Texas Senate approves bills requiring 10 Commandments in K-12 classrooms, Bible time in school

[Foxfyre]

Numerous people, in numerous threads, have said the 10 Commandments are the basis for our laws.

In a school, posting of things like this are most certainly coercive. A 4th grade child does not understand why his family believes differently than other families. They just want to fit in.

They are part of it as they are frequently taught as Christian doctrine. So basic Christian ethics in virtually all Christian disciplines do include the content of the Ten Commandments in some form. The Ten Commandments are Jewish, not Christian, but Jesus, a Jew himself, expressed them as God's law and they were quite easily incorporated into Christian doctrine as the Church formed and grew.

Islam also adopted the basics of the 10 Commandments into their doctrine with the exception of keeping the Sabbath.

The Ten Commandments are certainly not the whole of the Law in Judaism, Christianity, or Islam but they have been critical in religious theology for 3000+ years and a very large majority of us believe in the God who historically provided them to us. You don't get any more historical than that.

Can the government dictate we follow the 10 Commandments as they are written? No. And it should never have the power to do that. Can the government forbid the citizens from respecting the 10 Commandments and following them? No and it should never have the power to do that.

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

That wasn't the question nor the argument, but thanks for trying to again move the goalposts.


Sure you would. Over the years Tory, lessee: first you blew your hole about electronics but when I tried to pin you down you packed up and ran with some story about just being a radar operator/repairman in a submarine in WWII or something. Last I heard on that.

Then another time in a mathematics thread you again were blowing your hole about what a professor of math you were all the while failing to actually explain anything to the OP about what he was actually asking about until I came along and explained everything clearly and simply, then you went on to tell us what a great educator you were who then said you mainly worked in public school administration you say, the same school system that leaves our kids about 28th in the world. I've yet to ever once see you lucidly explain a thing to anyone here. You mainly just blow your hole here always about trying to put down someone else which is always a sure sign of some total loser.

Is that about it, Corporal?

You are striving to take RWinger's title as the biggest liar on this board. Fuck you and the horse you rode in on! You have nothing to offer, fucktard!

 

[Foxfyre]

Your simply incorrect. The book that will justifiably crucify your overconfident beliefs: Seidel, The Founding Myth: Why Christian Nationalism is Un-American.

Nobody is advocating Christian nationalism but most of the left seems to have a reading disability when it comes to that.

U.S. law is based on the concept of Christian ethics no matter how much a godless, anti-religious people want to pretend that it is not. U.S. law is NOT Christian doctrine however and gives power to no religious group nor can it dictate matters of speech, belief, opinion, faith to any citizen. But it is solidly based on Christian morals and ethics.

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

No one is saying they are the basis for our laws, but our laws are based on Christian ethics by Founders who embraced the Christian faith no matter how much anti-Christian people want to dispute that. And the Ten Commandments are historical and part of the human experience for at least more than 3000 years. And yes there are many historical figures and symbols of laws and law givers incorporated onto the Supreme Court building.

The Founders were wise in not allowing any faith group or other ideological group any power to exercise control over others by controlling the government and not allowing government control over the exercise of faith or ideology of any group.

Social contract that includes public prayer or posting of the Ten Commandments or any other expression of the common human condition is NOT coercive or authoritarian in any way to anybody.

Government forbidding such expression is.

Wow! You could not be any further from the truth.

I once taught middle school in a classroom with 3 Christians present. The other two were Cuban refugees. You would have no problem with them proselytizing the other students who were Jews, Muslims, and other eastern Asian religions.

 

[Foxfyre]

It is not the "twisted rationale of the left". It is the United States Constitution's 1st Amendment which does not allow establishment of a religion. I suggest educating yourself.

The twisted rationale of the left is that the government can therefore prohibit any expression of religion anywhere it wants to on public property. The Constitution does not say, imply, or intend that.

No religious group should be given power over any other citizens via power in the U.S. government or anywhere else. But the First Amendment explicitly forbids the government to prohibit the free exercise of religion or require any particular religion or belief or give special advantage to any particular religion or belief.

So in my opinion the Texas legislature errs when it mandates the Ten Commandments be posted in classrooms. But it would be absolutely correct in stating that the posting of the Ten Commandments in classrooms by those who choose to do so should not be hindered in any way.

 

[Foxfyre]

Wow! You could not be any further from the truth.

I once taught middle school in a classroom with 3 Christians present. The other two were Cuban refugees. You would have no problem with them proselytizing the other students who were Jews, Muslims, and other eastern Asian religions.

Well since you have stopped arguing with any common sense and are now using ad hominem and seen to have a reading comprehension problem, I will accept that you have no argument with any merit whatsoever, will wish you well and a pleasant afternoon and move on.

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

The twisted rationale of the left is that the government can therefore prohibit any expression of religion anywhere it wants to on public property. The Constitution does not say, imply, or intend that.

No religious group should be given power over any other citizens via power in the U.S. government or anywhere else. But the First Amendment explicitly forbids the government to prohibit the free exercise of religion or require any particular religion or belief or give special advantage to any particular religion or belief.

So in my opinion the Texas legislature errs when it mandates the Ten Commandments be posted in classrooms. But it would be absolutely correct in stating that the posting of the Ten Commandments in classrooms by those who choose to do so should not be hindered in any way.

It is your other beliefs that I have pointed out that in conflict with the 1st Amendment. Apparently you do not have a basic understanding of government involvement in religion. There should be NONE!

I say this as a Christian and retired educator. Religious discussions have no place in schools unless it is from a historical standpoint.

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

Well since you have stopped arguing with any common sense and are now using ad hominem and seen to have a reading comprehension problem, I will accept that you have no argument with any merit whatsoever, will wish you well and a pleasant afternoon and move on.

You need to learn the definition of ad hominem. You have that wrong also.

Did you ever attend school? All evidence indicates otherwise. My students would have demonstrated a better understanding of the topic than you.

What part of this do you not understand?

"The Establishment Clause prohibits the government from passing legislation to establish an official religion or preferring one religion over another. It enforces the "separation of church and state."

First Amendment

www.law.cornell.edu

 

[badger2]

Nobody is advocating Christian nationalism but most of the left seems to have a reading disability when it comes to that.

U.S. law is based on the concept of Christian ethics no matter how much a godless, anti-religious people want to pretend that it is not. U.S. law is NOT Christian doctrine however and gives power to no religious group nor can it dictate matters of speech, belief, opinion, faith to any citizen. But it is solidly based on Christian morals and ethics.

The educated will not allow any confiscations of morality by religion, and you are mistaken about the founding of America. It was not founded on Judeo-Christian principles.

 

[badger2]

You need to learn the definition of ad hominem. You have that wrong also.

Did you ever attend school? All evidence indicates otherwise. My students would have demonstrated a better understanding of the topic than you.

What part of this do you not understand?

"The Establishment Clause prohibits the government from passing legislation to establish an official religion or preferring one religion over another. It enforces the "separation of church and state."

First Amendment

www.law.cornell.edu

Also providing for freedom from religion, because there is no freedom of religion without there being freedom from religion, that is to say, separation of Church and State.

 

[Foxfyre]

It is your other beliefs that I have pointed out that in conflict with the 1st Amendment. Apparently you do not have a basic understanding of government involvement in religion. There should be NONE!

I say this as a Christian and retired educator. Religious discussions have no place in schools unless it is from a historical standpoint.

And I have not suggested religious discussions should be taking place in school at least as curriculum and I agree it should be within the historical context. I have not even hinted at anything else which is why I consider your accusations of me unacceptable.

I have also taught in the classroom, have taught Constitution to immigrants in the naturalization process, and served on a school board. So I am not at all uneducated in all this.

 

[Foxfyre]

You need to learn the definition of ad hominem. You have that wrong also.

Did you ever attend school? All evidence indicates otherwise. My students would have demonstrated a better understanding of the topic than you.

What part of this do you not understand?

"The Establishment Clause prohibits the government from passing legislation to establish an official religion or preferring one religion over another. It enforces the "separation of church and state."

First Amendment

www.law.cornell.edu

As an old debate coach I'm pretty sure I know what ad hominem is. And it definitely includes the clueless who presume to tell me what I think, what I want, what I would do, what I would choose.

 

[Foxfyre]

The educated will not allow any confiscations of morality by religion, and you are mistaken about the founding of America. It was not founded on Judeo-Christian principles.

Well the Founders who founded it say that it was. Who do I believe? Them? Or you?

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

And I have not suggested religious discussions should be taking place in school at least as curriculum and I agree it should be within the historical context. I have not even hinted at anything else which is why I consider your accusations of me unacceptable.

I have also taught in the classroom, have taught Constitution to immigrants in the naturalization process, and served on a school board. So I am not at all uneducated in all this.

All evidence is to the contrary. Did you not advocate student led prayer?

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

Well the Founders who founded it say that it was. Who do I believe? Them? Or you?

Where did you find this tidbit of information? Is it in the Constitution? No.

 

[pknopp]

All evidence is to the contrary. Did you not advocate student led prayer?

Student led prayer is allowed as long as it is not disruptive to the class. An example. Lets say a classmate is in an accident and the school is having an assembly for the student. Now a teacher can not lead a prayer but if one of the students friends wishes to stand to lead a prayer, they may.

During a football game a player gets hurt. His team mates can pray for him

 

[mak2]

Student led prayer is allowed as long as it is not disruptive to the class. An example. Lets say a classmate is in an accident and the school is having an assembly for the student. Now a teacher can not lead a prayer but if one of the students friends wishes to stand to lead a prayer, they may.

During a football game a player gets hurt. His team mates can pray for him

Ok but what if it was a Muslim student or Hindu etc? Could a High School student lead a Satanist prayer?

 

[BS Filter]

Ok but what if it was a Muslim student or Hindu etc? Could a High School student lead a Satanist prayer?

Muslims shouldn't have a problem with it since they believe Jesus was a prophet. Hindu...who cares. Not enough to worry about.

 

[toobfreak]

You are striving to take RWinger's title as the biggest liar on this board. Fuck you and the horse you rode in on! You have nothing to offer, fucktard!

Then prove me wrong, radar man! Or is that head teacher? Or is that technician extraordinaire? Or maybe mop man in the back of a Burger King, Flop-sweat. Is there a SINGLE claim you've EVER made good on or backed up, Big Shit?

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

Then prove me wrong, radar man! Or is that head teacher? Or is that technician extraordinaire? Or maybe mop man in the back of a Burger King, Flop-sweat. Is there a SINGLE claim you've EVER made good on or backed up, Big Shit?

I have you on ignore so I don't have to deal with your stupid ass. If you don't like being shown to be a moron, I suggest you do the same.