Page 7 of 11 FirstFirst ... 234567891011 LastLast
Results 121 to 140 of 210
  1. #121  
    Quote Originally Posted by t2gungho
    Hobbes: I like the argument for it being just a historical document, but would a reasonable person believe its not a religious symbol (dont most people think of the 10 commandments being brought down from the mountain by Moses?)
    I really didn't mean it to be just a historical document. To me personally it is far more. But legally it can be and has been referred to it as such, and in that light has been given the winning vote at times.

    Quote Originally Posted by t2gungho
    A religious symbol doesnt have to make an attempt at proselytizing in order for it to be viewed as religious does it?
    According to this last judgement from the court, Yes.


    Quote Originally Posted by t2gungho
    Although this is interesting, what you have to start with is what the constitution says. Courts begin with the plain meaning of the text (not supporting documentation in its creation).
    The intent of the writers is a valid perspective that has been included in court rulings.


    Quote Originally Posted by t2gungho
    The difference can be drawn between accomodating a religious practice via a private person versus accomodating by allowing religious symbols on government property (its not quite the same). One seems to allow first amendment, the other violates the establishment clause (IMO).
    Oh...I really tried not to open the practice vs can of worms as it really is more of minor point in this specific case. That gets into some pretty deep legal rangling that most of us normal people would have quite time try to getting our fingers wrapped around it....and still remember what we were talking about.


    Quote Originally Posted by t2gungho
    Although I can agree with most of this (some may argue that the 10 commandments arent factual in the sense of if they really came about via Moses and God) I dont see how this supports the idea that they should be posted on government buildings? The 10 commandments are NOT JUST historical but also religious?
    Agreed they are not just historical. Here is a nice quote that I think answers that question from the courts point of view:

    http://discussion.treocentral.com/sh...6&postcount=84



    Quote Originally Posted by t2gungho
    Hmm..I like the analogy but would a reasonable person conclude that the Statue of Liberty is a religious symbol? I dont think so.
    I did not mean it to be a religous symbol in any way. Just an anology of the process I have seen some extreme anti-Everything-Christian people go through.

    Quote Originally Posted by t2gungho
    Is he even human?
    I alreay have my DVR to set so I can each day for the next 3 weeks!
  2. #122  
    Quote Originally Posted by t2gungho
    Treo2die4-Im not signaling you out, but I couldnt go back too far to raise the issue that I think is important.

    I think the argument for the government endorsing a religion is if it shows preference to one religion over others. Plus, to be fair, it would really tick me off if I came to court one day and it had a big budda statue in the front (or any other religious symbol). Thats why I am for not having any.
    This is the difference between you and I. I do not see it as a government endosement, nor would I care if a Big Budda or any other religious symbol were located on Government property. I am secure with the idea that endorsement requires active use of such symbolism or ideaology in the proceedings. Without an impact on the proceedings, I take no issue....
  3. #123  
    Quote Originally Posted by HobbesIsReal
    According to this last judgement from the court, Yes.
    Hobbes: when you get a moment, can you post what in the opinion led you to believe this. I cant seem to find how the court defined religious (at least how you defined it.) Thanks.

    Quote Originally Posted by HobbesIsReal
    The intent of the writers is a valid perspective that has been included in court rulings.
    No doubt about that. Thats why I said that they FIRST start out with the plain meaning of the law. If its ambigious, then they look at the context, framers intent, etc.

    Quote Originally Posted by HobbesIsReal
    Oh...I really tried not to open the practice vs can of worms as it really is more of minor point in this specific case. That gets into some pretty deep legal rangling that most of us normal people would have quite time try to getting our fingers wrapped around it....and still remember what we were talking about.
    Isnt that the fun part? This is much better than the 'What does the blinking star in the corner do?'
    Palm III-->Palm IIIxe-->Palm 505-->Samsung i300-->Treo 600-->PPC 6600-->Treo 650-->Treo 700wx-->BB Pearl--> BB Curve

  4. #124  
    Quote Originally Posted by treo2die4
    This is the difference between you and I. I do not see it as a government endosement, nor would I care if a Big Budda or any other religious symbol were located on Government property. I am secure with the idea that endorsement requires active use of such symbolism or ideaology in the proceedings. Without an impact on the proceedings, I take no issue....
    Fair enough (thought I could persuade you ) I will have to try harder next time.
    Palm III-->Palm IIIxe-->Palm 505-->Samsung i300-->Treo 600-->PPC 6600-->Treo 650-->Treo 700wx-->BB Pearl--> BB Curve

  5. #125  
    Quote Originally Posted by t2gungho
    Hobbes: when you get a moment, can you post what in the opinion led you to believe this. I cant seem to find how the court defined religious (at least how you defined it.) Thanks.
    Sure. I think this article spells out the courts point of view pretty well:

    http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2005/...in704600.shtml

    Moreover, Breyer noted, the "physical setting of the monument ... suggests little or nothing of the sacred ... the setting does not readily lend itself to meditation or any other religious activity. But it does provide a context of history and moral ideals." And then the Justice noted, "40 years passed in which the presence of this monument, legally speaking, went unchallenged (until the single legal objection raised by petitioner) ... Those 40 years suggest that the public visiting the capitol grounds has considered the religious aspect of the tablets' message as part of what is a broader moral and historical message ..."
    I also read somewhere...though I am not sure where now...that one of their deciding factors was the intent of the display. One display was donated by a religous organization and the other from a frat or something like that with no religous ties in any way.
    Last edited by HobbesIsReal; 06/28/2005 at 10:25 PM.
  6. #126  
    Quote Originally Posted by HobbesIsReal
    Sure. I think this article spells out the courts point of view pretty well:

    http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2005/...in704600.shtml
    I understand your point. (Although I think it might be better phrased that if the display does proselytisize then its indicative of being religious - but not conclusive).

    Quote Originally Posted by HobbesIsReal
    I also read somewhere...though I am not sure where now...that one of their deciding factors was the intent of the display. One display was donated by a religous organization and the other from a frat or something like that with no religous ties in any way.
    Yeah, I agree. I think a questionable display that was intended to be predominantly a historical presentation would probably be ok (other factors would be considered of course).
    Palm III-->Palm IIIxe-->Palm 505-->Samsung i300-->Treo 600-->PPC 6600-->Treo 650-->Treo 700wx-->BB Pearl--> BB Curve

  7. #127  
    Quite the interesting thread.

    It amazes me how many people are convinced there is some religious conspiracy to indoctrinate everyone else. (daThomas) You also act as though the world has to be perfect for everyone (well at least you and those who believe like you do). You need to get over that. It willnever be perfect.

    I am a very non religious person. I think poorly of organized religion for many reasons. If you want a relationship with any god, have one but don't push it on everyone else. That being said, I am not bothered by religious symbols, bibles churches or anything else religious. I CHOOSE to ignore it. It doesnt affect me.

    At the same time I have great respect for anyone of faith, because they have faith. I admire that. When our daughter was born early many many people called to say they would pray for us. I appreciated that because that was important to them and they thought enough of us to share their faith. That is pretty cool in my book. Regardless of my beliefs they were going to pray on my behalf. Pretty openminded as I see it.

    Now based on someones obvious hatred for all things religious, I would think if he were in the same boat as we were, he would tell those nice folks to keep their prayers cause he dont need em. Am I right Thomas? Or do you actually possess the capacity to respect someone elses beliefs, even different from your own, enough to be gracious and accept what they consider to be the best thing they can do for you? I doubt it based on your comments but maybe you'll surprise me. You don't seem to respect anyone who disagrees with you.

    Until the governement starts lobbing 10 Commandment monuments into you living room, can you really point out any effect they have had on you? I do wonder how the monument outside the courthouse on the grass in Coeur d'alene Idaho has ruined your life. Please enlighten will you? Or just make you typical smug remark and move on like usual. I care not.
    “There are four boxes to be used in defense of liberty: soap, ballot, jury, and ammo. Please use in that order.”
    — Ed Howdershelt
    "A government big enough to give you everything you want, is big enough to take away everything you have."- Thomas Jefferson
  8. #128  
    Quote Originally Posted by Insertion
    Just FYI Clulup, Abe Lincoln was not a "founding father." Why you quoted him in that group is a mystery.
    Not a mystery, just a lapse.

    However, nobody seems to be able to provide information on which Christian principles played a role in founding the US (or other nations if you prefer). So for the time being, is it fair to assume that there aren't any?
    “Reality is that which, when you stop believing in it, doesn't go away.” (Philip K. ****)
  9.    #129  
    Quote Originally Posted by clulup
    Not a mystery, just a lapse.

    However, nobody seems to be able to provide information on which Christian principles played a role in founding the US (or other nations if you prefer). So for the time being, is it fair to assume that there aren't any?
    You havent looked very hard. The Library of Congress is a good place to start.

    "Many of the British North American colonies that eventually formed the United States of America were settled in the seventeenth century by men and women, who, in the face of European persecution, refused to compromise passionately held religious convictions and fled Europe. The New England colonies, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, and Maryland were conceived and established "as plantations of religion." Some settlers who arrived in these areas came for secular motives--"to catch fish" as one New Englander put it--but the great majority left Europe to worship God in the way they believed to be correct. They enthusiastically supported the efforts of their leaders to create "a city on a hill" or a "holy experiment," whose success would prove that God's plan for his churches could be successfully realized in the American wilderness. Even colonies like Virginia, which were planned as commercial ventures, were led by entrepreneurs who considered themselves "militant Protestants" and who worked diligently to promote the prosperity of the church."

    LOC
    Well behaved women rarely make history
  10. #130  
    Quote Originally Posted by clairegrrl
    You havent looked very hard. The Library of Congress is a good place to start.

    "Many of the British North American colonies that eventually formed the United States of America were settled in the seventeenth century by men and women, who, in the face of European persecution, refused to compromise passionately held religious convictions and fled Europe. The New England colonies, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, and Maryland were conceived and established "as plantations of religion." Some settlers who arrived in these areas came for secular motives--"to catch fish" as one New Englander put it--but the great majority left Europe to worship God in the way they believed to be correct. They enthusiastically supported the efforts of their leaders to create "a city on a hill" or a "holy experiment," whose success would prove that God's plan for his churches could be successfully realized in the American wilderness. Even colonies like Virginia, which were planned as commercial ventures, were led by entrepreneurs who considered themselves "militant Protestants" and who worked diligently to promote the prosperity of the church."

    LOC
    I fail to see the link to my question. Creating "a city on a hill" or a "holy experiment" are hardly Christian principles. I never doubted that many founders were Christians, but that does not mean Christian principles were of importance for the constitution or other foundations of the US.

    The question is still open: are there any Christian principles which were instrumental in the founding of the US or other nations, or which served as the basis for parts of the constitution? If so, which ones?
    “Reality is that which, when you stop believing in it, doesn't go away.” (Philip K. ****)
  11.    #131  
    Quote Originally Posted by clulup
    The question is still open: are there any Christian principles which were instrumental in the founding of the US or other nations, or which served as the basis for parts of the constitution? If so, which ones?
    That's really two questions. As far as the term "Christian principals", the people that came here did so because of religious persecution - "but the great majority left Europe to worship God in the way they believed to be correct." The part you left out about the city on the hill thing was "whose success would prove that God's plan for his churches could be successfully realized in the American wilderness." I think that they were very strong believers in God and an "organized" religion. While I think they were still hung up on who was Catholic and who was Protestant, it was religion that made them feel "moral."

    As far as being in the Constitution, no.
    Well behaved women rarely make history
  12. #132  
    Quote Originally Posted by clairegrrl
    As far as being in the Constitution, no.
    Cool, for once we agree on something...
    “Reality is that which, when you stop believing in it, doesn't go away.” (Philip K. ****)
  13. #133  
    Wow...so are you two dating now??
    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..."
  14. #134  
    Quote Originally Posted by Insertion
    Wow...so are you two dating now??
    Radiocarbon dating maybe...
    “Reality is that which, when you stop believing in it, doesn't go away.” (Philip K. ****)
  15.    #135  
    Quote Originally Posted by clulup
    Cool, for once we agree on something...
    I dont always disagree...it's just the way you say thing sometimes.
    Well behaved women rarely make history
  16.    #136  
    Quote Originally Posted by Insertion
    Wow...so are you two dating now??
    No..I know he's saving himself for T2 and Hobbesis. They have some kinda threesome goin'
    Well behaved women rarely make history
  17. #137  
    damn...and I thought we were about to have a love connection on TC.
    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.    #138  
    Quote Originally Posted by Insertion
    damn...and I thought we were about to have a love connection on TC.
    Actually...

    Well behaved women rarely make history
  19. #139  
    Is there a port in Swissland??
    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..."
  20. #140  
    Quote Originally Posted by clulup
    However, nobody seems to be able to provide information on which Christian principles played a role in founding the US (or other nations if you prefer). So for the time being, is it fair to assume that there aren't any?
    Your scientific manner of attacking arguments is showing here......not everything has an if, then feel to it.

    Would you not agree that many of the statements, rights and expectations discussed in the US Constitution has roots in the values of the founding fathers? If so, where do you suppose a significant portion of those values were derived?
Page 7 of 11 FirstFirst ... 234567891011 LastLast

Posting Permissions