Louisiana Governor knows this will increase his popularity

[konradv]

4 actually. Sabbath is also a religious concept. It's funny how all of them only ever seem to list the last six when discussing the 10 commandments.

Been a while!

#THETRINITYISPAGAN

 

[forkup]

The Ten Commandments in a classroom does not establish a religion. Parts of religion certainly must be taught. Sad for you. Like, "thou shall not kill."

The origin of that law can be taught and must be taught to teach respect for a law.

So you mean this than?HAMMURABI’S CODE OF LAWS.

 

[forkup]

Been a while!

#THETRINITYISPAGAN

Hey, for me too. The point is though that we both have a more accurate view of the 10 commandments than most "religious" people. Something I've read is usually the case.

 

[forkup]

So what, teaching is not establishing.

I suggest you reread that sentence, and really check how much sense it makes.

 

[elektra]

Then what you know is wrong. Hammurabi outdates Moses considerably and ai very much doubt you would want THOSE laws implemented in any case.

This is you get wrong; nobody is trying to implement into law the commandments that are not already law. Hammurabi should also be taught. I never heard of the man until you mentioned him. Why would we not at the least, teach that he also wrote laws.

This is the crazy of your position. Because a man was religious, he must be banned. We have seen many governments ban many things, many intellectual things. Those governments have all been tyrannical and any that still exist need to be forced to reform.

 

[elektra]

So you mean this than?HAMMURABI’S CODE OF LAWS.

Hammurabi, I have no problem with Hammurabi being taught. Of course, this would not be taught as our founding because it was the Ten Commandments we were founded on.

 

[elektra]

Hammurabi predates Moses by many centuries.

#HISTORYCHALLENGED

So, the United States was not founded on Hammurabi's codes.

 

[forkup]

This is you get wrong; nobody is trying to implement into law the commandments that are not already law. Hammurabi should also be taught. I never heard of the man until you mentioned him. Why would we not at the least, teach that he also wrote laws.

This is the crazy of your position. Because a man was religious, he must be banned. We have seen many governments ban many things, many intellectual things. Those governments have all been tyrannical and any that still exist need to be forced to reform.

No because a man wants to argue that HIS God must be followed should ot be banned, a person can be as religious as he wants. The moment THAT argument has to be made by law, it should be banned

Hammurabi, I have no problem with Hammurabi being taught. Of course, this would not be taught as our founding because it was the Ten Commandments we were founded on.

Lol, I tell you what. I gave you the first four of the 10 commandments. Point me to where any of its principles are mentioned anywhere in the constitution.

This is your problem I think. You know very little about history and simply assume things.

The Constitution had many things influence it. Religion not so much. That's why they specifically made religion and government 2 separate things, UNLIKE what was the common practice at the time.

 

[elektra]

I suggest you reread that sentence, and really check how much sense it makes.

Teaching in no way, establishes that you must do something. Certainly, you can teach a dog tricks. We are teaching students.

Our founding came from somewhere. The Ten Commandments is just one part. Another part is Martin Luther. Should Martin Luther not be taught because of the 1st Amendment.

 

[forkup]

No because a man wants to argue that HIS God must be followed should it be banned, a person can be as religious as he wants. The moment THAT argument has to be made by law, it should be banned
Lol, I tell you what. I gave you the first four of the 10 commandments. Point me to where any of its principles are mentioned anywhere in the constitution. In fact of the 10. Only 3 as far.as I can see are actually no-no's. Perjury, murder, theft. So how can you claim something's based on something else when it only addresses 3 of 10 points?

This is your problem I think. You know very little about history and simply assume things.

The Constitution had many things influence it. Religion not so much. That's why they specifically made religion and government 2 separate things, UNLIKE what was the common practice at the time.

 

[forkup]

Teaching in no way, establishes that you must do something. Certainly, you can teach a dog tricks. We are teaching students.

Our founding came from somewhere. The Ten Commandments is just one part. Another part is Martin Luther. Should Martin Luther not be taught because of the 1st Amendment.

If you teach a dog a "trick" that's what that dog will do.

You are claiming that the purpose of teaching is NOT trying to establish something. I don't think that's a logical thing to claim.

 

[elektra]

No because a man wants to argue that HIS God must be followed should ot be banned, a person can be as religious as he wants. The moment THAT argument has to be made by law, it should be banned
Lol, I tell you what. I gave you the first four of the 10 commandments. Point me to where any of its principles are mentioned anywhere in the constitution.

Your point has nothing to do with if the 1st Amendment states all aspects of religion must be banned.

The Ten Commandments are mentioned by our founding fathers if you read what they wrote and spoke. The 1st Amendment was well thought out and discussed.

Where does the rule of law, that principle of the Ten Commandments present itself in the Constitution. That is your question. The Ten Commandments was the rule of law, as is the Constitution.

Our founding, our founding fathers' beliefs, is what is being destroyed. Our founding came from brilliant men. There are no greater group of men that formed a government. The Ten Commandments is part of what those brilliant men used as the founding of our government.

 

[WinterBorn]

There is no command for anybody to become Christian. There’s no way around this argument.

No one is being forced to do anything.

If There is a New York Yankees sign in a school Nobody is forced to become a Yankees fan. When a teacher has a New York Yankees logo saying “the Yankees are number one” nobody is forced to become a Yankees fan in that class.

In addition to that, I do believe the majority religion and culture of any country should be respected by all people living in that country. Whether it is Islam in Saudi Arabia or Christianity in the USA. Or Buddhism in Cambodia.

I will disagree with you on the last line.

I am not worried about majority religion. The religions and culture of a people should be respected by all living in that country.

 

[elektra]

If you teach a dog a "trick" that's what that dog will do.

You are claiming that the purpose of teaching is NOT trying to establish something. I don't think that's a logical thing to claim.

I did no such thing, I stated teaching a dog a trick is not what we are doing, we are teaching students. You could not figure that out? I see that I will have to word things in very simple terms and avoid anologies.

You have not made your point, that teaching something establishes a religion

 

[elektra]

I am not worried about majority religion. The religions and culture of a people should be respected by all living in that country.

What about Sharia law in the United States? Or that a Woman does not choose their husband?

 

[forkup]

Your point has nothing to do with if the 1st Amendment states all aspects of religion must be banned.

I never said all aspects of religion should be banned, neither does the first amendment. That's simply a strawman. The argument in the first amendment is that the government has no role in the establishment of religion. This includes teaching religion in a public school.

Where does the rule of law, that principle of the Ten Commandments present itself in the Constitution. That is your question. The Ten Commandments was the rule of law, as is the Constitution.

Nowhere in the Constitution does it say you HAVE to worship God. In fact, the opposite is true. Hence the first amendment
Nowhere in the Constitution does it say you can't worship an idol. Hence the first amendment.
Nowhere in the Constitution does it say you can't swear. Hence the first amendment.
Nowhere in the Constitution does it say you can't work on a Sunday. Hence the first amendment.
Nowhere in the Constitution does it say you have to respect your parents. Hence the first amendment
Congratulations, murder is mentioned as a crime.
Nowhere in the Constitution does it say you can't commit adultery. Lucky Trump.
Congratulations, stealing is against the law. You are now 2 for 8.
Congratulations, perjury is a crime. That's 3 for 9
Nowhere in the Constitution does it say you can't be envious of your neighbor. In fact, outdoing your neighbor is what Capitalism is all about.

3 of the 10 Commandments are applicable in law. While 5 of the 10 are EXPLICITELY contradicted within the Constitution. But those "Great men" based it on it?

 

[forkup]

I did no such thing, I stated teaching a dog a trick is not what we are doing, we are teaching students. You could not figure that out? I see that I will have to word things in very simple terms and avoid anologies.

You have not made your point, that teaching something establishes a religion

Teaching a religion IS establishing a religion. IT'S THE WHOLE PURPOSE of the thing. You simply think that because not everybody will accept that purpose, the fact that it IS the purpose is not relevant. It is. That's why I was able to link 12 separate court discissions affirming that fact. All the way up to the Supreme Court.

 

[elektra]

Teaching a religion IS establishing a religion. IT'S THE WHOLE PURPOSE of the thing. You simply think that because not everybody will accept that purpose, the fact that it IS the purpose is not relevant. It is. That's why I was able to link 12 separate court discissions affirming that fact. All the way up to the Supreme Court.

Teaching that there are religions is not establishing a religion.
Are those 12 links in this thread, I have not seen them yet. I might look at them. I have pointed out the Dred Scott decision as an example of how all the courts were wrong in the past. A decision by courts does not always mean that decision was right.

 

[forkup]

Teaching that there are religions is not establishing a religion.
Are those 12 links in this thread, I have not seen them yet. I might look at them. I have pointed out the Dred Scott decision as an example of how all the courts were wrong in the past. A decision by courts does not always mean that decision was right.

Post 322. One even dealt with this particular thing.

{{meta.fullTitle}} This is specific to the ten commandments

 

[TheProgressivePatriot]

how terrible, people getting rich destroying our principles, attacking members of our courts
the sad fact is, these fools think the 1st amendment abolishes, bans, the mention of god, jesus, or religion

No one wants to destroy you "principles" We just want to live by our own beliefs, and leave you to yours. I will add that it takes a special kind of stupid to think that we believe that "the 1st amendment abolishes, bans, the mention of god, jesus, or religion" That is just dishonest , hyperbolic bovine excrement