Here we go again...

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

Red Dawn

Elite Member
Jun 4, 2001
57,529
3
0
Originally posted by: fluorescenthat
I think the judge should mandate a prayer before every session and hold anyone who doesn't participate in contempt of court.
Why?
 

Proletariat

Diamond Member
Dec 9, 2004
5,614
0
0
So can I wear a shirt mocking monotheism to work? Because to a Hindu or Buddhist that is pretty much what the 10 commandments does to their beliefs
 

glenn1

Lifer
Sep 6, 2000
25,383
1,013
126
The commandments were described as being big enough to read by anyone near the judge.

The description from the article isn't all that helpful. How close would someone have to be to see this? Five inches? Five feet? Fifty feet? That's somewhat important IMHO because it goes to motive. Someone wearing a small lapel pin depicting the Ten Commandments tablets on it that's not really visible by courtroom participants is one matter, if he's wearing a sandwich board with letters four inches high that's another thing altogether. One is a harmless gesture which no one would even notice in the court, the other is something which would be impossible not to intimidate with.
 

Harvey

Administrator<br>Elite Member
Oct 9, 1999
35,057
67
91
Originally posted by: fluorescenthat
I think the judge should mandate a prayer before every session and hold anyone who doesn't participate in contempt of court.
I think you should take some time to read the U.S. Constitution. Artifacts inferring any preference for the dictates of a specific religion have absolutely no place in the civil laws.

I have no fear of the ten commandments, but I don't want anyone else trying to enforce their religioius views on me.

If you think about it, the ten commandments are a bunch of rules intended to keep a small microcosm of wandering Jews from self descructing while running across the desert for years, and most of then are based on the theory of avoiding BAD VIBES.

Don't kill. Don't steal. Don't hit on your friend's SO. Why? Easy -- It causes BAD VIBES in the society.

Honor your father and mother. Why? They took care of you when you were too young to do it for yourself. Now that they're older, it's your turn to return the favor. Anything else causes BAD VIBES.

Honor the sabbath. Why? Without rest, human beings burn out and get mean. In other words, it causes (yep, you guessed it) BAD VIBES. For convenience, we'll all do it on the same day.

The same is true for all but one of the commandments, the first. When your society is so small and so busy taking care of merely supporting life, and you don't have enough manpower for a police. So, when the question arises, why we should obey these laws, the answer is GOD SAID SO! and all the little sheep people say Oh! and comply without question. :Q

The good news is, for the most part, the underlying rules are just common sense. The bad news is, too many idiots think some kind of deity is necessary for it to be so. The truth is, it isn't. The truth is, society is better off, and certainly more enjoyable, when people don't act like assholes and cause bad vibes. No deity required.
 

her209

No Lifer
Oct 11, 2000
56,336
11
0
Seriously, how many of the 10 Commandments are actual laws? I'm sure its not all 10
 

Harvey

Administrator<br>Elite Member
Oct 9, 1999
35,057
67
91
Originally posted by: her209
Seriously, how many of the 10 Commandments are actual laws? I'm sure its not all 10
The first sure isn't.
 

KidViciou$

Diamond Member
Oct 9, 1999
4,998
0
0
Originally posted by: fluorescenthat
Originally posted by: KidViciou$
Originally posted by: nick1985
Originally posted by: SuperTool
Another rightwing judicial activist.

and i assume that if this was a left wing judicial activist, you would be complaining still right?


ABSOLOUTELY i would! it's nto a question abotu right-wing or left-wing

he is crossing some very dangerous waters, i don't mind if he has a cross on a necklace that he keeps in his shirt while judicating, but he can't have the commandments on his robe during a trial. he could even wear it under his robes, but he still has to maintain the law of the land, and not his personal beliefs

How nice of you to allow the judge to wear his cross so long as he hides it. Don't ask don't tell policy towards Christianity in civilian life now eh? His robes he can wear what he wants on them end of story. If seeing the ten commandments makes you afraid that is only natural fear of God built into every one of us. Read them and follow them and we'd all be alot better off. By the way our legal system was founded on the ten commandments. Murder is illegal because it is one of the ten commandments. So is adultery, stealing, bearing false witness. I think the judge should mandate a prayer before every session and hold anyone who doesn't participate in contempt of court.

i don't have to dignify a response to this racist piece of $hit
 

DealMonkey

Lifer
Nov 25, 2001
13,136
1
0
Welcome to Christian Court with Judge Bible Thumper. He's no longer upholding the laws of the United States of America, rather he's upholding God's law. Which we all know, trumps U.S. law. Right? Right? Oh yeah, it's just like Islamic Law, but less stonings and hand choppings. Or is it? Crap, it's getting so I can't tell the difference anymore between Taliban-held Kabul City and Alabama anymore...
 

halik

Lifer
Oct 10, 2000
25,696
1
0
ACLU will be on this like sh!t on velcro. It don't think it's any more acceptable than me wearing political shirt or something in a business setting - he can have it on his car or wheverever he wants to, but its got no place in the courtroom.
 

KidViciou$

Diamond Member
Oct 9, 1999
4,998
0
0
like i said though, if the judge had a pendant of the cross, that is acceptable so long as it's under his robes because it's a personal item of his. it's the same as if the judge had a cross tattoo on him. this ten commandments robe however is inappropriate
 

halik

Lifer
Oct 10, 2000
25,696
1
0
Originally posted by: fluorescenthat
Originally posted by: KidViciou$
Originally posted by: nick1985
Originally posted by: SuperTool
Another rightwing judicial activist.

and i assume that if this was a left wing judicial activist, you would be complaining still right?


ABSOLOUTELY i would! it's nto a question abotu right-wing or left-wing

he is crossing some very dangerous waters, i don't mind if he has a cross on a necklace that he keeps in his shirt while judicating, but he can't have the commandments on his robe during a trial. he could even wear it under his robes, but he still has to maintain the law of the land, and not his personal beliefs

How nice of you to allow the judge to wear his cross so long as he hides it. Don't ask don't tell policy towards Christianity in civilian life now eh? His robes he can wear what he wants on them end of story. If seeing the ten commandments makes you afraid that is only natural fear of God built into every one of us. Read them and follow them and we'd all be alot better off. By the way our legal system was founded on the ten commandments. Murder is illegal because it is one of the ten commandments. So is adultery, stealing, bearing false witness. I think the judge should mandate a prayer before every session and hold anyone who doesn't participate in contempt of court.

you really scare me

however just to point out the fallacies in your arugment:

adultery is not illegal, using god name in vain is legal, not honoring your parents is legal, theres no mention of sabath/sunday service etc. I guess our legal system isn't really based on that, but rather on the idea that actions that cause injury to others are wrong.

as far as mandating prayer, i think you'd be more comfortable in theocratic society than in the US. Feel free to explore that idea

 

Riprorin

Banned
Apr 25, 2000
9,634
0
0
"The fundamental basis of this nation's law was given to Moses on the Mount. The fundamental basis of our Bill of Rights comes from the teaching we get from Exodus and St. Matthew, from Isaiah and St. Paul. I don't think we emphasize that enough these days. If we don't have the proper fundamental moral background, we will finally end up with a totalitarian government which does not believe in the right for anybody except the state." - Democratic President Harry S. Truman
 

halik

Lifer
Oct 10, 2000
25,696
1
0
Originally posted by: Riprorin
"The fundamental basis of this nation's law was given to Moses on the Mount. The fundamental basis of our Bill of Rights comes from the teaching we get from Exodus and St. Matthew, from Isaiah and St. Paul. I don't think we emphasize that enough these days. If we don't have the proper fundamental moral background, we will finally end up with a totalitarian government which does not believe in the right for anybody except the state." - Democratic President Harry S. Truman


quoting a president from highly polarized era (mccarthyism, fighting godless communism etc '44-'53) hardly proves your point. Only about 3 of the commandments directly apply to our legal system.

I suppose the moral dilemmas that these religious text depict would be the fundametals of the legislature, however those are not exclusive to christianity or the texts on hand.
 

KidViciou$

Diamond Member
Oct 9, 1999
4,998
0
0
Originally posted by: Riprorin
"The fundamental basis of this nation's law was given to Moses on the Mount. The fundamental basis of our Bill of Rights comes from the teaching we get from Exodus and St. Matthew, from Isaiah and St. Paul. I don't think we emphasize that enough these days. If we don't have the proper fundamental moral background, we will finally end up with a totalitarian government which does not believe in the right for anybody except the state." - Democratic President Harry S. Truman

truman's quote (which you have used many times), is just a slippery slope fallacy rip, among other fallacies
 

her209

No Lifer
Oct 11, 2000
56,336
11
0
September 12, 1960, address to the Greater Houston Ministerial Association
John F. Kennedy
While the so-called religious issue is necessarily and properly the chief topic here tonight, I want to emphasize from the outset that we have far more critical issues to face in the 1960 election; the spread of Communist influence, until it now festers 90 miles off the coast of Florida--the humiliating treatment of our President and Vice President by those who no longer respect our power--the hungry children I saw in West Virginia, the old people who cannot pay their doctor bills, the families forced to give up their farms--an America with too many slums, with too few schools, and too late to the moon and outer space.

These are the real issues which should decide this campaign. And they are not religious issues--for war and hunger and ignorance and despair know no religious barriers.

But because I am a Catholic, and no Catholic has ever been elected President, the real issues in this campaign have been obscured--perhaps deliberately, in some quarters less responsible than this. So it is apparently necessary for me to state once again--not what kind of church I believe in, for that should be important only to me--but what kind of America I believe in.

I believe in an America where the separation of church and state is absolute--where no Catholic prelate would tell the President (should he be Catholic) how to act, and no Protestant minister would tell his parishioners for whom to vote--where no church or church school is granted any public funds or political preference--and where no man is denied public office merely because his religion differs from the President who might appoint him or the people who might elect him.

I believe in an America that is officially neither Catholic, Protestant nor Jewish--where no public official either requests or accepts instructions on public policy from the Pope, the National Council of Churches or any other ecclesiastical source--where no religious body seeks to impose its will directly or indirectly upon the general populace or the public acts of its officials--and where religious liberty is so indivisible that an act against one church is treated as an act against all.

For while this year it may be a Catholic against whom the finger of suspicion is pointed, in other years it has been, and may someday be again, a Jew--or a Quaker--or a Unitarian--or a Baptist. It was Virginia's harassment of Baptist preachers, for example, that helped lead to Jefferson's statute of religious freedom. Today I may be the victim--but tomorrow it may be you--until the whole fabric of our harmonious society is ripped at a time of great national peril.

Finally, I believe in an America where religious intolerance will someday end--where all men and all churches are treated as equal--where every man has the same right to attend or not attend the church of his choice--where there is no Catholic vote, no anti-Catholic vote, no bloc voting of any kind--and where Catholics, Protestants and Jews, at both the lay and pastoral level, will refrain from those attitudes of disdain and division which have so often marred their works in the past, and promote instead the American ideal of brotherhood.

That is the kind of America in which I believe. And it represents the kind of Presidency in which I believe--a great office that must neither be humbled by making it the instrument of any one religious group nor tarnished by arbitrarily withholding its occupancy from the members of any one religious group. I believe in a President whose religious views are his own private affair, neither imposed by him upon the nation or imposed by the nation upon him as a condition to holding that office.

I would not look with favor upon a President working to subvert the first amendment's guarantees of religious liberty. Nor would our system of checks and balances permit him to do so--and neither do I look with favor upon those who would work to subvert Article VI of the Constitution by requiring a religious test--even by indirection--for it. If they disagree with that safeguard they should be out openly working to repeal it.

I want a Chief Executive whose public acts are responsible to all groups and obligated to none--who can attend any ceremony, service or dinner his office may appropriately require of him--and whose fulfillment of his Presidential oath is not limited or conditioned by any religious oath, ritual or obligation.

This is the kind of America I believe in--and this is the kind I fought for in the South Pacific, and the kind my brother died for in Europe. No one suggested then that we may have a "divided loyalty," that we did "not believe in liberty," or that we belonged to a disloyal group that threatened the "freedoms for which our forefathers died."

And in fact this is the kind of America for which our forefathers died--when they fled here to escape religious test oaths that denied office to members of less favored churches--when they fought for the Constitution, the Bill of Rights, and the Virginia Statute of Religious Freedom--and when they fought at the shrine I visited today, the Alamo. For side by side with Bowie and Crockett died McCafferty and Bailey and Carey--but no one knows whether they were Catholic or not. For there was no religious test at the Alamo.

I ask you tonight to follow in that tradition--to judge me on the basis of my record of 14 years in Congress--on my declared stands against an Ambassador to the Vatican, against unconstitutional aid to parochial schools, and against any boycott of the public schools (which I have attended myself)--instead of judging me on the basis of these pamphlets and publications we all have seen that carefully select quotations out of context from the statements of Catholic church leaders, usually in other countries, frequently in other centuries, and always omitting, of course, the statement of the American Bishops in 1948 which strongly endorsed church-state separation, and which more nearly reflects the views of almost every American Catholic.

I do not consider these other quotations binding upon my public acts--why should you? But let me say, with respect to other countries, that I am wholly opposed to the state being used by any religious group, Catholic or Protestant, to compel, prohibit, or persecute the free exercise of any other religion. And I hope that you and I condemn with equal fervor those nations which deny their Presidency to Protestants and those which deny it to Catholics. And rather than cite the misdeeds of those who differ, I would cite the record of the Catholic Church in such nations as Ireland and France--and the independence of such statesmen as Adenauer and De Gaulle.

But let me stress again that these are my views--for contrary to common newspaper usage, I am not the Catholic candidate for President. I am the Democratic Party's candidate for President who happens also to be a Catholic. I do not speak for my church on public matters--and the church does not speak for me.

Whatever issue may come before me as President--on birth control, divorce, censorship, gambling or any other subject--I will make my decision in accordance with these views, in accordance with what my conscience tells me to be the national interest, and without regard to outside religious pressures or dictates. And no power or threat of punishment could cause me to decide otherwise.

But if the time should ever come--and I do not concede any conflict to be even remotely possible--when my office would require me to either violate my conscience or violate the national interest, then I would resign the office; and I hope any conscientious public servant would do the same.

But I do not intend to apologize for these views to my critics of either Catholic or Protestant faith--nor do I intend to disavow either my views or my church in order to win this election.

If I should lose on the real issues, I shall return to my seat in the Senate, satisfied that I had tried my best and was fairly judged. But if this election is decided on the basis that 40 million Americans lost their chance of being President on the day they were baptized, then it is the whole nation that will be the loser, in the eyes of Catholics and non-Catholics around the world, in the eyes of history, and in the eyes of our own people.

But if, on the other hand, I should win the election, then I shall devote every effort of mind and spirit to fulfilling the oath of the Presidency--practically identical, I might add, to the oath I have taken for 14 years in the Congress. For without reservation, I can "solemnly swear that I will faithfully execute the office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my ability preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution...so help me God.
 

Harvey

Administrator<br>Elite Member
Oct 9, 1999
35,057
67
91
Rip -- Welcome to the mid 1940's. The good news is, we've all progressed a bunch since then.

The Constitution is great. The underlying concept of the most of the ten commanments is sound logic. The same basic principles are the basis of almost every civilization on the planet, whether or not they derive from the Judeo-Christian fiction.

To hell with the religious crap... and I mean ANY religion. All that does is give one group a superiority complex with respect "others" and drives them to violate the very principles they spout under the banner of whatever faith they happen to be preaching.

FUN-da-MENTAL-ists are neither.
 

DealMonkey

Lifer
Nov 25, 2001
13,136
1
0
Originally posted by: Riprorin
"The fundamental basis of this nation's law was given to Moses on the Mount. The fundamental basis of our Bill of Rights comes from the teaching we get from Exodus and St. Matthew, from Isaiah and St. Paul. I don't think we emphasize that enough these days. If we don't have the proper fundamental moral background, we will finally end up with a totalitarian government which does not believe in the right for anybody except the state." - Democratic President Harry S. Truman
Blah, blah, blah. Ya freaking robot. Think for yourself, Rainman.
 

Riprorin

Banned
Apr 25, 2000
9,634
0
0
Originally posted by: Harvey
Rip -- Welcome to the mid 1940's. The good news is, we've all progressed a bunch since then.

The Constitution is great. The underlying concept of the most of the ten commanments is sound logic. The same basic principles are the basis of almost every civilization on the planet, whether or not they derive from the Judeo-Christian fiction.

To hell with the religious crap... and I mean ANY religion. All that does is give one group a superiority complex with respect "others" and drives them to violate the very principles they spout under the banner of whatever faith they happen to be preaching.

FUN-da-MENTAL-ists are neither.

Harvey, like it or not, our cultural and religious heritage is what it is.
 

Harvey

Administrator<br>Elite Member
Oct 9, 1999
35,057
67
91
Originally posted by: Riprorin
[Harvey, like it or not, our cultural and religious heritage is what it is.
I have no problem with that, as far as that goes. The other important aspect of that cultural and religious heritage is that our nation's founders were wise enough to be emphatic about separating church and state.

Ideally, we should learn from the wisdom and better values found in our religious roots without condmening our ourselves to wallow in the morass of the dogma of any of them. Good people are good people, regardless of their heritage.

What matters is what you know, not where you learned it. What matters is how you live and how you respect others in this life, not what may or may not happen in another one.
 

jeffpapier

Junior Member
Aug 26, 2004
5
0
0
Let me set out my opinion on a spiritual matter. The judge is the biggest offender in his court room. He is a pimp using religion as a whore and his use of the ten commandments is just an advertisement of the fact.
 

sciencewhiz

Diamond Member
Jun 30, 2000
5,885
8
81
Originally posted by: Harvey
I think you should take some time to read the U.S. Constitution. Artifacts inferring any preference for the dictates of a specific religion have absolutely no place in the civil laws.

I read the part where it says Congress shall not prohibit the free exercise of religion. What part did you read?
 

halik

Lifer
Oct 10, 2000
25,696
1
0
Originally posted by: sciencewhiz
Originally posted by: Harvey
I think you should take some time to read the U.S. Constitution. Artifacts inferring any preference for[/b] the dictates of a specific religion have absolutely no place in the civil laws.

I read the part where it says Congress shall not prohibit the free exercise of religion. What part did you read?

reading comp
 
sale-70-410-exam    | Exam-200-125-pdf    | we-sale-70-410-exam    | hot-sale-70-410-exam    | Latest-exam-700-603-Dumps    | Dumps-98-363-exams-date    | Certs-200-125-date    | Dumps-300-075-exams-date    | hot-sale-book-C8010-726-book    | Hot-Sale-200-310-Exam    | Exam-Description-200-310-dumps?    | hot-sale-book-200-125-book    | Latest-Updated-300-209-Exam    | Dumps-210-260-exams-date    | Download-200-125-Exam-PDF    | Exam-Description-300-101-dumps    | Certs-300-101-date    | Hot-Sale-300-075-Exam    | Latest-exam-200-125-Dumps    | Exam-Description-200-125-dumps    | Latest-Updated-300-075-Exam    | hot-sale-book-210-260-book    | Dumps-200-901-exams-date    | Certs-200-901-date    | Latest-exam-1Z0-062-Dumps    | Hot-Sale-1Z0-062-Exam    | Certs-CSSLP-date    | 100%-Pass-70-383-Exams    | Latest-JN0-360-real-exam-questions    | 100%-Pass-4A0-100-Real-Exam-Questions    | Dumps-300-135-exams-date    | Passed-200-105-Tech-Exams    | Latest-Updated-200-310-Exam    | Download-300-070-Exam-PDF    | Hot-Sale-JN0-360-Exam    | 100%-Pass-JN0-360-Exams    | 100%-Pass-JN0-360-Real-Exam-Questions    | Dumps-JN0-360-exams-date    | Exam-Description-1Z0-876-dumps    | Latest-exam-1Z0-876-Dumps    | Dumps-HPE0-Y53-exams-date    | 2017-Latest-HPE0-Y53-Exam    | 100%-Pass-HPE0-Y53-Real-Exam-Questions    | Pass-4A0-100-Exam    | Latest-4A0-100-Questions    | Dumps-98-365-exams-date    | 2017-Latest-98-365-Exam    | 100%-Pass-VCS-254-Exams    | 2017-Latest-VCS-273-Exam    | Dumps-200-355-exams-date    | 2017-Latest-300-320-Exam    | Pass-300-101-Exam    | 100%-Pass-300-115-Exams    |
http://www.portvapes.co.uk/    | http://www.portvapes.co.uk/    |