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

[Evangelicalhumanist]

The 1st amendment ensures freedom of religion and assembly, freedom of the press, and freedom to petition for redresses of grievances. It also, shows us in the declaration of independence what is accepted and expected as an appropriate way to dissolve one people from others under constitutional law.

In other words, you won't answer my question. Got it.

 

[Balthazzar]

How many other rights would you permit states to take away from their citizens, at the behest of state majorities? Can you enumerate which you would and would not?

The right to marry? To marry a person of another race? Of the same sex?
The right to freedom of assembly?
The right to privacy?
Non-discrimination on the basis of (pick all that apply): race, colour, sex, sexual orientation, language, religion, political or other opinion, national or social origin, property, birth or other status?
Habeas Corpus?
Political dissent? (Many countries/states don't like that at all. Russia jails people for it.)

We're speaking about the 1st amendment and how it applies to Louisiana's ruling. At first you suggested there was no getting around it. I suggested that congress did not respect a particular religion or make a law. Louisiana did. Second you ask about other types of laws, which are irrelevant to this case. I simply posted what was relevant as an answer to your question.

 

[Viker]

If this is not about religious indoctrination and encroachment, why would it be required in a math class or in a classroom at a technical college? If it genuinely about a historical document, why not just in related classrooms (history, etc )?

 

[Viker]

We're speaking about the 1st amendment and how it applies to Louisiana's ruling. At first you suggested there was no getting around it. I suggested that congress did not respect a particular religion or make a law. Louisiana did. Second you ask about other types of laws, which are irrelevant to this case. I simply posted what was relevant as an answer to your question.

All public schools and public colleges are under the Department of Education, a public Federal jurisdiction. Louisiana is still in the United States and is still under it's laws.

 

[Balthazzar]

If this is not about religious indoctrination and encroachment, why would it be required in a math class or in a classroom at a technical college?

Because Louisianna lawmakers and state majority decided this was best for the state. Have you ever read the Declaration of Independance?

 

[Balthazzar]

All public schools and public colleges are under the Department of Education, a public Federal jurisdiction. Louisiana is still in the United States and is still under it's laws.

That's correct.

 

[Kenny]

They're Commandments, not requests or suggestions. I'll bet it would be instructive to go back in time and find out if there's wiggle room there or not. "I chose to not honor my parents because I found no value in them." My guess is that you'd rarely hear the answer, "OK, in that case, you can disobey or malign them."

Yes, if you mine it and don’t take the whole of the message or if you become dogmatically religious about it. You give honor where honor is due in as much as it is due.

 

[Viker]

Because Louisianna lawmakers and state majority decided this was best for the state. Have you ever read the Declaration of Independance?

Doesn't matter what they decided. Just as when it didn't matter when they decided to resist segregation.

The DoC uses ambiguous language. It does not use any direct religious terminology. It never mentions Jesus or Christianity.

 

[Viker]

Once more. "States rights" a lousy excuse to deprive minority groups their rights.

 

[Evangelicalhumanist]

Once more. "States rights" a lousy excuse to deprive minority groups their rights.

Thank you! Well said.

 

[Balthazzar]

Doesn't matter what they decided. Just as when it didn't matter when they decided to resist segregation.

The DoC uses ambiguous language. It does not use any direct religious terminology. It never mentions Jesus or Christianity.

I've noticed the law suit and the backing. I question something about this entire situation. The lawsuit, if you're not familiar with it, involves a few families of Louisiana residents who disagree with the ruling. This will likely end up in the Supreme court for these reasons. The question is about our nation and the people who live here. Prior to this law for the State of Louisiana, only Atheists were being acknowledged as credible and valid. Now, we at least have no bias shown in one State, the other religions are viewed as irrelevant in every state but Louisianna. This is why: They have chosen to dissolve their ties in way that they deem most fit to protect and secure their happiness in that state. This is the premise and why I expect a reason provided. I want it to be evident why this was important enough to pursue by Louisianna.

Congress will make no law that respects any religion, but we have Loiuisianna making a law that respects a religion. You would resist this type of segregation on what premise? That congress will make no law respecting a religion? When a majority makes a decision after a 50 year window has made the former ruling apparent, there's a reason for it. My view is, if this nation is to truly allow for freedom of religion and assembly, and also for congress to not make laws that respect any specific religion, this will require an equal position as a state to honor the declaration of Independance as a nation and as a state. I'm sure people would like to be free to practice openly their religions. I'm sure atheists would prefer not be subject to it all, which leaves a door open for everyone.

But, only one state has been able to do this thus far. It will take time if everyone is to be honored equally.

 

[Kathryn]

Researching the evolution of Christian wording of it.
There’s not denying or justifying Christians having supported slavery.

You sure do hold Christians up to a higher standard.

But I do agree that Christians should not support slavery and I don't see the connection - sorry.

 

[Kathryn]

It's never declared to be wrong or immoral in the Bible.

The New Testament doesn't involve itself with politics or even stations in life. It basically says that whatever condition you find yourself in, be content.

 

[Kathryn]

Yeah, I've heard the same from whatever camp you're hailing from but it's pretty easily refuted.

The Old Testament is the Old Testament. It's an archive from the ancient world. The New Testament doesn't involve itself with politics. It basically says that whatever condition one finds oneself in, be content and make it work.

It condones and endorses slavery. It tells you where to get your slaves. It tells you how long you get to own them. It tells you how much to pay for them. It tells you how to treat them.

 

[Kathryn]

Because it was in keeping with world practices when it was written by people in that world.

Whatever you say or mean. Not really sure what you mean by this.

 

[Balthazzar]

Once more. "States rights" a lousy excuse to deprive minority groups their rights.

Minority rights are important enough to find an adequate solution to our grievances. How many Christians are left in the USA? How many Muslims? How many Atheists? How many Shinto or Buddhists? What about Catholics? Those of Judaism or Tao? Wiccan? The list goes' on and on. Freedom to assemble and practice religion in this nation has been shackled, yet our religious populations seem content with this and often oppose the notion of being exposed to religious literature and displays. As I've stated already, only one State has been able to achieve a majority acceptance from its citizens. Here's the facts: We can assemble. We can practice our religions. We can do this in peace. We can establish our communities with greater cooperation and success, and we can still be part of the security of this nation.

 

[Pogo]

We're speaking about the 1st amendment and how it applies to Louisiana's ruling. At first you suggested there was no getting around it. I suggested that congress did not respect a particular religion or make a law. Louisiana did. Second you ask about other types of laws, which are irrelevant to this case. I simply posted what was relevant as an answer to your question.

Yes we know your version, but what you haven't done isn't is give anyone a reason that a realistic reading of the first amendment might agree.
\

 

[Viker]

Minority rights are important enough to find an adequate solution to our grievances. How many Christians are left in the USA? How many Muslims? How many Atheists? How many Shinto or Buddhists? What about Catholics? Those of Judaism or Tao? Wiccan? The list goes' on and on. Freedom to assemble and practice religion in this nation has been shackled, yet our religious populations seem content with this and often oppose the notion of being exposed to religious literature and displays. As I've stated already, only one State has been able to achieve a majority acceptance from its citizens. Here's the facts: We can assemble. We can practice our religions. We can do this in peace. We can establish our communities with greater cooperation and success, and we can still be part of the security of this nation.

A solution could be not forcing by law doctrine from religion onto others (why would the Commandments need to be in a technical college classroom?). Freedom of religion isn't being shackled. Freedom from another's religion is being defended.

Another solution could be putting the US Constitution on display in every classroom. Because that's what brings us all together....a nonreligious document for us all.

 

[Balthazzar]

Yes we know your version, but what you haven't done isn't is give anyone a reason that a realistic reading of the first amendment might agree.
\

I gave this in the posting of the Declaration of Independance.

"When in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.--That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, --That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness."

Read more

1st amendment

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.

 

[Balthazzar]

A solution could be not forcing by law doctrine from religion onto others (why would the Commandments need to be in a technical college classroom?). Freedom of religion isn't being shackled. Freedom from another's religion is being defended.

Another solution could be putting the US Constitution on display in every classroom. Because that's what brings us all together....a nonreligious document for us all.

Time, effort, patience, perseverance and suffering or rather suffering the exclusion of our religions in the 49 states not subject to religious displays seems a very good start to me. At least one state has the freedom to represent their culture, even in the classrooms. They've chosen a small display with ten commandments, accompanied with a brief history. If other states choose this route, I wonder which religion will be honored next and how?