| Topic: |
Sociology > Education |
| User: |
"" |
| Date: |
22 Aug 2003 01:50:11 PM |
| Object: |
Re: Judge Refuses to Remove Ten Commandments Display |
Mitchell Holman <ta2eeneNoemail@comcast.com> wrote:
:| Roger 1, Lentz 0.
:|
:| Looks like game, set and match.
Naaaaaaa, Lentz is another one of these ultra conservatives or
libberterians (deliberately misspelled) trolls that keep showing up from
time to time up over the years in these newsgroups, making the same false
points, arguing over the same issues, etc.
Nothing anyone says to him makes a bit of a difference.
.
|
|
| User: "Roger" |
|
| Title: Re: Judge Refuses to Remove Ten Commandments Display |
23 Aug 2003 02:19:13 AM |
|
|
"SemiScholar" <noemail@spambegone.com> wrote in message
news:g3kdkvoc18he1rgqemjd9v91vfafmb62rj@4ax.com...
On Fri, 22 Aug 2003 14:50:11 -0400, wrote:
Mitchell Holman <ta2eeneNoemail@comcast.com> wrote:
:| Roger 1, Lentz 0.
:|
:| Looks like game, set and match.
Naaaaaaa, Lentz is another one of these ultra conservatives or
libberterians (deliberately misspelled) trolls that keep showing up from
time to time up over the years in these newsgroups, making the same false
points, arguing over the same issues, etc.
Nothing anyone says to him makes a bit of a difference.
All true, but it's still worthwhile to go through the exercise of
rebutting all those arguments and restating the case for separation of
church and state. Committed wackos like Lentz won't change, but the
lurking readers will always find the right arguments being made as
well.
Plus it's fun.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "David Lentz" |
|
| Title: Re: Judge Refuses to Remove Ten Commandments Display |
23 Aug 2003 09:02:47 AM |
|
|
SemiScholar wrote:
<nnip>
Naaaaaaa, Lentz is another one of these ultra conservatives or
libberterians (deliberately misspelled) trolls that keep showing up from
time to time up over the years in these newsgroups, making the same false
points, arguing over the same issues, etc.
Nothing anyone says to him makes a bit of a difference.
All true, but it's still worthwhile to go through the exercise of
rebutting all those arguments and restating the case for separation of
church and state. Committed wackos like Lentz won't change, but the
lurking readers will always find the right arguments being made as
well.
I find it interesting that so many profess to support the
Constitution while citing, as if quoting, a provision,
"separation of church and state" not found in the Constitution.
The separation of church and state is idea attributable to Thomas
Jeffeson but not found no where in the Constitution of the United
States.
If also find it interesting that federal judges can have there
court houses adorned with Greek gods but feign to be mortally
offended when a judge cites the Ten Commandments. Maybe Judge
Roy Moore should have translated the Commandments to Greek and
attributed them to Zeus.
David
.
|
|
|
| User: "Bob LeChevalier" |
|
| Title: Re: Judge Refuses to Remove Ten Commandments Display |
23 Aug 2003 01:35:18 PM |
|
|
David Lentz <dlentz10@/*NOSPAM*/rochester.rr.com> wrote:
SemiScholar wrote:
I find it interesting that so many profess to support the
Constitution while citing, as if quoting, a provision,
"separation of church and state" not found in the Constitution.
Of course it is. The words aren't used, but then neither are the
words "3 branches of government" nor "freedom of religion"
The separation of church and state is idea attributable to Thomas
Jeffeson but not found no where in the Constitution of the United
States.
Jefferson used the words as a shorthand for the Establishment Clause
combined with the Free Exercise Clause.
If also find it interesting that federal judges can have there
court houses adorned with Greek gods but feign to be mortally
offended when a judge cites the Ten Commandments. Maybe Judge
Roy Moore should have translated the Commandments to Greek and
attributed them to Zeus.
Read the decision. Court houses can have the ten commandments also,
if they are portrayed in the same manner as Greek gods.
lojbab
--
lojbab
Bob LeChevalier, Founder, The Logical Language Group
(Opinions are my own; I do not speak for the organization.)
Artificial language Loglan/Lojban: http://www.lojban.org
.
|
|
|
| User: "Joni Rathbun" |
|
| Title: Re: Judge Refuses to Remove Ten Commandments Display |
23 Aug 2003 01:50:49 PM |
|
|
On Sat, 23 Aug 2003, Bob LeChevalier wrote:
David Lentz <dlentz10@/*NOSPAM*/rochester.rr.com> wrote:
SemiScholar wrote:
I find it interesting that so many profess to support the
Constitution while citing, as if quoting, a provision,
"separation of church and state" not found in the Constitution.
Of course it is. The words aren't used, but then neither are the
words "3 branches of government" nor "freedom of religion"
The separation of church and state is idea attributable to Thomas
Jeffeson but not found no where in the Constitution of the United
States.
Jefferson used the words as a shorthand for the Establishment Clause
combined with the Free Exercise Clause.
If also find it interesting that federal judges can have there
court houses adorned with Greek gods but feign to be mortally
offended when a judge cites the Ten Commandments. Maybe Judge
Roy Moore should have translated the Commandments to Greek and
attributed them to Zeus.
Read the decision. Court houses can have the ten commandments also,
if they are portrayed in the same manner as Greek gods.
These people just can't be bothered with the facts and it's getting
old.
.
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: Judge Refuses to Remove Ten Commandments Display |
23 Aug 2003 02:36:32 PM |
|
|
Joni Rathbun <jrathbun@orednet.org> wrote:
:|These people just can't be bothered with the facts and it's getting
:|old.
That's the name of the game, keep repeating the lies over and over and over
again till you wear the other side down and they go away.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Joni Rathbun" |
|
| Title: Re: Judge Refuses to Remove Ten Commandments Display |
23 Aug 2003 03:09:03 PM |
|
|
On Sat, 23 Aug 2003 wrote:
Joni Rathbun <jrathbun@orednet.org> wrote:
:|These people just can't be bothered with the facts and it's getting
:|old.
That's the name of the game, keep repeating the lies over and over and over
again till you wear the other side down and they go away.
They also use the lies to foster those emotional responses from the
naive and ignorant who, in turn, alarm all their friends, "They've removed
even the mention of God from the schools and the court houses!"
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "SemiScholar" |
|
| Title: Re: Judge Refuses to Remove Ten Commandments Display |
23 Aug 2003 11:51:14 AM |
|
|
On Sat, 23 Aug 2003 14:02:47 GMT, David Lentz
<dlentz10@/*NOSPAM*/rochester.rr.com> wrote:
SemiScholar wrote:
<nnip>
Naaaaaaa, Lentz is another one of these ultra conservatives or
libberterians (deliberately misspelled) trolls that keep showing up from
time to time up over the years in these newsgroups, making the same false
points, arguing over the same issues, etc.
Nothing anyone says to him makes a bit of a difference.
All true, but it's still worthwhile to go through the exercise of
rebutting all those arguments and restating the case for separation of
church and state. Committed wackos like Lentz won't change, but the
lurking readers will always find the right arguments being made as
well.
I find it interesting that so many profess to support the
Constitution while citing, as if quoting, a provision,
"separation of church and state" not found in the Constitution.
The separation of church and state is idea attributable to Thomas
Jeffeson but not found no where in the Constitution of the United
States.
I find it interesting that you can still be spouting that nonsense
even after it's been explained to you so thoroughly and so many times.
If also find it interesting that federal judges can have there
court houses adorned with Greek gods but feign to be mortally
offended when a judge cites the Ten Commandments. Maybe Judge
Roy Moore should have translated the Commandments to Greek and
attributed them to Zeus.
I find it interesting that you still seem to have no cluse about this
case, and that you have still not read the decision, in which it
explicitly says that there is not a problem with displaying the 10
commandments in general, but that Justice Moore's particular actions
cross the line.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
