| Topic: |
Religions > Atheism |
| User: |
"simon sez" |
| Date: |
27 Jun 2005 02:47:41 PM |
| Object: |
Court: Some Ten Commandments Displays OK |
What is the problem liberals and atheists have with the Ten
Commandments? Even from a secular point of view, they make perfect
sense.
http://www.wgtndailynews.com/articles/2005/06/24/ap/headlines/d8b04h280.txt
Court: Some Ten Commandments Displays OK
WASHINGTON - The Supreme Court struggled in a pair of 5-4 rulings
Monday to define how much blending of church and state is
constitutionally permissible, allowing the Ten Commandments to be
displayed outside the Texas state capitol but not inside Kentucky
courthouses.
In its first rulings on the issue in a quarter-century, the high court
said that displays of the Ten Commandments on government property are
not inherently unconstitutional. But each exhibit demands scrutiny to
determine whether it amounts to a governmental promotion of religion,
the court said in a case involving Kentucky courthouse exhibits.
In effect, the court said it was taking the position that issues of Ten
Commandments displays in courthouses should be resolved on a
case-by-case basis.
In that ruling and another decision involving the positioning of a
6-foot granite monument of the Ten Commandments on the grounds of the
Texas capitol, Justice Sandra Day O'Connor was the swing vote.
Justice Antonin Scalia released a stinging dissent in the courthouse
case, declaring, "What distinguishes the rule of law from the
dictatorship of a shifting Supreme Court majority is the absolutely
indispensable requirement that judicial opinions be grounded in
consistently applied principle."
.
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: Court: Some Ten Commandments Displays OK |
27 Jun 2005 04:40:24 PM |
|
|
simon sez wrote:
What is the problem liberals and atheists have with the Ten
Commandments? Even from a secular point of view, they make perfect
sense.
http://www.wgtndailynews.com/articles/2005/06/24/ap/headlines/d8b04h280.txt
Court: Some Ten Commandments Displays OK
WASHINGTON - The Supreme Court struggled in a pair of 5-4 rulings
Monday to define how much blending of church and state is
constitutionally permissible, allowing the Ten Commandments to be
displayed outside the Texas state capitol but not inside Kentucky
courthouses.
In its first rulings on the issue in a quarter-century, the high court
said that displays of the Ten Commandments on government property are
not inherently unconstitutional. But each exhibit demands scrutiny to
determine whether it amounts to a governmental promotion of religion,
the court said in a case involving Kentucky courthouse exhibits.
In effect, the court said it was taking the position that issues of Ten
Commandments displays in courthouses should be resolved on a
case-by-case basis.
In that ruling and another decision involving the positioning of a
6-foot granite monument of the Ten Commandments on the grounds of the
Texas capitol, Justice Sandra Day O'Connor was the swing vote.
Justice Antonin Scalia released a stinging dissent in the courthouse
case, declaring, "What distinguishes the rule of law from the
dictatorship of a shifting Supreme Court majority is the absolutely
indispensable requirement that judicial opinions be grounded in
consistently applied principle."
This ruling is a defeat for atheists, as they were hoping for a
complete abolishment of any Ten Commandments display. The Supreme
Court has fear of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ, and atheists
worldwide would be wise to have same. Picture yourself saying the
following prayer, hand-in-hand with the justices of the Supreme Court:
The Apostles' Creed Prayer:
I believe in God, the Father Almighty,
Creator of heaven and earth;
And in Jesus Christ, His only Son, Our Lord;
who was conceived by the Holy Spirit,
born of the Virgin Mary,
suffered under Pontius Pilate, was crucified,
died, and was buried.
He descended into hell; the third day He arose
again from the dead;
He ascended into heaven,
sitteth at the right hand
of God, the Father Almighty,
from thence He shall come to judge
the living and the dead.
I believe in the Holy Spirit,
the Holy Catholic Church,
the communion of Saints,
the forgiveness of sins,
the Resurrection of the body
and life everlasting. Amen.
.
|
|
|
| User: "ZenIsWhen" |
|
| Title: Re: Court: Some Ten Commandments Displays OK |
27 Jun 2005 04:53:48 PM |
|
|
<vivapadrepio@aol.com> wrote in message
news:1119908424.057822.75700@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com...
simon sez wrote:
What is the problem liberals and atheists have with the Ten
Commandments? Even from a secular point of view, they make perfect
sense.
????????? worshipping one god makes perfect sense to atheists?
http://www.wgtndailynews.com/articles/2005/06/24/ap/headlines/d8b04h280.txt
Court: Some Ten Commandments Displays OK
WASHINGTON - The Supreme Court struggled in a pair of 5-4 rulings
Monday to define how much blending of church and state is
constitutionally permissible, allowing the Ten Commandments to be
displayed outside the Texas state capitol but not inside Kentucky
courthouses.
In its first rulings on the issue in a quarter-century, the high court
said that displays of the Ten Commandments on government property are
not inherently unconstitutional. But each exhibit demands scrutiny to
determine whether it amounts to a governmental promotion of religion,
the court said in a case involving Kentucky courthouse exhibits.
In effect, the court said it was taking the position that issues of Ten
Commandments displays in courthouses should be resolved on a
case-by-case basis.
In that ruling and another decision involving the positioning of a
6-foot granite monument of the Ten Commandments on the grounds of the
Texas capitol, Justice Sandra Day O'Connor was the swing vote.
Justice Antonin Scalia released a stinging dissent in the courthouse
case, declaring, "What distinguishes the rule of law from the
dictatorship of a shifting Supreme Court majority is the absolutely
indispensable requirement that judicial opinions be grounded in
consistently applied principle."
This ruling is a defeat for atheists, as they were hoping for a
complete abolishment of any Ten Commandments display.
Bull *****!
They were hoping for separation of state - and fanaical christianity!
The Supreme
Court has fear of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ, and atheists
worldwide would be wise to have same. Picture yourself saying the
following prayer, hand-in-hand with the justices of the Supreme Court:
Sure ... once you PROVE the claims about geezus!
I won't hold my breath!
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "R. Pierce Butler" |
|
| Title: Re: Court: Some Ten Commandments Displays OK |
28 Jun 2005 10:28:40 PM |
|
|
"vivapadrepio@aol.com" <vivapadrepio@aol.com> wrote in
news:1119908424.057822.75700@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com:
snip *****
plonk
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Ordog" |
|
| Title: Re: Court: Some Ten Commandments Displays OK |
27 Jun 2005 06:10:37 PM |
|
|
wrote:
This ruling is a defeat for atheists, as they were hoping for a
complete abolishment of any Ten Commandments display. The Supreme
Court has fear of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ, and atheists
worldwide would be wise to have same.
FEARING an all loving, all benevolent god??????????????????????
How do you explain that?
Picture yourself saying the
following prayer, hand-in-hand with the justices of the Supreme Court:
At my best will I am still incapable of chanting meaningless garbage!
Ordog
"Beware of the man whose God is in the skies." Bernard Shaw
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Mark K. Bilbo" |
|
| Title: Re: Court: Some Ten Commandments Displays OK |
27 Jun 2005 08:27:54 PM |
|
|
In our last episode
<1119908424.057822.75700@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com>,
vivapadrepio@aol.com pirouetted gracefully and with great fanfare
proclaimed:
This ruling is a defeat for atheists,
No it isn't.
--
Mark K. Bilbo - a.a. #1423
EAC Department of Linguistic Subversion
Alt-atheism website at: http://www.alt-atheism.org
--------------------------------------------------
"Come to think of it, there are already a million
monkeys on a million typewriters, and the Usenet
is NOTHING like Shakespeare!" -- Blair Houghton
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "AR" |
|
| Title: Re: Court: Some Ten Commandments Displays OK |
27 Jun 2005 06:25:15 PM |
|
|
This is not a defeat for atheists. It is certainly a sitback for
non-believers and Christians that support a separation of church and
state. I am a non-believer and I don't have any problems with the
display of the Ten Commandments. The only thing I see wrong with it is
why they don't display the Ten Commandments for the three major
religions (all are different) as well as something for Hindus,
Buddhists, Muslims, and even non-believers. Seems to me a "belief"
memorial would keep everyone happy. However, that will not happen
because each religious sect feels they are the "right" religion and
wouldn't want to be caught dead appearing to acknowledge a different
religion.
.
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: Court: Some Ten Commandments Displays OK |
28 Jun 2005 04:37:27 PM |
|
|
AR wrote:
This is not a defeat for atheists. It is certainly a sitback for
non-believers and Christians that support a separation of church and
state. I am a non-believer and I don't have any problems with the
display of the Ten Commandments. The only thing I see wrong with it is
why they don't display the Ten Commandments for the three major
religions (all are different) as well as something for Hindus,
Buddhists, Muslims, and even non-believers. Seems to me a "belief"
memorial would keep everyone happy. However, that will not happen
because each religious sect feels they are the "right" religion and
wouldn't want to be caught dead appearing to acknowledge a different
religion.
Well, like the Supreme Court said, the display of the Ten Commandments
are appropriate because the United States has a Judeo-Christian
heritage.
But everyone, let's keep in mind that 'to display' is nice, but 'to
obey' is even better. :-)
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Ash" |
|
| Title: Re: Court: Some Ten Commandments Displays OK |
27 Jun 2005 04:21:16 PM |
|
|
simon sez wrote:
What is the problem liberals and atheists have with the Ten
Commandments? Even from a secular point of view, they make perfect
sense.
Are you out of your fucking mind?
http://www.wgtndailynews.com/articles/2005/06/24/ap/headlines/d8b04h280.txt
Court: Some Ten Commandments Displays OK
WASHINGTON - The Supreme Court struggled in a pair of 5-4 rulings
Monday to define how much blending of church and state is
constitutionally permissible, allowing the Ten Commandments to be
displayed outside the Texas state capitol but not inside Kentucky
courthouses.
In its first rulings on the issue in a quarter-century, the high court
said that displays of the Ten Commandments on government property are
not inherently unconstitutional. But each exhibit demands scrutiny to
determine whether it amounts to a governmental promotion of religion,
the court said in a case involving Kentucky courthouse exhibits.
In effect, the court said it was taking the position that issues of Ten
Commandments displays in courthouses should be resolved on a
case-by-case basis.
In that ruling and another decision involving the positioning of a
6-foot granite monument of the Ten Commandments on the grounds of the
Texas capitol, Justice Sandra Day O'Connor was the swing vote.
Justice Antonin Scalia released a stinging dissent in the courthouse
case, declaring, "What distinguishes the rule of law from the
dictatorship of a shifting Supreme Court majority is the absolutely
indispensable requirement that judicial opinions be grounded in
consistently applied principle."
.
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
