Kentucky county removing Ten Commandments from schools

[shrewsbury]

School is about learning and how can you learn without knowing ABOUT religion?

The OT is the basis for 3 major religions that have and do effect millions upon millions of people.
I still say show me they are enforcing this as a religious law for the students to abide by, if not, it does not endorse any single religion, nor break any laws.

[xpucksx]

School is about learning and how can you learn without knowing ABOUT religion?

The OT is the basis for 3 major religions that have and do effect millions upon millions of people.
I still say show me they are enforcing this as a religious law for the students to abide by, if not, it does not endorse any single religion, nor break any laws.

the OT are old Babylonian/Summerian laws as well...pre-dating the Western religions. Judaism just overtook them as these old Civilizations crumbled and the Jews flourished. Heck, much of the OT is also rooted in basic pagan/animist rules of interaction. They have only attained a religious connotation in the past 7-1000 years...

man, people are getting there undies in a bunch about some truly insignificant things....(not you shrew...meaning many Americans with too much time on there hands...)

[Wickabee]

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.


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!


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.

No. That isn't my argument at all. I'm not stating what I said again because you cannot honestly be that slow.

[JustAlex]

No. That isn't my argument at all. I'm not stating what I said again because you cannot honestly be that slow.

Your only argument in this thread was that the 10 commandments hold more historical value than religious value.

I ADMITTED that YES, the 10 commandments have historical value....but so what?

A lot of things have historical value, that doesn't mean you overlook what they actually mean or stand for!

I've got to do this argument 3 times now because you refuse to acknowledge it.

You think that somehow a VERY Religious set of rules should be allowed into public schools (and somehow this doesn't trample all over the Establishment Clause) why exactly?

And don't say that it holds more historical value than religious value because that doesn't even make sense....how do you even determine something like that?

[JustAlex]

Please explain the non- religious meanings of all 10 . If any one has religious meaning they are all invalid in government. We call them the 10, not just 2 or 3.

Should we place verses from the Koran, Tora, Vedas, or Tipitaka in public places?

Hinduism is older then Christianity so the Vedas holds more historical value, right?

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.

Exactly.

The Founders did not want one religion to rule over all of them, they wanted neutrality when it came to government.

There are TONS of religions older than christianity and Judaism....and they have even MORE historical value.

Who cares.

If they are religious in nature they will cause a divide....and we need to avoid that.

How simple is that?

You either embrace every single religion or NONE!

And guess what, none is a lot easier than every single one.

[shrewsbury]

Who cares

religion has affected everything from middle Paleolithic (more than likely before) and on. to understand humans, society, cultures, and arts, requires the study of religion.

alex, it seems your equality is only for those you seem to think are deserving of equality, whereas; equality should be for everyone.

[JustAlex]

^NO, because we have rules....And one of those rules is that a public school (which is an extension of the government) can NOT endorse a religion over any other.

Give me ONE good reason why we should?

Why should the 10 commandments be the ones chosen, and not other set of rules from other religions?

The problem here is that christians are blatantly biased to their religion.


Think of it this way.

Pretend that instead of religion we used sports in the establishment clause.

So a school can't endorse one specific sports team over another.

However, 70% if not more of the students are Yankee fans, and the school decides to post a 1927 Yankees pennant.

They then say, oh don't worry, it's just there for "historical significance".

NO!

We agreed that you can't endorse ANY sports team, it doesn't matter if the majority like one particular team, it doesn't matter if it's not being imposed on any student.

You are showing an endorsement of one team over all other....that is NOT fair.

And it's best just to stay neutral.

How do you stay neutral....you don't endorse ANY sports team whatsoever, under no circumstances.

[shrewsbury]

can NOT endorse a religion over any other

how are they endorsing it? are they saying, hey this is the only religion? (if so which one) or hey you must follow these?

or are they pointing out that a small group of people, less than any other major religion, has had an effect on the whole world for thousands of years?
Sikhs out number Jews, but yet you know more about the Jews, and the Sikhs are partially based in Islam, which guess where it comes from?

Why do you have an issue with the Jews?

[Wickabee]

Your only argument in this thread was that the 10 commandments hold more historical value than religious value.

Wrong again, my friend. You should read what I say. My argument is that they have more historic value than your Satanic. Had you actually read, you'd know that. I've said it three times.

[habsheaven]

Jay your giving religion way too much credit for its affects on the world. Sure religion provides another perspective when learning about all the varies topics, but it isn't necessary to know about religion any more than it is necessary to learn about sex. In fact I would argue that sex has had a far longer and greater affect on the world than anything else, religion included.