Louisiana becomes first state to require that Ten Commandments be displayed in public classrooms

[Clizby Wampuscat]

For myself, of course, I like the Ten Commitments of Humanism, Developed by the American Humanist Association's Centre for Education.

But of course, we couldn't put them on school walls -- nowhere do they say, "I will amass as much money as possible regardless of the cost to the planet or people and creatures on it."

The Ten Commitments​

Altruism: “I will help others in need without hoping for rewards.”

Critical Thinking: “I will practice good judgment by asking questions and thinking for myself.”

Empathy: “I will consider other people’s thoughts, feelings, and experiences.”

Environmentalism: “I will take care of the Earth and the life on it.”

Ethical Development: “I will always focus on becoming a better person.”

Global Awareness: “I will be a good neighbor to the people who share the Earth with me and help make the world a better place for everyone.”

Humility: “I will be aware of my strengths and weaknesses, and appreciate the strengths and weaknesses of others.”

Peace and Social Justice: “I will help people solve problems and handle disagreements in ways that are fair for everyone.”

Responsibility: “I will be a good person—even when no one is looking—and own the consequences of my actions.”

Service and Participation: “I will help my community in ways that let me get to know the people I’m helping.”

These are all good values that we should aspire to. My only issue with these is that is follows the pattern of the ten commandments. It is a response to them instead of just providing our values as humanists. They made sure there was ten of them to correspond to christianity. I think that was a mistake.

 

[Pogo]

No, we don't, unless we're in public office. I wonder if you take this same stance towards the 2nd Amendment, as well.

So you have always kept silent during the pledge of allegiance?
As to the 2A, Scotus's opinion is the law though I disagree, but my allegiance says not to disobey but to change.
SCOTUS and the law as written.

 

[Pogo]

These are all good values that we should aspire to. My only issue with these is that is follows the pattern of the ten commandments. It is a response to them instead of just providing our values as humanists. They made sure there was ten of them to correspond to christianity. I think that was a mistake.

Whoosh

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

So you have always kept silent during the pledge of allegiance?
As to the 2A, Scotus's opinion is the law though I disagree, but my allegiance says not to disobey but to change.
SCOTUS and the law as written.

I stopped standing for the Pledge of Allegiance after 9/11. I don't agree with it. We just did it because that's what we were expected to do. It's not a legit oath.

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

How insecure are these people?
This is a sad day.

You want insecure, look at the hysterics in this thread. Lol.

 

[metis]

Since this Louisiana law goes against previous court decisions over the last 50+ years, it is my hope it's declared unconstitutional again.

 

[Balthazzar]

Only if it's teaching world religions, and no one religion is said to be correct over others.

As would be their right IF Florida is going to allow any single religion to be promoted by the state.

But the federal constitution has authority over anything a state will decree.

We are seeing some red states being rebellious, and oddly are much like the old Confederate States and their rebellion against the federal coalition. What is motivating this rebellion? It seems to be rebellion for the sake of frustration of nothing in particular. It resembles the tantrums we see in children.

Like wearing a cross....

Yes, and like all other rights it has limitations. For example Christians can't torture and execute people for wutchcraft like they once did. Christians can't proliferate creationism to children in public school. Christians do have the right to teach their children to be bigots against gays, or lie to them about science, and that I find troubling, but it's the way it goes in a free society.

That hasn't happened for any religion. If they did for Christianity would it be a liberal version that valkues science and women's right to access abortion services, or an extremist form that is anti-gay, anti-science, and anti-abortion access?

Sure, if a community allows a place for religious symbols, good for them to show diversity and liberty.

The last thing the world needs is more religious extremists beleiving they have the "truth" over all others. Less conviction and zeal for religion, and more for humanism.

The last point I might agree on. Democracy has been in developmental stages for some time now. Not just in the states here, but other territories, which have become allies, and our cooperation is based on democracy, so the stage has gotten bigger. With this growth comes a need for greater State control. This limits the larger democracy and increases state majority power via democratic process. How this is going to play out moving forward is anyone's guess, but Louisiana has taken the initiative to represent State majority. This is a good thing in my opinion. Similar things have been common over the last several years with Marijuana reform. Anyway, the democratic pond has become a much larger body of water, so to speak. This likewise threatens other non-democratic territories. In other words, some issues seem trivial in contrast to the bigger picture and concern.

 

[Balthazzar]

Do you think thats what polygamists prefer?

I wouldn't know and don't really concern myself with other people's sexual lifestyles. Several partners equate to several partners, and some people don't practice fidelity in these types of relationships. Others do. Polygamy wasn't my point...obviously. The point was pointed out specifically. This isn't about judgment, but about practical understanding of very common things.

 

[Pogo]

I stopped standing for the Pledge of Allegiance after 9/11. I don't agree with it. We just did it because that's what we were expected to do. It's not a legit oath.

Well then excuse us if we give your opinions the same degree of respect.

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

Well then excuse us if we give your opinions the same degree of respect.

Plenty of people on here respect my opinions. If you do or not doesn't matter. You're just some noob.

 

[Pogo]

Since this Louisiana law goes against previous court decisions over the last 50+ years, it is my hope it's declared unconstitutional again.

Ok faith and hope are beautiful things.

 

[Pogo]

The last point I might agree on. Democracy has been in developmental stages for some time now. Not just in the states here, but other territories, which have become allies, and our cooperation is based on democracy, so the stage has gotten bigger. With this growth comes a need for greater State control. This limits the larger democracy and increases state majority power via democratic process. How this is going to play out moving forward is anyone's guess, but Louisiana has taken the initiative to represent State majority. This is a good thing in my opinion. Similar things have been common over the last several years with Marijuana reform. Anyway, the democratic pond has become a much larger body of water, so to speak. This likewise threatens other non-democratic territories. In other words, some issues seem trivial in contrast to the bigger picture and concern.

And separation of church and state is not one of the trivial ones, look at Iran for example.

 

[Pogo]

Plenty of people on here respect my opinions. If you do or not doesn't matter. You're just some noob.

And you are just a refugee that couldn't make it in the Capitol of the land of fruits and Nuts.

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

And you are just a refugee that couldn't make it in the Capitol of the land of fruits and Nuts.

You're like twice my age and behaving like a damn child with school yard insults. You really need to grow up. You're the one who made this conversation turn rude and personal, starting in that other thread.

 

[Balthazzar]

And separation of church and state is not one of the trivial ones, look at Iran for example.

As a historical document required in that context, the disagreement is trivial particularly when practical application of intent is understood. Looking back at the past 3 decades, the many constitutional challenges, amendments, and dialogue/debate concerning them by the left, you would think if the constitution was truly the issue, we'd have seen much greater support for it. It's not the issue. Something else is. People just like using the constitution, skewed perception of anyway to challenge the church. If I'm incorrect, prove to me from the last 3 decades how the constitution is being honored at all by some types.

 

[Pogo]

As a historical document required in that context, the disagreement is trivial particularly when practical application of intent is understood. Looking back at the past 3 decades, the many constitutional challenges, amendments, and dialogue/debate concerning them by the left, you would think if the constitution was truly the issue, we'd have seen much greater support for it. It's not the issue. Something else is. People just like using the constitution, skewed perception of anyway to challenge the church. If I'm incorrect, prove to me from the last 3 decades how the constitution is being honored at all by some types.

Which Church? Who's Church. The constitution and the founders wanted separation of church and state for exactly the reasons that you are attempting to contravene by imposing your religious sensibilities on everyone. The last few decades have been the recognition of the founders reasons for the separation. Specifically because some would abuse it to favor their religion.
Your religion is a private matter as is everybody else's as is guaranteed by the constitution.

 

[Argentbear]

As a historical document required in that context, the disagreement is trivial particularly when practical application of intent is understood. Looking back at the past 3 decades, the many constitutional challenges, amendments, and dialogue/debate concerning them by the left, you would think if the constitution was truly the issue, we'd have seen much greater support for it. It's not the issue. Something else is. People just like using the constitution, skewed perception of anyway to challenge the church. If I'm incorrect, prove to me from the last 3 decades how the constitution is being honored at all by some types.

Challenge the church how?

 

[Subduction Zone]

Which Church? Who's Church. The constitution and the founders wanted separation of church and state for exactly the reasons that you are attempting to contravene by imposing your religious sensibilities on everyone. The last few decades have been the recognition of the founders reasons for the separation. Specifically because some would abuse it to favor their religion.
Your religion is a private matter as is everybody else's as is guaranteed by the constitution.

I have a brother that is a member of the Seventh Day Adventists. They are an extremely fundamentalist group. But he is no idiot. He can see how government dabbling in religion is a threat to his religious beliefs. When it comes to religion and the government he strongly supports a secular government, even when he disagrees with him. He understands that a government that tells you what you have to do religiously can also tell you what you cannot do. This is a first attempt to form a national religion.

 

[Balthazzar]

Which Church? Who's Church. The constitution and the founders wanted separation of church and state for exactly the reasons that you are attempting to contravene by imposing your religious sensibilities on everyone. The last few decades have been the recognition of the founders reasons for the separation. Specifically because some would abuse it to favor their religion.
Your religion is a private matter as is everybody else's as is guaranteed by the constitution.

i agree actually. We really can't afford a biased religious government broad brushing rule, particularly when the 1st amendment guarantees freedom of religion. The bias of one religion over another religion as it might relate to federal laws and policies, would be a dangerous thing for this nation. I wouldn't want to be controlled or ruled by a Buddhist philosophy, nor Muslim or even Christian. As a State becoming its own entity existing within a territory within the realm of constitutional law, I would suggest that each state has a right to enact laws they deem best fit to secure the safety and well being of its citizens. I will assume this is the dynamic taking place in Louisiana as well as in Florida, and very likely due to perceived threats by hostile entities. If I'm not mistaken, this too is constitutional and likewise expected from us as the governing authority over our specific demographics. It's a less violent stand for our security, but not unwarranted.

 

[Pogo]

i agree actually. We really can't afford a biased religious government broad brushing rule, particularly when the 1st amendment guarantees freedom of religion. The bias of one religion over another religion as it might relate to federal laws and policies, would be a dangerous thing for this nation. I wouldn't want to be controlled or ruled by a Buddhist philosophy, nor Muslim or even Christian. As a State becoming its own entity existing within a territory within the realm of constitutional law, I would suggest that each state has a right to enact laws they deem best fit to secure the safety and well being of its citizens. I will assume this is the dynamic taking place in Louisiana as well as in Florida, and very likely due to perceived threats by hostile entities. If I'm not mistaken, this too is constitutional and likewise expected from us as the governing authority over our specific demographics. It's a less violent stand for our security, but not unwarranted.

Louisiana constitution Article 1 section 8

§8. Freedom of Religion
Section 8. No law shall be enacted respecting an establishment of religion or prohibiting the free exercise thereof.

US Constitution Amendment 1
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

It is generally interpreted as not being able to favor one religion and since the 10 commandments are specific to a subset of religions it shouldn't fly in LA or the US . See Stone vs Graham re Ten Commandments in classrooms.
Stone v. Graham, 449 U.S. 39, was a court case in which the Supreme Court of the United States ruled that a Kentucky statute was unconstitutional and in violation of the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment, because it lacked a nonreligious, legislative purpose. Wikipedia​