Should it be allowed?

[atholon]

Hey, there is an ongoing fight to remove religious things from courthouses, our constitution and the pledge of allegience. I was wondering what your thoughts on this are.

[Hellfighter]

will it count in the way you think about it.

me i say leave it be reason: my father he had it in his time and in the pass 200+ years it been in the system so why all the bull, you ask me there some jerk making money off this.

i like it to stay it Part of the American way and history of this country. all they seem to do is trash the system anyway they can get away with it.

[atholon]

I don't think it is fair that people should force the courts to remove things like the Ten Commandments because the majority of the people want it there. It is not just a religious emblem it is a historical emblem. I guess we should remove all the crosses and gravestones with the star of david on them from Arlington because people are not Jewish and that is violating their beliefs.

I think it is just morons that want special treatment. I don't think the average person gives a crap that the ten commandments are in a courthouse or that you are sworn in using a bible.

This country, the USA was founded on the belief in God, that is one thing that cannot be changed.

This is another case of the minority whinning about something that really isn't a problem. Why don't they whine about something that is a bigger issue?

[Rampage.]

meant to vote for one above it, my bad

[BADDOG]

Originally posted by atholon
I don't think it is fair that people should force the courts to remove things like the Ten Commandments because the majority of the people want it there. It is not just a religious emblem it is a historical emblem. I guess we should remove all the crosses and gravestones with the star of david on them from Arlington because people are not Jewish and that is violating their beliefs.

I think it is just morons that want special treatment. I don't think the average person gives a crap that the ten commandments are in a courthouse or that you are sworn in using a bible.

This country, the USA was founded on the belief in God, that is one thing that cannot be changed.

This is another case of the minority whinning about something that really isn't a problem. Why don't they whine about something that is a bigger issue?

I would say I agree with that bro!!!!

Warm Regards

[Lakie]

Generally speaking references to god when used in a generic sence is ok, god is a generic word...

You dont need to swear on a bible anymore i dont think, i know here in Australia wve gotton around it by having different procedures for different religions (for example the buddhist one ois quite interesting, theres chanting and candle and the whole works) or then you can take an oath without need for a bible, i believe most of america adopted something similar.

Things like the 10 commandments statue i can understand being removed, afterall there is the seperation of church and state as enshrined in the constitution by the founding farthers, infact, america was established with the seperation of church and state in mind, most of the early settlers of America were thos who were trying to excape england for fear of religious persecution because the Chirch of England is very intertwined with the state, the British Monarch is the Headof the Church of England...

You also cant allow the 10 commandments and also disallow things like statues of other "gods" or holy texts, hindus have as much right to walk into the courthouse and see Ganesh as christians do to walk in and see the 10 commandments.

There also the principle of Judicial Independance, the judiciary has to be (at least seen) to be independant, or religion as well of the legislature and executive. The judiciary gets its power from the very fact that it is independant. When people dont feel they can go to court to settle disputes for fear of religious persecution or religious inteferance it screws up the country.

The only way around it i can see is to allow all the religions to have a statue, otherwise the are equal protection (14th amendment i think) issues as well i would think.

[atholon]

Yeah but when you go to China and see a ton of Buddhist shrines and such I have a right to have a Christian statue there too. So I assume we should remove all of those too.

Like I said it is unreasonable to have a country founded on such a strong belief in God and then try to remove it completely from the government.

Honeslty when people go on about rights...I would say that at least over 60% of the United States is Christian in some form or another. The minority that is trying so hard to remove the statues and stuff because it infringes on their right to religion? Now explain to me how that is infringing on their religion? When you go to a wedding and they are jewish not christian, are you going to make them remove all the crosses form the church you go to? All the statues and such on the government land are symbols, they are no way forcing the religion upon you.

The seperation between church and state law has been so twisted by people that it can be used to argue anything concerning religion. It was originally founded to say that there would not be a single religion for the government and that a single religion would not be taught in schools or anywhere else by the government.

[Lakie]

If the government allowed satanists to put up a statue of the devil in the supreme court building, i bet it would be the cathoilic right jumping up and down about it. As long as there isnt discrimination about what can and cant be displayed with regard to religious symbology i dont personally overall have much of a problem with it, but like i said, i can understand the decision though.

But if it was "No only christain (for aruments sake) symbols allowed because christainity (for arguments sake) constitutes a majorty then id say that the USA is in a worse state than the times of racial segregation, discriination on the basis of religion is as bad if not worse than that of race.

[atholon]

It just bugs me that the minority has to whine and complain and ruin everything for the majority. For instance, if I am an employer and I choose not to hire a hispanic man because I found a more qualified white guy, the guy could turn around and sue me with no problem but if I was applying for a job and this hispanic guy was only hiring hispanic guys not white guys and I tried to file suit the court would throw it out.

You're not getting my point with the religious icons mike. If you are in a christian country you better expect there to be a christian influence. Whether it be art or just historical things.

It is just as much religious discrimination against the majority that want to have them there. Having something removed is more discrimitory than having something kept there. How hard is it to ignore the things if you don't believe in them?

It is like going to a sleazy site and then getting porn popups and getting mad about it.

[Kandi]

ok maybe its just me but would you join a club or a church with thoughts and beliefs that are against your own? no. so why would you <b>willingly</b> move to a country where they have beleifs different than your own.. i think for the most part we are all very accepting of the different cultures such as different languages, a billion different churches and many other allowances. We dont make them change their language and everything when they move to our countries but we do expect them to follow our laws which i think is more than reasonable. They would expect us to do the same if we went to their country.. These people and/or their ancestors knew what to expect when they came here and if they didnt they should have done their research.. They try so hard to come here and then when they get in they try their best to do what they want and go against what our countries are...
i have no problem with the references of god everywhere but i could see how they might. At the same time though think, would they change their culture for us or would they say heck with you and if you dont like it go home? or even say its our culture, history and beliefs too bad? most likely they wouldnt change anything for us either... i say go with the majority because that way you arent getting on everyones bad side I dont think they want the majority angry at them either.. just wouldnt be pretty

[atholon]

So are you joking or serious?

J/K

That makes sense.

[Trojan]

It's not just the Majority it's the Vast Majority. Like 89% are Christains and will fight and die to preserve what this Nation was founded on.

[BADDOG]

Originally posted by Trojan
It's not just the Majority it's the Vast Majority. Like 89% are Christains and will fight and die to preserve what this Nation was founded on.

Now that is the truth and it's a damn pity we can't say things like that in the U.K. anymore! Why? Because we bend over backwards to accomadate everyone else and to say your a christian is tantamount to being a fascist!!!!

Warm Regards

[atholon]

Interesting to see the opinions, I am glad I am not alone.

[-live-wire-]

I think it is just morons that want special treatment. I don't think the average person gives a crap that the ten commandments are in a courthouse or that you are sworn in using a bible.

I agree ...
<:{{{}}}><

[SilentTrigger]

"They shouldn't have been there in the first place"

[Lakie]

According to the CIA only 24% of americans are roman catholics.

You have to remeber the a seperated church and state is not hostile to religion. The protection is there as much as it is to stop inteferance by the church into government, but to stop inteferance by the government in the church. Madisson said

"Religion flourishes in greater purity without than with the aid of government"
and
"the number, the industry and the morality of the priesthood, and the devotion of the people have been manifestly increased by the total separation of the church and state."

The USA is a place where religious belief and diversity is greater than in most other countries in the world. In countries where an established church exists and/or state support for religion, belief is almost always lower than thos with a seperation. If the separation was anti-religion you would have to argue that religious belief has flourished in the USA more than most other countries in the world in spite of separation as opposed to due to the seperation.

The founding fathers certainly did believe in a speration of church and state, the Treaty of Tripoli, an agreement between the US and Muslim (?) leaders in Africa, which was negotiated by autority of washington himself. The actual treaty, approved by the Senate, John Adams being the president at the time states and i quote (were talking the 1790's here btw)
"the United States is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion"

The USA wasnt established as a christain nation and has been whittled away by us left wing folk, its the opposite, it was established quite deliberatley with the wall of seperation (as proposed and promoted by very religious men) and has had religious influences added to it over time.

This is shown by the national motto, which currently is "In god we trust". Believe it or not, it actually hasnt always been this, the original motto, if memory serves correctly was "E Pluribus Unum" (Many becomes one or something like that) which was the work of Jefferson, Addams and Franklin.

Similarly, the pledge of alligence:


I pledge allegiance to the Flag
of the United States of America,
and to the Republic for which it stands:
one Nation under God, indivisible,
With Liberty and Justice for all.


the orginal pledge was

I pledge allegiance to my Flag,
and to the Republic for which it stands:
one Nation indivisible,
With Liberty and Justice for all.

It wasnt till the mid 50's that any referecne to god was insteretd into these two passages,a nd this was dont because at the time there was a great fear of communists, people were killed if they were thought to be communists, denied jobs, bank loans and a whole variety of things.....

And to finish off the post for now, i also argue that if you are a true catholic, then you should support the wall of seperation, not only due to the fact religion seemingly florishes with a wall of seperation, but read the following.

But when Gallio was proconsul of Achaia, the Jews made a united attack on Paul and brought him before the tribunal. They said, "This man is persuading people to worship God in ways that are contrary to the law." Just as Paul was about to speak, Gallio said to the Jews, "If it were a matter of crime or serious villainy, I would be justified in accepting the complaint of you Jews; but since it is a matter of questions about words and names and your own law, see to it yourselves; I do not wish to be a judge of these matters." And he dismissed them from the tribunal. Then all of them seized Sosthenes, the official of the synagogue, and beat him in front of the tribunal. But Gallio paid no attention to any of these things. (Acts 18:12-17)


This is interesting, i actually have to give a speach on this topic to a constitutional convention later in the year, so im killing two birds with one stone and bouncing arguments of the opposition...

[JonM]

i think that it needs to be removed at some degree, and some of it left. Here's what ticked me off. Now i may not believe in drinking beer, or having stores open on sundays... but people should never force others to live that way. One community wanted to not allow beer to be sold, or stores to be open on sunday. That is soooo forceful, and is unconstitutional. ....

[atholon]

LOL Mike I am never going to convince you but honestly my other posts say it all.

Seperation of church and state is something that is easily molded to whatever you want it to be.

They were saying that the government would not be interfering with any churches but they did not say that there would be no refrence to it in the government. Those are different things.

Honestly I think that they will be removed if nothing is done about it. It bugs me that these people who claim to have religious views forced upon them by the government are forcing our government to change to their views so they are doing the same thing!

[Jeff]

All i know is that this is a touchy subject and will most likely always be one.