Page 3 of 11 FirstFirst 12345678 ... LastLast
Results 41 to 60 of 210
  1. #41  
    Quote Originally Posted by clairegrrl
    Start Believing



    Ohhh, and if you wanna write her, click HERE
    Only if she comes to me in leather or vinyl.
    MaxiMunK.com The Forum That Asks, "Are You Not Entertained?"

    Remember: "Anyone that thinks the Treo should just work right out of the box, shouldn't own a Treo..."
  2. #42  
    Quote Originally Posted by t2gungho
    I may be way off here on this atheist/commandments thing but I thought the issue is that the 10 Commandments came from... God.

    The issue of whether they could be based on general moral principles really doesnt matter because of the fact that the 10 Commandments posted in these public places come from God. The fact that I (or anyone else) thinks they are good moral principles really doesnt matter for this particular argument.

    Because they come from God and they are posted in the government places, then the argument turns to the government endorsing a religion.

    If the 10 commandments were just moral principles made up from the founding fathers and were placed in public buildings, then there wouldnt be any issue with the establishment clause.
    Eh, they're all derived from the Code of Hammurabi and a few others. The ten commandments were just the first to put a religous slant on them....
    "It is the soldier, not the reporter who has given us the freedom of the press. It is the soldier, not the poet, who has given us the freedom of speech. It is the soldier, not the campus organizer, who gives us the freedom to demonstrate. It is the soldier who salutes the flag, who serves beneath the flag, and whose coffin is draped by the flag, who allows the protester to burn the flag." -- Father Dennis Edward O'Brien, Sergeant, USMC
  3. #43  
    Quote Originally Posted by Insertion
    When they become pro-active with religious beliefs. If they start teaching the Bible in public schools, (other than perhaps using examples in a World/Ancient History class), I'll be upset. If you start seeing Clergy men sitting on the bench, I'll be upset.

    But the Ten Commandments to me is no more an endorsement by the Government to me then the any number of Latin phrases used being an endorsement on language.
    You hit it right on the head Insertion! I think there is too much bandwidth wasted on minor issues such the presence of the 10 commandments in court houses. Same goes with the references to "God" in our national anthem or on our money. None of these religious symbols are meant to intimidate others of different faith (or no faith). It just represents the cultural and historical landscape without forcing anyone to feel "intimidated".
    Palm m505 -> Treo600 (GSM ATT) -> Treo650 (Cingular) -> BB8700g -> BB Pearl
    "The point of living and of being an optimist, is to be foolish enough to believe the best is yet to come."
  4. #44  
    Quote Originally Posted by daThomas
    I am an atheist, read 1- 4.
    I am more or less an atheist but I have no problem with the Commandments being in a Courthouse. From a historical perspecitve, the Commandments represent one of man's first cracks at defining the concepts of morality. To rise above selfishness and greed and say that as a race we can be better to each other than that. It is a landmark achivement in the development of the human race. Apparently, the difference between us is that although we both lack a belief in God, I am not amoral and believe in concepts such as morality which I believe to be absolute truths independent of the existence of a higher being.
    ROOTING for WebOS makes me more sympathetic to Cubs fans.
  5. #45  
    Quote Originally Posted by mattyparanoid
    Eh, they're all derived from the Code of Hammurabi and a few others. The ten commandments were just the first to put a religous slant on them....
    You probably are correct (I dont know). I just know that for the last 2000 years, most people (again a generalization) would say that the 10 Commandments are rules by which Christians should live their lives.

    Some of you (Insertion, chillig35 and Bob -C ) dont have any issue with them. Thats great (and I sincerely applaud your tolerance) but it would be difficult to say that you are in the majority.

    Just to put this in a different light (I know this has been mentioned before) but if the courts allowed Christian symbols (or what people believe Christian symbols to be) in the public buildings...they would have a hard time not violating the Equal Protection Clause by not allowing groups to put Satanic and other religious symbols (which many would have a problem with) into public spaces.

    Its the slippery slope argument Where would you draw a line that by definition would be arbitrary and subjective?
    Palm III-->Palm IIIxe-->Palm 505-->Samsung i300-->Treo 600-->PPC 6600-->Treo 650-->Treo 700wx-->BB Pearl--> BB Curve

  6. #46  
    I hear what you're saying about that slope but you could take it an even more dangerous step further. You could argue that since the Commandments are religious beliefs, that by making any of them law, you are actually forcing Judeo/Christian religion onto the populace. You could certainly argue it effectively with adultery as Bill Clinton demonstrated. Once that can is opened, then daThomas could around murdering people claiming that he is protected by his atheist beliefs.

    If religion and the legal system are both trying to define and establish what morality is, there is going to be some crossover in what they are saying. So you can't take it literally that the 10 commandments in a courthouse is an endorsement of religion. It is an endorsement of man's striving to live decently, by a code of conduct.
    ROOTING for WebOS makes me more sympathetic to Cubs fans.
  7. #47  
    Quote Originally Posted by Bob-C
    I hear what you're saying about that slope but you could take it an even more dangerous step further. You could argue that since the Commandments are religious beliefs, that by making any of them law, you are actually forcing Judeo/Christian religion onto the populace. You could certainly argue it effectively with adultery as Bill Clinton demonstrated. Once that can is opened, then daThomas could around murdering people claiming that he is protected by his atheist beliefs.

    If religion and the legal system are both trying to define and establish what morality is, there is going to be some crossover in what they are saying. So you can't take it literally that the 10 commandments in a courthouse is an endorsement of religion. It is an endorsement of man's striving to live decently, by a code of conduct.
    I like the analysis but I have a couple of questions/comments:

    You said:
    I hear what you're saying about that slope but you could take it an even more dangerous step further.
    Thats what makes it so 'bad'...its slippery, you can always take it a step further.

    You said:
    You could argue that since the Commandments are religious beliefs, that by making any of them law, you are actually forcing Judeo/Christian religion onto the populace
    I think the argument is that although the 10 Commandments are viewed by Christians as being God's Laws, that doesnt mean that the founding fathers adopted them for that purpose. An argument could be made that the founding fathers adopted them because of their high moral content (because they are good principles for people to live by...not because they are God's laws.) If thats the case, then there is no forcing of Judeo/Christian beliefs (not religion...I underlined where you switched the words).

    I have also heard that some of our founding fathers looked at the ideology of 'natural law' during the creation of the constitution. Law that is based only on morality, utilitarianism and such without reference to a higher power or creator.

    Also you said:
    So you can't take it literally that the 10 commandments in a courthouse is an endorsement of religion.
    I wouldnt say that by doing that you are literally saying that the government is endorsing THAT religion. It appears that there is a logical deduction that is made that brings us to that conclusion. The argument is that if the government puts THAT specific religion (and no others) then the deduction is that they support ONLY that specific religion. <--This isnt really saying that literally but 'logically' its the conclusion people draw.
    Palm III-->Palm IIIxe-->Palm 505-->Samsung i300-->Treo 600-->PPC 6600-->Treo 650-->Treo 700wx-->BB Pearl--> BB Curve

  8. #48  
    Quote Originally Posted by Bob-C
    I am more or less an atheist but I have no problem with the Commandments being in a Courthouse. From a historical perspecitve, the Commandments represent one of man's first cracks at defining the concepts of morality. To rise above selfishness and greed and say that as a race we can be better to each other than that. It is a landmark achivement in the development of the human race. Apparently, the difference between us is that although we both lack a belief in God, I am not amoral and believe in concepts such as morality which I believe to be absolute truths independent of the existence of a higher being.
    Should you be called to testify in court do you have a problem swearing on a bible?
  9. #49  
    Quote Originally Posted by t2gungho
    Also you said: I wouldnt say that by doing that you are literally saying that the government is endorsing THAT religion. It appears that there is a logical deduction that is made that brings us to that conclusion. The argument is that if the government puts THAT specific religion (and no others) then the deduction is that they support ONLY that specific religion. <--This isnt really saying that literally but 'logically' its the conclusion people draw.
    Ok, you just need to stop RIGHT NOW! Your contribution to this discussion is FAR too SANE and WELL THOUGHT OUT to be allowed in an Off-Topic thread on the treocentral boards. If you don't stop now I will be forced to report you to a moderator or worse, Clairegirl.
  10. #50  
    Quote Originally Posted by daThomas
    Should you be called to testify in court do you have a problem swearing on a bible?
    Is this really an issue anymore? Cant you just 'affirm' that you will tell the truth?

    (Or are you raising this issue simply to show how much religion been institutionalized in our society?)
    Palm III-->Palm IIIxe-->Palm 505-->Samsung i300-->Treo 600-->PPC 6600-->Treo 650-->Treo 700wx-->BB Pearl--> BB Curve

  11. #51  
    Quote Originally Posted by t2gungho
    (Or are you raising this issue simply to show how much religion been institutionalized in our society?)
    Yup. But experience going to the stand and asking to be affirmed instead of swearing on the bible and observe the judge and others in the courtroom. Not a very comfortable experience and worse if your interests are at stake.
  12. #52  
    Quote Originally Posted by daThomas
    Should you be called to testify in court do you have a problem swearing on a bible?
    No. I only take it as a symbolic gesture that I agree to tell the truth on whatever honor system I value. I take it as no more and no less.
    ROOTING for WebOS makes me more sympathetic to Cubs fans.
  13. #53  
    Quote Originally Posted by daThomas
    Ok, you just need to stop RIGHT NOW! Your contribution to this discussion is FAR too SANE and WELL THOUGHT OUT to be allowed in an Off-Topic thread on the treocentral boards. If you don't stop now I will be forced to report you to a moderator or worse, Clairegirl.
    LOL...at first I thought you were being serious and thoughts of "Mods...please don't ban me" raced through my head.

    Now that I think about it though...you probably shouldnt compliment me in this open forum...people will notice and then not take my arguments seriously because either YOU complimented me (Im just kidding) OR even worse (*shhh - they might think Im a ... ah....l-i-b-e-r-a-l)

    In all seriousness...I think other people feel and think this same way but just cant get it down into words. (I kid you not ... I have already been PM'd about this). Of course, if I am asked, I cannot reveal my sources.

    Disclaimer: 1/2 the time I dont know what I am talking about.
    Palm III-->Palm IIIxe-->Palm 505-->Samsung i300-->Treo 600-->PPC 6600-->Treo 650-->Treo 700wx-->BB Pearl--> BB Curve

  14. #54  
    Quote Originally Posted by Bob-C
    No. I only take it as a symbolic gesture that I agree to tell the truth on whatever honor system I value. I take it as no more and no less.
    I considered this approach. However, it just made me realize that I, like any buddihst or other non christian, should not be forced to make this decision. That's my point. Just leave any and all religious references (as in swear on this sacred christian religious text) out of gov't practices and all is kewl. Why muddy the process in this great melting pot?
  15. #55  
    Quote Originally Posted by Bob-C
    No. I only take it as a symbolic gesture that I agree to tell the truth on whatever honor system I value. I take it as no more and no less.
    That's my attitude. For all I care, I could be swearing to the Muffin Man (The Muffin Man? Yes, The Muffin Man) with my hand on a box of Pop Tarts...
    Last edited by Insertion; 06/27/2005 at 11:02 PM.
    MaxiMunK.com The Forum That Asks, "Are You Not Entertained?"

    Remember: "Anyone that thinks the Treo should just work right out of the box, shouldn't own a Treo..."
  16. #56  
    Quote Originally Posted by t2gungho
    LOL...at first I thought you were being serious and thoughts of "Mods...please don't ban me" raced through my head.

    Now that I think about it though...you probably shouldnt compliment me in this open forum...people will notice and then not take my arguments seriously because either YOU complimented me (Im just kidding) OR even worse (*shhh - they might think Im a ... ah....l-i-b-e-r-a-l)

    In all seriousness...I think other people feel and think this same way but just cant get it down into words. (I kid you not ... I have already been PM'd about this). Of course, if I am asked, I cannot reveal my sources.

    Disclaimer: 1/2 the time I dont know what I am talking about.
    My point is you're more moderate than myself BUT MORE PRECISELY you post very well as far as getting your point across without being inflammatory and jumping too far on one side or the other. Not really weenie fence straddling but rather, "Look, these are the two sides and the important points of each."

    Disclaimer: Please don't soil this good posters reputation by associating them with myself.
  17. #57  
    Quote Originally Posted by t2gungho
    In all seriousness...I think other people feel and think this same way but just cant get it down into words. (I kid you not ... I have already been PM'd about this). Of course, if I am asked, I cannot reveal my sources.
    Release the name(s) so that we may flog him (her?)

    Forked tongue bastards!

    MaxiMunK.com The Forum That Asks, "Are You Not Entertained?"

    Remember: "Anyone that thinks the Treo should just work right out of the box, shouldn't own a Treo..."
  18. #58  
    Quote Originally Posted by daThomas
    Yup. But experience going to the stand and asking to be affirmed instead of swearing on the bible and observe the judge and others in the courtroom. Not a very comfortable experience and worse if your interests are at stake.
    I don't consider you to be an atheist. A true atheist simply does not believe there is a god. Being such, a true atheist could care less about swearing on the bible and would have no problem doing it since they would be conscious that it means nothing to them and consequently would be a complete non-issue. You are too threatened by religious beliefs to be an atheist.

    That you insisted on being affirmed to tell the truth instead of swearing on the bible underlines this. It demonstrates that you do believe in a God and just have such an aversion to him that you feel the need to show animosity towards him by refusing to participate in any type of act that could be construed as an affirmation of him. In other words, if you didn't believe in God you wouldn't feel threatened by swearing on a bible. You probably believe in God to the extent that you blame him for all the things you believe are unjust in the world or in your life. So to get him back you denounce him every opportunity you get for a little bit of payback. Doing anything to affirm the existence of God in such a case is threatening to you because it would mean that some being is responsible for the things in your life that suck. I felt that way once and moved on. Now I don't give much thought at all to such issues.

    It's like having an ex-lover that you still having feelings for and trash at every chance while trying to convince friends that you don't still have feelings for that person but everyone knows you do, versus having an ex-lover that never even crosses your mind for years because you have truly gotten over them.
    ROOTING for WebOS makes me more sympathetic to Cubs fans.
  19. #59  
    Quote Originally Posted by daThomas
    My point is you're more moderate than myself BUT MORE PRECISELY you post very well as far as getting your point across without being inflammatory and jumping too far on one side or the other. Not really weenie fence straddling but rather, "Look, these are the two sides and the important points of each."

    Disclaimer: Please don't soil this good posters reputation by associating them with myself.
    Yes, please...Insertion, Evilghost and Claire might see.
    Palm III-->Palm IIIxe-->Palm 505-->Samsung i300-->Treo 600-->PPC 6600-->Treo 650-->Treo 700wx-->BB Pearl--> BB Curve

  20. #60  
    Quote Originally Posted by Insertion
    Release the name(s) so that we may flog him (her?)

    Forked tongue bastards!

    Isnt this the same guy that got his skin tatoo'd with scales like a snake (I thought I saw him on Ripleys Believe it or Not.)
    Palm III-->Palm IIIxe-->Palm 505-->Samsung i300-->Treo 600-->PPC 6600-->Treo 650-->Treo 700wx-->BB Pearl--> BB Curve

Page 3 of 11 FirstFirst 12345678 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions