Kentucky county removing Ten Commandments from schools

[shrewsbury]

so no one is familiar with shempp v abington?

religion can be taught ABOUT in school, they are not forcing these kids to follow them.

alex, if you are so into SCOTUS rulings, you should be ok with the 10 Commandments being there

[Wickabee]

so no one is familiar with shempp v abington?

religion can be taught ABOUT in school, they are not forcing these kids to follow them.

alex, if you are so into SCOTUS rulings, you should be ok with the 10 Commandments being there

More so than the Satanic, anyway.

[JustAlex]

so no one is familiar with shempp v abington?

religion can be taught ABOUT in school, they are not forcing these kids to follow them.

alex, if you are so into SCOTUS rulings, you should be ok with the 10 Commandments being there

Goodness sake Shrew, why do you continue to say this when I've already agreed that I have no problem teaching religion in schools as long as it's an elective and away from science!

That's NOT what we're discussing here.

We're discussing about the actual 10 commandments statue or poster being put up in schools, and I've already showed proof that you CAN'T do that.

The issue has been resolved already.

The only reason you continue to hear stories about this is because schools ultimately don't care what SCOTUS or any court says, they'll put up religious banners, posters, whatever as long as no one says a damn thing.

Go see what happened to Jessica Ahlquist when she spoke up about religion in her school!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jessica_Ahlquist

She was bullied, she was threatened, she became a pariah for saying something which she was ultimately right about.

The School had no justification for having Prayer banner in it.....and the courts ruled in HER FAVOR!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ahlquist_v._Cranston

Enough shrew.....this isn't hard to do, all we (secularists) are asking is to stay NEUTRAL.

And believe it or not, YES, even I'm neutral.

If I were biased I would want atheism taught in schools in an imposing manner, but I don't want that because schools are not meant for that type of stuff.

[JustAlex]

Imagine going to a public school with atheist banners, posters, and statues in it Shrew?

Your tax dollars are paying for that school, how would you feel?

The same way us non-believers feel when we hear about these stories.

All we are asking for is neutrality.....that's fair.

But you guys continue making bogus arguments to side step the issue.

C'mon let's be fair.

I know a lot of you don't like what I say, but all of you are reasonable adults, this isn't something we should be arguing about.

It's common sense.

[shrewsbury]

no different than Zeus or Rosa Parks, they are part of history, show me an atheist that has had as much of an influence?

I guess the difference is when you see a picture of Jesus or some words from the Bible you think someone is trying to take you over, also you assume I think the same thing.
but the reality is I have no issue in bowing to Buddha (showing reverence and respect) or seeing a quote from the Koran, or the Vedas or the I Ching, I stop, read, and enjoy.

again, are the kids being forced to follow the 10 Commandments or to study them for religious purposes? If not, no law is broken, just intolerance shown.

[JustAlex]

show me an atheist that has had as much of an influence?

What does this have to do with anything?

There are many types of people that had all kinds of influence in history.

Hitler was a racist, psychopathic scumbag! He also had a ton of influence on history.

What does that tell you?

Why are you making arguments that have nothing to do with the topic?

This isn't about atheism.

It's about secularism.

And why schools need to stay that way.

If you want religion so badly at schools, that already exists.....they're called Private schools.

[JustAlex]

I guess the difference is when you see a picture of Jesus or some words from the Bible you think someone is trying to take you over, also you assume I think the same thing.

No, that's not what I think.

What I think is that if I walk into a house and they have pictures of Jesus and the bible, they probably believe in that stuff and they obviously endorse it.

Similar to that, if I walk in a school and see pictures of Jesus or bible scripture, I think the school believes in that stuff and they are endorsing it!

There is no difference!

It doesn't matter if students are being forced to believe it or not, the school can NOT endorse any religion.

That's sensible, and reasonable.

but the reality is I have no issue in bowing to Buddha (showing reverence and respect) or seeing a quote from the Koran, or the Vedas or the I Ching, I stop, read, and enjoy.

That's fine for you, but not for others.

And others should not have to deal with that in a place where it doesn't belong.

Religion belongs in Religious places.

Education belongs in educational places.

That makes sense right?

again, are the kids being forced to follow the 10 Commandments or to study them for religious purposes?

If I put a picture of Satan in a school, does that force kids to be satanists?

No, right?

But is it right to do that?

Does it make sense to have that there?

If not, no law is broken, just intolerance shown.

So, have you or have you not read anything which I have said about the Establishment Clause and SCOTUS rulings on this matter?

Plenty of laws are being broken.

And the intolerance is on the schools who want to promote one religion over all others.

[Wickabee]

C'mon let's be fair.

Irony.

But okay, you start by admitting that the Ten does in fact have historical value and therefore more non religious value than the Satanic, which only has religious value.

When you're fair...well, I actually think I have been. Most of your arguments against me were based on stuff I didn't say. I guess you figured that out and that's why you moved onto Jay.

You're just bursting with credibility...wait...*sniff sniff* that's not credibility...

[JustAlex]

But okay, you start by admitting that the Ten does in fact have historical value and therefore more non religious value than the Satanic, which only has religious value.

I do admit that the Ten commandments have historical value, but I never said they were more non-religious in value than the satanic.

Unlike the 10 commandments, the satanic commandments don't have anything in them about a deity.

When you're fair...well, I actually think I have been. Most of your arguments against me were based on stuff I didn't say. I guess you figured that out and that's why you moved onto Jay.

No you haven't been fair.

Your main argument is that the 10 commandments have "Historical value" and therefore should be allowed.

I made the argument that ANYTHING can have "historical value", such as a Nazi flag, that doesn't mean you allow it in public schools while you ignore what that object actually means.

For example, the bible itself has historical value....so what?

That doesn't mean teachers can make a history lesson from it.

Saying that X has historical value does not mean you ignore what X actually is.

In this instance, X is religious in nature (Just like SCOTUS ruled) and therefore the school is showing an endorsement of that particular religion over others.

IF and I want to emphasize this.....IF the 10 commandments did not have any rules regarding god, worshiping god, or duties to god....then one can say that even though they derive from religion, the rules don't have anything to do with a deity and apply to our secular laws, and therefore, it would be OK to post that.

Again, this is exactly how SCOTUS ruled.

The first 4 commandments are all about god.....and therefore SCOTUS said there is no reason for something so plainly religious in nature was to be allowed in a secular place like Public schools.

Here's something fun that the school can do...

Make a contest about 10 secular commandments, the best ten can be made as a poster or statue or whatever and placed in the school.

That would be fun for the whole school and you can show a REAL set of rules which don't pander to a jealous, vindictive, wrathful god!

You're just bursting with credibility...wait...*sniff sniff* that's not credibility...

My arguments are based on knowledge acquired from the Constitution and past rulings from SCOTUS.

If you, Shrew, and anyone else on here chooses to ignore that solely based on any grudges you have towards me, very well, but I will NOT stop making arguments based on reason and logic.

Regardless of your petty counterattacks.

[xpucksx]

This is the problem. Once you allow one religion in a government place, they all should get time to be fair. This is what the Founding Fathers were worried about.

actually, this is the opposite of what the Founding Fathers wanted...they wanted NO main religious affiliation, not ALL or even one...they would have been against ANY official endorsement of religion.

..and I am going to play Devil's Advocate here while we are all assuming that we know the Founding Fathers mindsets and corrcect a big wrong that seems to permeate all the discussion about our Constitution:

concernign religion, I am pretty sure that the Founding Fathers were only focusing on Freedom to adhere to whatever Christian branch you wanted....since they were fleeing from and unhappy with being told that they could only worship according to the Church of England's dogma (as well as all of the taxation without representation etc etc). I highly doubt that they were accepting of ALL religions, or they would NOT have been part pf stamping out the Natvie American religious structure that was here for eons before they, or Christianity itself, was around....

I think it is funny that we suppose that the Founding Fathers were educated about Islam, Buddhism, Paganism etc like we are. We overlay quite a few modern perspectives that just truly were not there. (This also runs over into the gun control argument as well)

The reality of the fact is that these people were Christians, who were not allowed to worship Christ in the way THEY wanted ,and therefore came over to set up a place where they could worship Christ the way they wanted. I am pretty sure that any of the Founding Fathers would have smirked at the though of allowing a Mosque, Shrine or Temple to be raised in their colonies.

Lets all get a grip on real history here people....