Should the Ten Commandments be posted on public buildings?

[goobergunch]

Poll question: Should the Ten Commandments be posted on public buildings?

I'm curious what DU opinion is on this topic. I'm expecting 95%-100% to answer "No."

[sujan]

1. hell no

[goobergunch]

2. I'm just wondering if anybody will say "Yes"

of course, I voted "No"

[Sushi_lover]

6. if someone voted Yes

One possibility is Yes votes are coming from rightwing stowaways.

The other possibility is they come from folks who gleefully anticipate shocked fundies when lawsuits start flying to install plaques in courthouses displaying Koran, Talmud, goth, John Lennon lyrics, pagan rites, etc.

[Garage Queen]

3. Why, sure! They should be posted in every ...

church in the country. B-)

[RobertSeattle]

4. "I need a Wedge Issue" ~ Karl Rove

[dolo amber]

5. NO!!

And again, for those just tuning in...NO!!!!

[Blue_Chill]

7. Wow 2 answered yes and neither was me, lol!

The question is moronic.

Do I want to? No.
Do I care? No.
Do I think people are actually offended by them? No.
Do I think people that hate religion like to use the courts to piss off the religious? Yes.
Do I think religious displays force your views on others? No.
Do I think the goverment should fund any such monuments? No.
Do I think that privately funded tasteful religious art should be allowed in public buildings? Yes.

If I haven't covered an question you have feel free to ask it.

[LeftCoast]

23. "Do I think people are actually offended by them?"

Er, I'm offended by the 10 commandments being placed on public buildings. Much like I'm offended at the HUGE hideous concrete cross on top of the hill I live on. I know lots of other non-christians who find such displays very offensive. Every time I see something like that I just have to wonder what the outcry would be like if MY religious symbols were posted on public buildings...

BTW, I'm Wiccan.

PS: not flaming you, just wanted to give you an FYI.

[Blue_Chill]

27. Put your art where ever you wish

Those of us that don't actively dislike other groups don't get offended by their symbols. We shouldn't cultivate the idea that it's right to be offended by having to see other groups symbols. We are better learning to get along.

BTW - Your offense seems to come more from the fact that yours aren't allowed, then from the actual symbol you are seeing. That is a different matter entirely and one that should be addressed.

[LeftCoast]

34. Actually...

I really can't stand seeing crosses everywhere. I just didn't want to be rude.

Ever since I was a little kid I was basically horrified by any crucifix I saw. I doubt I'll ever understand why you folks want an instrument of torture and death as your main symbol.

I know about "the sacrifice" and all that...still doesn't change the feeling I get when I see it.

[Walt Starr]

36. I agree with everything you listed except one

I would change one to read thusly:

Do I think people that hate atheism like to use the government funded religious displays to piss off the atheists? Yes.

[Blue_Chill]

39. I wouldn't change anything but

I should have added the one you just suggested. I agree with that. Fundies are assholes and love to piss other groups off.

[starroute]

50. So it's really about power and not religion

I'll say it one more time -- the separation of church and state has no other purpose than to protect religion. That's all it was ever about. Not only does it protect minority religions from majority religions, but it also protects majority religions from being turned into instruments of power politics by people who wouldn't know real religion if it bit them in the ass.

[goobergunch]

8. Who voted "Yes"?

Inquiring minds want to know!

And I did say "public buildings" in the poll question...this does not include churches.

[Blue_Chill]

11. Had I voted yes I wouldn't have posted here.

This thread is an ambush.

[w13rd0]

9. They can post the 10 commandments...

...when they embroider my ass with pure gold...

[redeye]

10. No...

...but you're 14% short of 95.

[demnan]

12. No

but if they manage to go through with it I propose that they be forced to post the Communist Manifesto in every church, synagoge or mosque.

[redeye]

14. Right...

...the communist manifesto has as much to do with religion as the ten commandments have to do with US law and constitution.

[Blue_Chill]

16. Sure thing

That way all us church folk can laugh at that pipe dream on are way in.

[K-W]

18. And the ten commandments arent a pipe dream?

nt

[sujan]

19. It will be

not to worry

[Blue_Chill]

21. Really? When?

Please tell me.

[sujan]

24. open your history books

and read it. Seems like we have come a long way. So I am hopeful that we will do away with it in the near future.

[Blue_Chill]

28. You are mistaking progress

with your own wishful thinking.

[sujan]

30. nope you're the one deluded

thinking that the outdated dogma will have its stand in the future. Especially in the legal process. Wishful thinking? I think not....History has so far been proving me correct.

[Tyler Durden]

13. I seem to remember the "Riz" saying something about...

....Caesar's stuff being for Caesar?

AND if they want the 10 C's in court, I want some quotes from the UPADISHADS and the TAO TE CHING, both very relavent to everyday life.

Really: does anyone NOT believe this is Right Wing Fundamentalist Evangelical Christians ( a misuse of the word "Christian" if you ask me) to wedge in their "Our way or to HELL with you" philosophy?

I'm not anti-Christian. I'm anti-ASSHOLE.

[Blue_Chill]

15. I would also like to see religious art work

from other religions on display. That way my trip to the courthouse (to fight tickets) wouldn't be so boring.

[MikeH]

17. An Emphatic No

I personally would find them offensive, since my father sometimes bordered on being emotionally and psychologically abusive, and one of the commandments says "Honor your father and mother". I think the same would be true for anybody else who might have or have had an abusive parent or parents, and who realizes it.

I am formerly a Protestant Christian, and one of the reasons for my disenchantment with Christianity is that it was not of help to me in enabling me to deal with my father those times when he was borderline abusive. Screw anybody who would want to remind me to "honor my father", in the name of a religion that I am unhappy with.

[Zardeenah]

20. Only if they give equal time to everybody...

The way it stands now, ABSOLUTELY NOT...

But if they posted the 10 commandments along with Hammurabi and readings from Greek, Egyptian, Ancient Indian, Chinese, etc...spiritual and secular laws, I think it would be an appropriate decoration for a courthouse.

The problem here is that some Christians don't recognize that even mentioning God in certain language (like the 10 commandments, or statements by Jesus) is NOT neutral. They like to say that just talking about God doesn't endorse a particular religion, but it really does, since many religions don't even have a god (Taoism, Buddhism sorta), it skews the debate. There's a certain lack of empathy here -- I can picture their reaction if there was a 5200 pound monument to the laws of the Koran in a public courthouse, but I don't really think they can.

Susan

PS: Notice I said *some* Christians. Not all are this way, by any means.

[northzax]

22. YES. hell yes

oops, strike that 'hell' from the above subject. Every public building should have the Ten Commandments written in the original HEBREW. Yaweh speaks Hebrew, didn't you know? and ancient Hebrew at that. That's the language of Jesus, Moses and the Big Fella.

and if Hebrew doesn't do it for you, I'm also willing to accept the Gospels in Aramaic. why should we trust something this important to a translation? maybe something is getting lost.


a joke:

So Brother Albert joins an ancient monastery and is assigned to the manuscript division. He will work under Brother Francis, an octogenarian monk who is a legend in manuscript copying. Albert takes a vow of silence and is only allowed one question every five years.
After the first five years, he asks Francis: "Brother Francis, have we ever made a mistake?"
Brother Francis: "No, my brother, in 1500 years we have never made a mistake."
Five more years pass. Albert asks: "But how can you know we've never made a mistake?"
Francis: "We have never made a mistake."
Five more years pass: "Are you sure we've never made a mistake?"
Francis:"Yes, and I'll prove it to you." Francis slowly gets up and goes into the archives. Five hours pass, then ten. Albert gets worried and goes looking for Francis. He finds him holding an ancient scroll and weeping. "Brother Francis, are you okay? What is wrong?"
Francis: "The scroll says CELEBRATE. Priests shall CELEBRATE with women."

[goobergunch]

29. Vaiydaber elohim et kol-hadvarim ha'eileh leymor:

Anochi adonai elohecha asher hotzeitecha meyeretz mitzrayim eivadim. Lo-yihyeh l'cha elohim acheirim al-panai.

more...Exodus Chapter 20 (that was Ex 20:1-3, the Ten Commandments are Ex 20:1-17)

[northzax]

40. exactly

but none of this romanization crap gimmie the real stuff.

[Brian Sweat]

43. If Jesus existed,

he spoke Aramaic.

[ieoeja]

49. And probably some Greek. Maybe some Latin.

He was a scholar after all living in a land where the overlords spoke Latin and the educated spoke Greek.

Of course, none of this has anything whatsoever to do with the Ten Commandments as they predate Yeshua by millenia.

[benddem]

25. People who want the 10 Commandments posted everywhere

Should photocopy them and carry them with them, put the copies in their children's lunch boxes.....and most of all READ THEM. Most who spout out about the 10 C hardly are the pillars of any society I've ever been in. O8)

[Robin Hood]

26. Only if every other religion out there is posted on the building.

Don't think freepers would go for that.

[kcwayne]

31. No way

Reasons:

1) How many people can even recite what they are? If people cannot remember them from their Sunday School teachings (after 2000 years of practice) why should the government take on the expense of reminding Christians of something they should already know.

2) Should we also post the guidelines from the gazillion mullahs who have commentary on the rules of life? I especially liked Ayatollah Khomeni's rules about never defecating with your ass pointed towards Mecca, and using 3 stones when you do it.

3) Consider the irony of posting "Thou shall not kill" on the walls of the Pentagon. For those that think Americans are very stupid, this is proof positive.

[pbeal]

32. as long as they put

a big monument of the Five Precepts of Buddhism, and the Five Pillars of Islam right next to it. These are the same people who believe in the free market after all.

[VermontDem2004]

33. I voted Yes

I am just kidding, I voted No.

[Walt Starr]

41. Why?

?

[sujan]

42. It's a duty of a good christian to do so

[Walt Starr]

47. I cannot respect anybody who would vote yes

I simply cannot. They deserve no respect, IMO. Especially if they won't even offer up an explanation.

[sujan]

53. by the way

meant that with <sarcasm on>.

[Shanty Oilish]

35. No, but...

I'm with blue chill on this. (post 7) I'm not offended by them. I spend money with In God We Trust on it. There are religious figures on friezes on public buildings. People take oaths in public courts and so forth...So what?
This issue is petty and divisive. We have bigger problems. This one will get bigger, needlessly, when someone files suit because of the motto or the friezes. People will get more riled up and more bitter. That will be the primary result and legacy of this controversy.
I miss MLK. He knew wheat from chaff.

[K-W]

37. Slippery Slope

A war is made up of small battles. If we let them take baby steps into further christianizing the government, we will wake up one day and it will be too late to turn back. Thats why we need a clear wall between church and state.

And it does offend me.

[Blue_Chill]

46. Nice spin

But this stuff has been allowed for years. There is no battle to keep it out.

The only battle being fought is to CHANGE the current status quo and push this stuff out. So thus your slippery slope argument does not apply.

[K-W]

54. Now I havent been to alot of court houses

but ive never seen the ten commandments in one, so I am going to have to say that it isnt the status quo. The fact that in some places this has been done before doesnt make it any less improper, doesn't make it any less of something that should be fought, and doesnt mean that the expansion of the practice doesnt threaten the seperation between church and state.

This isnt about status quo, this is about the constitution. This is about my right to not feel like I dont belong in this country because im not a protestant christian. This is about my right to a justice system based on our constitution and not on religious morals.

There is a very very slippery slope. These people dont just want to post the ten commandments at a court house. They want thier morals to be the law of the land. They want thier religion promoted and favored.

[Walt Starr]

55. The most hilarious thing about this decalogue crap is

Most churches do not have the decalogue displayed.

This is the ugliest form of ramming religion down the throats of those who do not want it and anybody who supports this kind of crap gets nothing from me but disrespect. They do not deserve respect.

[ieoeja]

59. I was thinking of that when reading an earlier post.

Someone said, "yes, it should be posted in every church," and it occurred to me that I don't recall ever seeing the Ten Commandments posted in any church.

[ieoeja]

58. I have to disagree.

In God We Trust first appeared on our money during the Civil War when each side tried claiming God as being on their side.

Under God was not added to the Pledge of Allegiance until 1954.

U Pluribus Unum, the National Motto since the founding of this country, was not replaced by In God We Trust until 1956.


It appears to me the battle is not to CHANGE the current status quo and push this stuff "out", but rather to push this stuff "IN". The defenders of Jefferson's "wall of separation" between Church and State did not start this process.

It isn't as if Alabama had a ten-ton monument to the Ten Commandments in the statehouse the past hundred years. One jackass decided to install it a few months back because he believes that you must be Christian in order to be a good American.

[sujan]

38. It especially offends rational thinking non christians

Having said that, the rights of the minority should be protected especially the atheists. Because atheists and gay folks are the oppressed minorities just like African Americans in yesteryears.

[Blue_Chill]

44. Oh please

1- no one is stepping on your rights by placing ART in a building, that's insane. Do you know what you are saying? Basically if no public funds can go towards anything that contains religion that meseums that recieve public funds could not display thousands of pieces of artwork that have religous themes. Your way of thinking does not PROTECT atheism it FORCES IT ON ME. Allowing donated art of all kinds to be displayed protects everyone, your way screws over the majority of the nation.

2- Atheist are not even close to the level of discrimintation faced by blacks or any other minority. Please never say that again it's incredibly insulting.

[Walt Starr]

48. I disagree with your number 2

Atheists are the only group people are actually allowed to be bigotted against, and atheists are as a group, the most maligned people in this nation.

[Blue_Chill]

66. Hmm

I thought it was illegal to discriminate based on race. homosexuals on the other hands do not have the law on their side.

[sujan]

51. let me get this straight

TC is arts for you?
Fucking ridiculous. The display of those religious tenets constitutes an endorsement of Abrahamic religion by the government period.
If an art has a religious theme, dont post it. No point arguing over that.

And not endorsing a particular religion by not displaying these religious artifacts doesn't constitute an approval of atheism. It is secularism which has a very different meaning to it.

And the second point, try to live as one and come back to me. I dont have to buy your bullshit either.

[Blue_Chill]

61. So now you define art?

Is that art? Or is Salvador Dali pushing his faith on you?

You would have the nation shun all forms of religious art from all publically funded areas simply because you dislike it. Who cares that it has historical and cultural significance. You would have us ignore all the reality that shaped America in favor of what you would accept.

And not endorsing a particular religion by not desplaying these religious artifacts doesn't constitute an approval of atheism. It is secularism which has a very different meaning to it.

Secularism is forced atheism. Anything that is funded by the public should represent the public. The majority of this nation and the world is does not believe in having a seclur society.

And the second point, try to live as one and come back to me. I dont have to buy your bullshit either.

Oh yeah where are the fireman hosing you down in the streets. Where are the police releasing their dogs on you and beating you? Where are your own segregated schools and drinnking fountains. When were you ever a slave?

You insult millions when you say Atheists are in the same boat as blacks.

[sujan]

67. huh?

Is that art? Or is Salvador Dali pushing his faith on you?

> if it were to posted in a court house, would it be? Beats me...It is not only an endorsement of christianity but even more specific, catholicism.

You would have the nation shun all forms of religious art from all publically funded areas simply because you dislike it. Who cares that it has historical and cultural significance. You would have us ignore all the reality that shaped America in favor of what you would accept.
> No worries, this idea of religious interference will have to stop. It will but with time. It shaped america how? Even the founders were repulsed by the dogmas so they had to mention it in the constitution.


Secularism is forced atheism.
> Webster defines:

Secularism: indifference to or rejection or exclusion of religion and religious considerations

Atheism: a disbelief in the existence of deity b : the doctrine that there is no deity

Huge difference.



http://www.usconstitution.net/jeffwall.html

Anything that is funded by the public should represent the public. The majority of this nation and the world is does not believe in having a seclur society.
> Majority of the public is christian too, so now they get to influence the legal process with their dogmas? that's a bullshit rhetoric.

Oh yeah where are the fireman hosing you down in the streets. Where are the police releasing their dogs on you and beating you? Where are your own segregated schools and drinnking fountains. When were you ever a slave?
> dont be foolish now. We can see the religious groups trying to supress the voices of atheists by promoting religion in the government openly. Say like you, promoting christianity in the legal process. So far they have been mildly successful. It is political lynching in process.


You insult millions when you say Atheists are in the same boat as blacks.
> whatever

[Blue_Chill]

73. response

if it were to posted in a court house, would it be? Beats me...It is not only an endorsement of christianity but even more specific, catholicism.

OK so then I was right. Art has no place in public funded areas. I notice you limit yourself to courthouse to better your argument however this entire debate is about public funding mixing with religion.

By your thought process we should throw Dali out of museums that recieve public funds.

No thanks.

No worries, this idea of religious interference will have to stop. It will but with time. If I were to go with your theme of maintaining the status quo, we would still be having slaves.

So all status quo is bad because slavery was? That's just stupid.

Secularism: indifference to or rejection or exclusion of religion and religious considerations

Atheism: a disbelief in the existence of deity b : the doctrine that there is no deity

Huge difference.

Huge? Look closely....you really think 'rejection' and 'disbelief' have a that differnt?

please....

> Majority of the public is christian too, so all the minorities should now follow the bible. that's a bullshit rhetoric.

The majority of the public is not Christian. The world is about 1/3 Christian. So your argument is flawed.

Also I am not saying the majority should dictate action, but the should not be forced to behave by minorities beliefs. I should not have to live in a society where religion is hidden because you don't like it.

dont be foolish now. We can see the religious groups trying to supress the voices of atheists by promoting religion in the government openly. So far they have been mildly successful. It is political lynching in process.

I'm still waiting for you to show me the atheist slaves, beatings, segregation, etc. Until then you argue that political lynching = real lynching, which is insulting.

[sujan]

80. really?

OK so then I was right. Art has no place in public funded areas. I notice you limit yourself to courthouse to better your argument however this entire debate is about public funding mixing with religion.
> Did I just mention court houses? I meant all of the government. Even the museums. No public money to fund your religious indulges.

By your thought process we should throw Dali out of museums that recieve public funds.
> Absolutely. What makes him so special?

No thanks.

> Thats the good christian speaking in you.

So all status quo is bad because slavery was? That's just stupid.

> Name one feature we have retained in our social life that was true say 10000 years ago.

Huge? Look closely....you really think 'rejection' and 'disbelief' have a that differnt?

please....

> well if you choose to be that disparate then I have no comment to make. I dont think you really know what you mean to say. Read the comment by T Jefferson from the link I posted to you earlier.

The majority of the public is not Christian. The world is about 1/3 Christian. So your argument is flawed.
> Majority of american public is. We're not talking world here.

Also I am not saying the majority should dictate action, but the should not be forced to behave by minorities beliefs.
I should not have to live in a society where religion is hidden because you don't like it.
> fine then it goes the other way too, minorities dont have to be forced to your beliefs. Keep your fithly religion to your churches and not in the public buildings. The constitution makes the point about the government not endorsing religion.

I'm still waiting for you to show me the atheist slaves, beatings, segregation, etc. Until then you argue that political lynching = real lynching, which is insulting.
> I can't help it if you're want to play that dumb. Of course it's not of the same intensity. But the level of hatred remains somewhat same.

For instance, here

http://www.holysmoke.org/sdhok/aa011.htm

[karlschneider]

102. I find images or statuary of a dead guy on a stick to be obscene.

People actually stand around and imitate the shape of an instrument of torture as some perverse kind of worship? That is the sickest fucking thing I can ever imagine.
:grr:

[K-W]

56. Why are you defending this?

1- Yes they are. ART? Why are you delluding yourself into thinking that this is about art. The judge who put the statue there isnt even using this defense, why are you? If he argued that it was a piece of art, thats one thing. He didnt put it up as art, and he never pretended it was art.

2- Yes, but so? It is still descrimination.

[Blue_Chill]

62. response

1- I think this judge should move it. I have already said so in other threads. He did not do this for any other reason then to anger people as is proven by the fact that he snuck it in, in the middle of the night.

2- No it is not.

[K-W]

69. Are you joking?

Maybe you shouldnt be sitting around trying to tell other people when they are and aren't descriminated against. I think thats a fairly silly thing to say.

The president of the United States has said that athiests arent citizens. That isnt good enough for you?

[Blue_Chill]

77. Not good enough for me.

Chimpy has said a lot of things about a lot of groups, many of whom are not discriminated against. Also I fail to see how that has anything to do with displays of art or forcing a TOTAL secular system on me.

I do not support having laws decided via the bible. I do not want the goverment telling me what to believe. I also don't want all religion booted out of anything that recieves public funding because you don't like it.

[K-W]

81. I really could'nt care less

if it it is good enough for you. Luckily you are not the arbiter of when people are being descriminated against.

I consider myself very lucky that I have a constitution that defends me from people like you and I hope that it continues to do so, and that is what this is all about. We should have a totally secular government. Why do you people feel the need to bring religion into government. We have a wonderful country that will let you worship freely and as you wish. Why isnt that good enough? Why do you need to get your beliefs tangled up in government at my expense?

[Blue_Chill]

87. Nice try

I consider myself very lucky that I have a constitution that defends me from people like you

From people like me? So you need to be defended against those that wish all people to share their beliefs. Please.

So sorry that I'm not as harmless as those like you that wish to impose your will on all public funding.

We should have a totally secular government. Why do you people feel the need to bring religion into government.

That's a strawman. No one is bring religion into the goverment. You can make that argument when we start stoning adulterers. Until then don't try to say art is the same as ruling via religion.

We have a wonderful country that will let you worship freely and as you wish. Why isnt that good enough?

Becuase we shouldn't have to hide our fath and public funds are everywhere. Forcing religion completely out of all public funded areas is forcing us to hide our faith.

It's forcing your beliefs on us. I want everyone to share their beleifs you want everyone to be forced to hide them and you say you need protection from me? Please.

Why do you need to get your beliefs tangled up in government at my expense?

I'm not asking you to pay artists to build religious pieces. I'm asking that you get off my ass about where we can display them because we have a right to frickin be proud of who we are same as you.

[K-W]

91. Funny that you mention straw men

because I didnt create one, but you did.

It is quite simple. Secular does not equal athiest.

"No one is bringing religion into government"
It is fairly obvious that there are alot of people trying to bring religion into governement

No one is talking about hiding your faith. You, as a citizen can exercise whatever faith you want wherever you want.

I love it when christians start acting like they are being oppressed in this country.

[Blue_Chill]

94. Nice spin

It is fairly obvious that there are alot of people trying to bring religion into governement

Art is not the same as insane groups that demand biblical laws and prayer in schools.

No one is talking about hiding your faith. You, as a citizen can exercise whatever faith you want wherever you want

Just not anywhere that gets public funding. So basically at home or in a church. Like I said hide it.


love it when christians start acting like they are being oppressed in this country

I never said we are oppressed. I do however think you want us to be.

[K-W]

99. ART?

I am fairly confused. When did anyone mention art. When was art discussed, waht does art have to do with anything? I have not mentioned art once, so I'm not sure why you are rebuttling talking about art.

"Just not anywhere that gets public funding. So basically at home or in a church. Like I said hide it."

Where are you getting this? No one in this thread, or in this debate, or anywheree has ever said that you shouldnt be able to express your views on public property. You have every right to, I didnt say a damn thing regarding this. You are creating an absolutely rediculous straw man. Please quote where I or anyone else stated that you couldnt.

"I never said we are oppressed. I do however think you want us to be."

I am equaly enamored with the paranoid fear of christians that people want to oppress them. Christians are a monstrous majority. No one wants to, and certainly no one could oppress them.

As far as your accusation towards me, I suggest you read my posts more closely. I have never said anything even slightly suggesting that christians should be oppressed. The very idea disgusts me, are you going to throw some more baseless accusations at me? I want to oppress christians? Where on earth are you getting this stuff.

[sybylla]

60. Dude - you are so wrong

The chimp's daddy got away with saying that atheists shouldn't be considered citizens of this country. Why don't you substitute "black" or "hispanic" or "women" or "jews" or "christians" in that sentence and tell me you don't think there would have been a massive uproar across this land.

The fact is that discrimination against atheists would be rampant if it showed on our faces like being black, or hispanic or a woman does.

on edit: er and another er

[Blue_Chill]

63. Still not the same

1- I am hispanic.

2- Chimp said it, but you're not a group that has actively had laws passed against you. Words can not be compared to the suffering of blacks. Had they only had their feelings hurt they wouldn' be so far behind whites in this day and age would they?

[sybylla]

74. No laws are necessary when it's implied

we aren't supposed to have a religious litmus test for office but I doubt this country will consider an atheist for president before it elects a woman, a black or a hispanic. Athiests know this. Running for a high profile office will turn it into a discussion of personal beliefs rather than allowing the contest to focus on issues. Heck, Sharpton and Moseley-Braun have had to face questions solely in relation to their color that no other candidatates have had to face. Joe Lieberman has had to face questions about his religion. Heck, Kennedy was the first Catholic elected in the first 185 years of this country because of a bias against catholics. You of all people, Blue Chill, should understand the prejudice in this country about religion.

If you wanna run for pres in this country, you better hope you're white, male and protestant or you will face a most arduous cross-examination by the white protestants of this country.

on edit: spelling

[Blue_Chill]

78. Try running for office

They said the same moronic thing in Chile WHICH IS FAR MORE RELIGIOUS THEN THE US. And we have a atheist Pres.

Run on good ideas and make sense and the people will see the right wing fundies for what they are. Not even I would care about a person faith if their goals matched mine.

[sybylla]

86. See, that's cool. This is where you and I agree

you said: Not even I would care about a person faith if their goals matched mine.

That is my sentiment exactly. And in an ideal world, it would be everyone else's too. Lucky for you it worked in Chile. As no one has tried here, we'll never know. But since you aren't an atheist, please don't tell me how badly I'm not discriminated against. Just as I won't ever tell you the discrimination you suffer as a hispanic is no big deal. It's all different, it's all relative, and it shapes your actions in the real world, whether you want to admit it or not. I'm glad we've broken down the barriers that have kept blacks, hispanics, women, jews and other minorities from public office. Now it is time to put this socially accepted bias against athiests to bed as well.

[K-W]

64. Has Shrub said that?

I know big daddy bush was very fond of railing against athiests. He didnt consider us citizens. I havent actually seen any jr quotes on the subject, though Im sure he shares his daddies sensibilities.

[Shanty Oilish]

65. I thought that was Sr. ...?

Wasn't it Bush Sr. who said that? About atheists shouldn't be considered...

[sybylla]

68. Yes it was chimp senior

I misspoke and my first edit made it more confusing. Sorry.

[ieoeja]

70. Atheist office holders?

We have at least one openly gay Representative (Frank).

We have dozens of black Representatives.


But are there any openly atheist Representatives?


I do not atheists today face the sort of discrimination that blacks did in the past. But I do believe they face greater discrimination today. Can you imagine George H. W. Bush saying "I don't believe you can be black and still be a good American" during his presidential campaign just over a decade ago? Yet he was able to say exactly that about atheists with no problem whatsoever.

Another thing is that atheists are unidentifiable walking down the street. When I am walking down the street, people don't eye me in fear the way they do a black man. But let me happen to mention that I am an atheist and frequently the other person starts screaming at me at the top of his/her lungs. It has happened many times, but it still surprises me every time because ... it ... just ... doesn't ... make ... any ... sense. Why are you screaming at me? Why are you calling me "evil" and a "devil worshipper"?

[K-W]

71. We will have

a black president, a hispanic president and a female president before we will have an athiest president.

[Blue_Chill]

75. So then if one belief is not represented they are discriminated against?

Then holy cow do we ever discriminate. Do you have any frickin idea how many are not?

Nice argument.....

Next time start by showing me how many openly atheist people ran and what the reaction was. Otherwise shhh.

[ieoeja]

84. Merely an example.

And I agree with the other response. Americans will elect a black, female or latino president before an atheist. In today's climate we probably DO have the advantage over Muslims.

I *did* give you an example of a person declared that atheists can not be good Americans, and won that election to the presidency (at least, I think it was the '88 election, I may be wrong).

In truth, I imagine there are LOTS of atheists in congress. And I wish someone would "come out of the closet". I would imagine an established Representative in a progressive part of the country would continue with a successful career.

[snooper2]

72. Now that is bullshit..

"Atheist are not even close to the level of discrimintation faced by blacks or any other minority"

Name one self described atheist or agnostic person holding public office anywhere in the country who is above the Water Works Commissioner?

[Blue_Chill]

76. Now that is spin...

Name me how many have run openly atheist campaign, where they ran, and what the reaction was. Otherwise I could use your argument to say Satanists are suffering like blacks.

[snooper2]

83. None run..

I'll give you that. But I wonder how many people "lie" about their beliefs when running for office? Do a search on "atheist office holder", nothing. Do a search on "agnostic office holder", nothing. I did a search on "agnostic running for office", nothing...

I did a search on "atheist running for office" and got this one hit, and you can see what it right here. Religous people always have this weird idea that they are "better" than people who don't believe because they have "morals". I was once asked, if I don't believe in God, where do my morals come from? It took me a second and I responded, uh, my parents?


http://nyc-atheists.org/gamow-j.html
"In a country where almost 90 percent of the population believes in some type of religion, Senyszyn said he believes that an atheist running for office would commit political "suicide" by acknowledging that belief.

He said he thinks atheists do not have enough of a presence in policy involving the interaction of church and state.

While saying Peoria is accepting of atheistic beliefs, he said that he has testified in cases in which church and state intertwined, including a case involving public prayer during a Washington Community High School football game.

He said he isn't sure how many Peorians actually are atheists, but he felt he needed to come voice support for those who do not believe in a God.

"Atheists as a whole deeply resent anything promoting religion, especially using government funds to sponsor faith-based community programs," he said.

He called the use of prayer in schools the equivalent of brainwashing and used the term "sloganeering" to refer to any religious symbolism present on public property."

[Blue_Chill]

Dupe n/t

n/t

[Blue_Chill]

90. hmmm

Neither side should resent the other. If an atheist runs on a campaign that I agree with I will vote for him/her.

Prayer in school should be allowed BEFORE or AFTER school for those that choose to attend. I don't have a problem with prayer taking place on school grounds but I do have a problem with other kids feeling left out because of it taking place in class while they are there. The kids who pray should have to go elsewhere to do their thing and not force those that disagree to get up and move.

Faith based programs are fine with me as long as they are filling a public need. Like a church that wants to feed the local homeless but has no funds to do it. Allowing them to do it is cheaper then setting up a brand new goverment program. They shuold however be forbidden from trying to convert people while on goverment money. Say all the "God bless you" you want but don't go handing out fliers and asking people to join your church.

[ieoeja]

93. Agreed 100%

In fact, Nation Of Islam has received government contracts in the past to handle situations where it was felt they would be better received than "the man".

[Blue_Chill]

95. Exactly

Further evidence that absolutes are always wrong. Not all religiously based programs are bad.

[snooper2]

96. I disagree...

You really think that will work? Give a church public funding and they will suck as much as they can and of course they will try to convert people. It's in their nature and that is not going to change. If a couple kids want to sit on the playground and pray during lunch, let them go for it. But any type of "organized" daily or any other time on school property is a big no-no. I remember in grade school I didn't even like saying the pledge because of the "under god" addition. I would replace that part with "blah blah".

[Blue_Chill]

97. See now you're forcing others to live by your rules

Kids should be free to form groups in school as long as they don't hurt anyone else. Prayer seperated from others during non school hours harms no one. In fact I always found the football team to be more of a problem then the Christians (I was an atheist in High School).

As far as no religion would not convert people, you are simply wrong. I work for a Christian Micro Charity and we provide loan programs all over the world using goverment money. None of our programs push christianity on anyone. In fact we provide money to Muslim programs in Egypt.

[snooper2]

100. ?

Could you provide some links to those organizations? And also links to the yearly audit reports that I'm sure are done?

Of course kids should be able to form groups in school. I was specifically reffering to school sponsored groups or functions.

[K-W]

85. Let us drop the black issue

The fact is that atheists are descriminated against. You can't name an openly athiest politician because there are none. It is political suicide. People feel that athiests are inherently untrustworthy because they dont have god peering over thier shoulder.

Atheists have to deal with these attitudes every day. We all know that what we are is something that most people think is wrong and that many people think is evil.

[ieoeja]

92. Beat me to it.

[ieoeja]

88. Discrimination vs Suffering

I don't believe anyone is saying that atheists suffer as much as many other minorities, especially blacks. But I still maintain, as in my earlier message, that this is due to identification. When a black person walks into the store, everybody knows he is black. When an atheist walks into a school, nobody knows unless he tells someone.

If he's smart he never would. I lost friends who had children and decided they didn't trust me around them. As an atheist I must have no morals meaning there is every likelihood that I am a sexual pervert. Actual statement from the man who was my best friend in high school.

[ieoeja]

89. And this is a stupid argument anyway.

"I'm more discriminated against than you are."

"No, I am!"


The real point, for the purposes of this thread, is that atheists DO face a LOT of discrimination and bigotry. Whether it is more or less than some other group doesn't matter.

If you discriminate against me, do I not hurt? Do I not bleed? Oh, well, no I guess I don't actually bleed.

[Shanty Oilish]

45. Intolerance in the name of tolerance

Yes, yes, you win on points, but it's starting to smell like intolerance in the name of tolerance. Let's pick our fights more carefully, these are perilous times, and I'm more worried about what's on the court than what's on the courtyard.

[jmm]

52. How about a compromise?

I'm sure the people pushing for the Ten Commandments to be posted on public buildings would never want to force their beliefs on others :eyes: so we should give other belief systems an opportunity to post something next to them.

Let's start with Anton Lavey's Satanic Statements:

1. Satan represents indulgence instead of abstinence.

2. Satan represents vital existence instead of spiritual pipe dreams.

3. Satan represents undefiled wisdom instead of hypocritical self-deceit.

4. Satan represents kindness to those who deserve it instead of love wasted on ingrates.

5. Satan represents vengeance instead of turning the other cheek.

6. Satan represents responsibility to the responsible instead of concern for psychic vampires.

7. Satan represents man as just another animal -- sometimes better, more often worse than those that walk on all fours -- who, because of his "divine spiritual and intellectual development" has become the most vicious animal of all.

8. Satan represents all of the so-called sins, as they all lead to physical, mental or emotional gratification.

9. Satan has been the best friend the Church has ever had, as he has kept it in business all these years.

[Walt Starr]

57. BRAVO!!!!

If they want one religion rammed down the throats of the people by the government, RAM ALL RELIGIONS DOWN OUR THROATS!

For my part, I want a statement about Loki on the courthouse lawn.

[Sweetpea]

79. Thou shall not commit adultery

In a public building......really makes sense.....

[varun]

82. No

No religious scriptures should be posted on any government property.

[mkregel]

98. THIS IS A DISTRACTION ISSUE!!!

Just like the "under god" fervor.

This is used to divide the nation, and distract us lefties while the right hand does all sorts of nasty things.

When something like this hits the news, read every other story BUT this one.

As for me, I'm not a fan of organized religion, but if someone wants to erect a rock by a courthouse....I've got bigger fish to fry...

[sybylla]

101. Yea

but see, this issue kept all us silly people who can't tell the difference between a serious issue and a phony one away from all those other threads you were on busily frying bigger fish.

Lucky you.