• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

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

Shadow Wolf

Certified People sTabber & Business Owner
I like George Carlin's version:

First: •THOU SHALT ALWAYS BE HONEST AND FAITHFUL, ESPECIALLY TO THE PROVIDER OF THY NOOKIE.
And second:•THOU SHALT TRY REAL HARD NOT TO KILL ANYONE, UNLESS, OF COURSE, THEY PRAY TO A DIFFERENT INVISIBLE MAN THAN THE ONE YOU PRAY TO.
Two is all you need, folks. Moses could have carried them down the hill in his pocket. And if we had a list like that, I wouldn't mind that brilliant judge in Alabama displaying it prominently in the courthouse wall. As long he included one additional commandment: •THOU SHALT KEEP THY RELIGION TO THYSELF!
 

Argentbear

Well-Known Member
I happen to agree with your post. I also happen to agree with the decision made in Louisianna. The difference is in the democratic process. The state represented a majority, federally the separation still stands, and it is on a state to state decision course now, based on efforts and majority rule. This way, the 1st stands for everyone, and each state represents their own majority as they deem fit. This separation enables greater freedom and strengthens our democratic processes per community.
State laws cannot conflict with the Constitution no matter how many people vote for it or not. Individual states cannot for example vote to have segregation reinstated or it can't vote to outlaw interracial marriage.
 

Kathryn

It was on fire when I laid down on it.
Your foundational book must be interpreted by others?
Which have THE TRUTH, of the many diverse views?

Christian history says otherwise.
Even today, some still practice it.

You mean the version of the 10 Commandments
that you like. What of Christians who want other
versions....more original godly versions?
Why not post other prescriptions of good behavior,
eg, don't enslave people, honor your word, etc?
To command obeying a god we don't believe in,
but not command integrity is evil.
WORLD history says that the entire WORLD practiced slavery from as far as we can look back thru to the 19th century. Not just Christians, for the record.

What's your process for deciding that the 10th commandment is actually condoning slavery?
 
Last edited:

Kenny

Face to face with my Father
Premium Member
So, @Kenny, the First Commandment was cited in 26 cases, the Second in 24 cases. Do you know what convictions resulted? I mean, not following the First ought to mean that it was cited to put Hindus into jail for worshipping any of their gods, right? Or the Second could be cited for putting up a cross with a figurine of Jesus hanging on it, no?
No. Did God force the Edomites to worship YHWH? No. Jesus didn’t say force.

But we still shouldn’t commit murder et al.


If not those, what the hell was your point in posting that nonsense?

That it does have historical value as demonstrated
 

Kenny

Face to face with my Father
Premium Member
As I responded last time somebody made this silly claim, do the same search for how many times Shakespeare has been quoted. That literature that deals with the human condition is used in a rhetorical context does not make it law so matter how many points it is printed in.
How was Shakespeare used in law? Did they quote his works?

I still see irrelevancy with your statement.
 

Kenny

Face to face with my Father
Premium Member
wow an unreferenced and context free quote about a computer search that seems to have nothing to do with my question. Thank you
You are welcome. Does that mean it is false? Would you like the site?
 

Shadow Wolf

Certified People sTabber & Business Owner
I agree, aside from being useless and that people innately know they are wrong. Some do sure, but not all. Tweaking like teaching what they mean and how to apply them or do you think they should be amended like the bill of rights?
The Bill of Rights is America's 10. Those haven't been amended. 11-27 aren't considered the Bill of Rights.
I think "honor thy mother and thy father" needs completely changed to put the pressure on parents to be worthy of honor. Thou shalt not covet needs reworked because it depends on what we do with those feelings that matter. Does it motivate you to improve your life? Did it move you to sleep with your neighbor's wife who is in a monogamous relationship? Did it make you go out and work to earn it or go out and steal it?
But the Bible doesn't really tell or instruct us on how to handle and cope with thoughts. It just pretends it's better to not have "impure thoughts" and Jesus counts it as a sin to have them.
 

Shadow Wolf

Certified People sTabber & Business Owner
US History and its application in US Law.

View attachment 93254
So? Lots of states have laws that prohibit atheists from holding public office despite the blatant unconstitutionality of those laws.
The Treaty of Tripoli states America was not founded upon the a Christian religion in any sense.
A Supreme Court judge wrote a clear distinction between a nation of predominantly Christians, which the US is, and a Christian Nation, which the US is not.
 

McBell

Unbound
... do you think they should be amended like the bill of rights?
I am unaware of the Bill of Rights being amended

As for the Ten Commandments, their being amended depends upon what purpose theya re to serve.
If they are merely guidelines for Christians, no amending needed.

If they are to be guidelines for all the world, they need some serious work.
 

Kenny

Face to face with my Father
Premium Member
Yet you ignore the statements in the treaty of Tripoli.

Not really. You basically have just two documents, one a letter and the other a political treaty with another country that was later changed, to base your position while I have dozens and dozens of documents - legal documents - that say otherwise.

What you want is for me to throw out all legal document based on two statement - one political and the other person (and the personal somewhat taken out of context) Why do you ignore the legal documents that support my position?
 
Last edited:

The Hammer

Skald
Premium Member
Not really. You basically have just too documents, one a letter and the other a political treaty with another country that was later changed, to base your position while I have dozens and dozens of documents - legal documents - that say otherwise.

What you want is for me to throw out all legal document based on two statement - one political and the other person (and the personal somewhat taken out of context) Why do you ignore the legal documents that support my position?

I'll take the text of the US constitution and Treaty of Tripoli, over your opinion.

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion." Which applies as the basis all the States are supposed to follow (the Constitution, in case I'm not clear).
 

The Hammer

Skald
Premium Member
By requiring public state funded schools post the Christian ten commandments that is a law that explicitly "respects an establishment of religion". @Kenny
 
Top