Hamilton County (TX) May Install Ten Commandments Monument Outside Courthouse

[Darkforbid]

I must jump in here.....
It is personally harmful in that it puts all on notice that the court is a Christian
affair....their version of Sharia. I've already endured the choice of pretending
to be one of them when affirming that I'll testify truthfully...or asking that I be
given a secular oath. The former is forced prayer of a sort. The latter is to
tacitly notify a judge &/or jury I'm not of their tribe, & perhaps not to be trusted.
Religion should not be made a factor in decisions & enforcement of justice.

Would you want your life or fortune to be ruled over by those who are likely
to look down upon you as an infidel?

A oath is available for many religions why do you think it implys a Christian court.

 

[We Never Know]

I must jump in here.....
It is personally harmful in that it puts all on notice that the court is a Christian
affair....their version of Sharia. I've already endured the choice of pretending
to be one of them when affirming that I'll testify truthfully...or asking that I be
given a secular oath. The former is forced prayer of a sort. The latter is to
tacitly notify a judge &/or jury I'm not of their tribe, & perhaps not to be trusted.
Religion should not be made a factor in decisions & enforcement of justice.

Would you want your life or fortune to be ruled over by those who are likely
to look down upon you as an infidel?

People are tried by a jury of their peers. What does peer mean to you?
Should a homeless man charged with a crime have a jury of homeless people as his peers?

 

[Revoltingest]

IMO I disagree. It shows they believe in the commandments which most try to to with being moral.
I don't believe in god but the commandments are a good list to follow even for me.
If they where supposedly written by John Doe instead of a god, no one would care.

If posting morals to be observed were the real goal, then the list
includes some wrong ones (no other gods allowed), & leaves out
some good ones (mind your own business).
So no, it's not about morals...it's about clearly stating....
"This is our religion, and ye shall submit.".

The problem here is that too many authoritarian Christians
believe that their morals are the universal morals for all.
They don't recognize or allow for other beliefs, even though
they should all be compatible.
So to those Christians I offer the return of advice (with some
modification) they'd previously given me....
Our Constitution as law of the land....love it or leave it.

 

[Revoltingest]

A oath is available for many religions why do you think it implys a Christian court.

"God", as spelled in the oath, is the name of the Christian god.
It is not Allah, Cthulhu, Thor, Krom, Lakshmi, Ganesh, or any other.

 

[Revoltingest]

Do you reply to and question yourself often

More often than I'd care to admit.
I blame multitasking....it leads to trouble.

 

[Revoltingest]

People are tried by a jury of their peers. What does peer mean to you?

A "jury of one's peers" is actually a popular myth.

The 6th Amendment....
In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public
trial, by an impartial jury of the state and district wherein the crime shall have been
committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be
informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the
witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his
favor, and to have the assistance of counsel for his defense.

Should a homeless man charged with a crime have a jury of homeless people as his peers?

This would not be his right.
While it is possible, it is highly unlikely.

 

[Darkforbid]

"God", as spelled in the oath, is the name of the Christian god.
It is not Allah, Cthulhu, Thor, Krom, Lakshmi, Ganesh, or any other.

In the courtroom

Before you give your evidence, you will be asked to either:

• repeat a religious oath (the court will take into account your religious beliefs), or
• agree that you promise to tell the truth (called an affirmation)

 

[Enoch07]

Oh, cool. Another nonsensical analogy.

Nope, every time a discussion like this pops up you accuse people of wanting a theocracy. It's just hilariously ridiculous.

 

[Revoltingest]

In the courtroom

Before you give your evidence, you will be asked to either:

• repeat a religious oath (the court will take into account your religious beliefs), or
• agree that you promise to tell the truth (called an affirmation)

My experience differs in that the choice is not offered.
But even if it were, this puts judge & jury on notice that
one eschews the Christian oath. This is potentially
negatively prejudicial.

Let's suppose that you're offered an oath to swear the
truth to Mohammed & Allahk. You're being sued by someone
who takes the Muslim oath. The judge & jury are Muslim.
Would you find this potentially problematic?

 

[A Vestigial Mote]

Nope, every time a discussion like this pops up you accuse people of wanting a theocracy. It's just hilariously ridiculous.

Not a bad thing to just keep reminding people that it will never be cool to want a theocracy. May as well use it as a point of obvious ridicule to keep such ideas at bay.

 

[Milton Platt]

In which case angered citizens may exercise the right of the sledge hammer---actually, I'd like to see the thing put up just to see it torn down.

"For some reason, the commissioners in Hamilton County, Texas think it’d be a great idea to install a stand-alone Ten Commandments monument outside the local courthouse, despite a very clear Supreme Court ruling that says that very thing is an illegal promotion of Christianity.

There’s already an “In God We Trust” sign outside the courthouse which skirts the boundary of church/state separation but has traditionally been on the “legal” side of it. The Ten Commandments one, however, would cross that boundary without question.

When the commissioners met this week, the discussion went in the wrong direction when a local judge cosplaying Roy Moore insisted there was nothing wrong with the potential Christian monument.

“I have no problem bringing it before the court and the will of the people in my opinion will be served,” County Judge Mark Tynes said.

“There have been those who waved the Constitution at me and I said, ‘OK wonderful, show me in the Constitution where what we are doing is against the Constitution?’”​

It’s in the amendments somewhere. One of the first few, I think. Pretty early in the bunch.

Christ, that man is a judge…"
source
​

What is it, the water they drink down south?

.​

All that needs to happen is that every two bit religion on earth needs to step up and say "Me too". It will be impossible to even gt to the door of the courthouse.

 

[Milton Platt]

Local government is restricted in some things but not all things by the Constitution. There is nothing in the language of the Clause that says it applies to local governments and federal and state jurisdiction over them can only go so far.

That is very true. But can a state legally do something that is in direct opposition to the constitution?

 

[Revoltingest]

That is very true. But can a state legally do something that is in direct opposition to the constitution?

Not legally....but the fed ultimately has the power of the purse.

 

[The Reverend Bob]

That is very true. But can a state legally do something that is in direct opposition to the constitution?

No states can't because of the 14th amendment but a state is allowed by home rule to let a municipality to govern themselves as they see fit as long as they don't violate the principles of the state or federal constitutions. Technically a municipality can limit whom can carry or possess firearms and to whom they can be sold to.

 

[whirlingmerc]

In which case angered citizens may exercise the right of the sledge hammer---actually, I'd like to see the thing put up just to see it torn down.

"For some reason, the commissioners in Hamilton County, Texas think it’d be a great idea to install a stand-alone Ten Commandments monument outside the local courthouse, despite a very clear Supreme Court ruling that says that very thing is an illegal promotion of Christianity.

There’s already an “In God We Trust” sign outside the courthouse which skirts the boundary of church/state separation but has traditionally been on the “legal” side of it. The Ten Commandments one, however, would cross that boundary without question.

When the commissioners met this week, the discussion went in the wrong direction when a local judge cosplaying Roy Moore insisted there was nothing wrong with the potential Christian monument.

“I have no problem bringing it before the court and the will of the people in my opinion will be served,” County Judge Mark Tynes said.

“There have been those who waved the Constitution at me and I said, ‘OK wonderful, show me in the Constitution where what we are doing is against the Constitution?’”​

It’s in the amendments somewhere. One of the first few, I think. Pretty early in the bunch.

Christ, that man is a judge…"
source
​

What is it, the water they drink down south?

.​

What's wrong with displaying the 10 commandments? the ethics of America was significantly shaped by that

 

[The Reverend Bob]

What's wrong with displaying the 10 commandments? the ethics of America was significantly shaped by that

Some people don't like history.

 

[Skwim]

What's wrong with displaying the 10 commandments?

How about the fact that it's against the law?

See post 22

.

 

[Father Heathen]

What's wrong with displaying the 10 commandments? the ethics of America was significantly shaped by that

Looking over them, I don't see how that's so.

 

[Enoch07]

Not a bad thing to just keep reminding people that it will never be cool to want a theocracy. May as well use it as a point of obvious ridicule to keep such ideas at bay.

Yeup just like reminded people daily of communist swine.

 

[Neutral Name]

In which case angered citizens may exercise the right of the sledge hammer---actually, I'd like to see the thing put up just to see it torn down.

"For some reason, the commissioners in Hamilton County, Texas think it’d be a great idea to install a stand-alone Ten Commandments monument outside the local courthouse, despite a very clear Supreme Court ruling that says that very thing is an illegal promotion of Christianity.

There’s already an “In God We Trust” sign outside the courthouse which skirts the boundary of church/state separation but has traditionally been on the “legal” side of it. The Ten Commandments one, however, would cross that boundary without question.

When the commissioners met this week, the discussion went in the wrong direction when a local judge cosplaying Roy Moore insisted there was nothing wrong with the potential Christian monument.

“I have no problem bringing it before the court and the will of the people in my opinion will be served,” County Judge Mark Tynes said.

“There have been those who waved the Constitution at me and I said, ‘OK wonderful, show me in the Constitution where what we are doing is against the Constitution?’”​

It’s in the amendments somewhere. One of the first few, I think. Pretty early in the bunch.

Christ, that man is a judge…"
source

​

What is it, the water they drink down south?

.​

Well, it's right up there with "In God we trust" written behind the judge in many courthouses, at least the ones I have been in and swearing on the Bible. What if you don't believe in the Bible? It seems to me that many people in the U.S. expect everyone in the U.S. to be Christians. They exclude people who are not Christian. I understand that Christianity is the highest percentage in the U.S. but that doesn't mean that everyone is Christian. Why should they expect everyone to go along with them? I never understand that. I thought we were a country dedicated to freedom of religion. That should mean all religions including not religious belief.