thou shall not kill etc?
I think you can run your country seperate from your diverse group of religions and still honour the basic underlying rightness of most religions.
Don't kill, dont steal, don't rape, etc all good religious doctrines which one can follow and be a good person for with out going to church every sunday, or synagogue, or mosque, or what ever.
Your fore fathers may have quite correctly feared the possibilty of religious persicution etc.. That didn't mean they didn't follow church doctrine in thier day to day lives.
Nothing's wrong with the final 6 of them (or 7, depending on which version you use).
I think some people have a problem with Commandments 1 - 3 (or 4, depending on which version). If a Hindu in the USA wishes to make a golden calf, worship many gods, and not keep the Sabbath, why shouldn't she? If that Hindu enters a government establishment should she have to see a document posted telling her that she is sinning by pursuing her own religion? That seems to me to be a clear violation of the Bill of Rights.
I for sure don't keep the Sabbath. I bet a lot of skydivers don't keep the Sabbath.
The Catholic, Protestant and Jewish versions are slightly different, and the Dueteronomy version is not identical with the Exodus version.
tmontana 0
There is a big thing in being told a bunch of religious gibberish in a public building.
Yes most people can agree on that but that covers only 2 commandments that i see.
George Carlin has spelled it out much better than i ever could http://www.geocities.com/bobmelzer/gc10cx.html
Quote
Don't kill, dont steal, don't rape, etc all good religious doctrines which one can follow and be a good person for with out going to church every sunday, or synagogue, or mosque, or what eve
Yes most people can agree on that but that covers only 2 commandments that i see.
George Carlin has spelled it out much better than i ever could http://www.geocities.com/bobmelzer/gc10cx.html
___________________________________________
"They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." -Benjamin Franklin
"They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." -Benjamin Franklin
winsor 236
QuoteQuoteI through V you probably learned as "This little piggy..", and VI through X are on the other foot, when extracted.
That's a personal attack. I've banned you from Speaker's Corner.
Actually, if you read the exchange carefully you will note there was no attack involved at any level.
The response was facetious, but made direct reference to the question posed. Ask a semanticist if you think otherwise.
A tongue-in-cheek answer - and that is what it was - is hardly a personal attack.
Blue skies,
Winsor
QuoteQuoteI through V you probably learned as "This little piggy..", and VI through X are on the other foot, when extracted.
That's a personal attack. I've banned you from Speaker's Corner.
Just out of curiousity (so I can avoid similar shunning), how do you figure? Ron asked what the roman numerals I through X might represent other than the 10 commandments. Kallend's response could either be construed as "toes" or "the numbers 1-10", neither of which come across as an attack on Ron or anyone else.
Blues,
Dave
"I AM A PROFESSIONAL EXTREME ATHLETE!"
(drink Mountain Dew)
(drink Mountain Dew)
jcd11235 0
For what it's worth, I agree. I did not see a personal attack, and really don't understand how that conclusion was reached.
Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials!
Quote
But what is wrong with a display of, or a belief in following things like the ten commandments?
It depends upon the context. In the misleading example that started this thread, nothing's wrong with it. The artist commissioned to do the work included historical lawmakers from several religions and cultures. Moses was but one of them. Also included were Hammurabi, Mohamad, and Confucious to name a few.
The only commandments actually written out (in Hebrew btw), were chosen because they were not unique to Christianity ie: thou shalt not kill/steal.
So the point that the original poster was trying to make is not supported by the facts in context.
-Josh
If you have time to panic, you have time to do something more productive. -Me*
*Ron has accused me of plagiarizing this quote. He attributes it to Douglas Adams.
*Ron has accused me of plagiarizing this quote. He attributes it to Douglas Adams.
Quote
DID YOU KNOW?
James Madison, the fourth president, known as "The Father of Our Constitution" made the following statement:
"We have staked the whole of all our political institutions upon the capacity of mankind for self-government, upon the capacity of each and all of us to govern ourselves, to control ourselves, to sustain ourselves according to the Ten Commandments of God."
Most of that e-mail was simply misleading because it lacked context. This one is a flat out lie according to Snopes:
Actually, this statement appears nowhere in the writings or recorded utterances of James Madison and is completely contradictory to his character as a strong proponent of the separation of church and state.
QuoteAnd of course this proves, once again, there was absolutely NO religious undertones when the country was founded. No, that couldn't have been.[/sarcasm]
No one's claiming that.
-Josh
If you have time to panic, you have time to do something more productive. -Me*
*Ron has accused me of plagiarizing this quote. He attributes it to Douglas Adams.
*Ron has accused me of plagiarizing this quote. He attributes it to Douglas Adams.
QuoteQuoteQuoteI through V you probably learned as "This little piggy..", and VI through X are on the other foot, when extracted.
That's a personal attack. I've banned you from Speaker's Corner.
Just out of curiousity (so I can avoid similar shunning), how do you figure? Ron asked what the roman numerals I through X might represent other than the 10 commandments. Kallend's response could either be construed as "toes" or "the numbers 1-10", neither of which come across as an attack on Ron or anyone else.
Blues,
Dave
Is there a response to this? I'm sure we'd all like to know what the new rules are.
Winsor, you're so smart! Will you take Kallend's place? 
I miss his humor here!
I miss his humor here!There's a thin line between Saturday night and Sunday morning
QuoteOutsorcing - yes - Immigration - well - sort of.
Outsorcing definateley. the people work for as little as $1 US per day! Even slaves were compensated with more.
What is the cost of living in said area? Is it possible that $1.00 per day is decent pay? Probably not but on the other hand someone living in many parts of the world can get by quite nicely on a whole lot less than US minimum wage.
"Truth is tough. It will not break, like a bubble, at a touch; nay, you may kick it about all day like a football, and it will be round and full at evening."
-- Oliver Wendell Holmes
dorbie 0
QuoteOutsorcing - yes - Immigration - well - sort of.
Outsorcing definateley. the people work for as little as $1 US per day! Even slaves were compensated with more.
How do you confront this kind of ignorance, it's so indefensible that it just leaves you perplexed.
People hired for a buck can always quit and do something else, or nothing at all, it has nothing to do with slavery. In some parts of the world a buck is a decent wage, that's *why* Americans lose their job to them or more realistically someone else from a slightly better off region loses their job to them.
The alternative is not to pay them more (the job would go elsewhere for better skill/infrasturcture) The alternative is to take their job away making it impossible for them to compete even if they want the job. Taking their job away to appease some confused American liberal wouldn't be something they'd appreciate. So, you're not doing them a favor by advocating this, the result would be abject poverty for the people you pretend to support.
skydyvr 0
QuoteQuoteOutsorcing - yes - Immigration - well - sort of.
Outsorcing definateley. the people work for as little as $1 US per day! Even slaves were compensated with more.
How do you confront this kind of ignorance, it's so indefensible that it just leaves you perplexed.
Read up on the concept of "sweatshops", and perhaps you won't be so perplexed.
That third worlder's buck-a-day wage comes in part due to the lack of workplace safety, extremely long hours, no benefits, no child labor laws, and just overall horrible on-the-job treatment in many places.
. . =(_8^(1)
And since he's not, what's your worry?
I love you, Shannon and Jim.
POPS 9708 , SCR 14706
Share this post
Link to post
Share on other sites