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

[Kathryn]

That’s what I just said… it was there with the advent of the slaying of Abel. Morality is the DNA that was there from the beginning. It is man hat twits morality.

Please don't make me decipher this.

 

[Revoltingest]

That’s what I just said… it was there with the advent of the slaying of Abel.

This isn't clear.
Was it there for the 1st time, or already there?

Morality is the DNA that was there from the beginning.

The beginning of humans (or animals) or of Christianity?

It is man hat twits morality.

What does this mean in the context of this discussion?

 

[Kathryn]

What does this mean in the context of this discussion?

Maybe it's just a cool thing to say. It is man hat twits morality.

 

[Twilight Hue]

Maybe it's just a cool thing to say. It is man hat twits morality.

Lemme try! Oh, I got it!

 

[Evangelicalhumanist]

Doesn't anybody read enough of @Kenny to figure out what he's actually saying -- and typing badly?

Maybe it's just a cool thing to say. It is man hat twits morality.

Kenny meant to write: "Maybe it's just a cool thing to say. It is man that twists morality."

 

[fantome profane]

Doesn't anybody read enough of @Kenny to figure out what he's actually saying -- and typing badly?

Maybe it's just a cool thing to say. It is man hat twits morality.

Kenny meant to write: "Maybe it's just a cool thing to say. It is man that twists morality."

It is possible that that was intended to say "It is man that twists morality". That is the only thing that makes any sense to me. But that would mean that we have to assume two typos, but not only that, but we would have to assume @Kenny was quoting Nietzsche, and that doesn't seem his style. The idea seems counter to his point and I think it is safe to say his entire philosophy.

 

[Kenny]

This isn't clear.
Was it there for the 1st time, or already there?

It is there from the beginning

The beginning of humans (or animals) or of Christianity?

of humans made in His image and in His likeness

What does this mean in the context of this discussion?

You tell me… I’m just answering your questions.

 

[SkepticThinker]

This was your claim, "If there is an application to US Law from another religion, I think it would have every right to be posted also. If there are Greek applications to US Law… post them. I don’t think erasing historical realities is an answer to anything. We shouldn’t erase the realities of historicity of slavery in the US and we shouldn’t erase reality that US Law used much of the 10 commandments aa a basis for law."


Just looking briefly over your list here, I can see that the ruling on Edwards v. Aguilard was that, "The [Creationism] Act is facially invalid as violative of the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment, because it lacks a clear secular purpose."
And, "The Act impermissibly endorses religion by advancing the religious belief that a supernatural being created humankind. The legislative history demonstrates that the term "creation science," as contemplated by the state legislature, embraces this religious teaching. The Act's primary purpose was to change the public school science curriculum to provide persuasive advantage to a particular religious doctrine that rejects the factual basis of evolution in its entirety. Thus, the Act is designed either to promote the theory of creation science that embodies a particular religious tenet or to prohibit the teaching of a scientific theory disfavored by certain religious sects. In either case, the Act violates the First Amendment. Pp. 482 U. S. 589-594."

Justice Brennan delivered the opinion which concluded with:

"The Louisiana Creationism Act advances a religious doctrine by requiring either the banishment of the theory of evolution from public school classrooms or the presentation of a religious viewpoint that rejects evolution in its entirety. The act violates the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment because it seeks to employ the symbolic and financial support of government to achieve a religious purpose. The judgment of the Court of Appeals therefore is

Affirmed."


This decision was upheld by the Supreme Court that the act violated the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment. And you've included this in your list of cases that demonstrate that "much of the 10 commandments [are] the basis for US law." Can you explain why?

I guess I'm not getting a response to this.

I sure hope I don't see you dropping this cut and paste jumble of cases ever again, since you don't seem to know what they say and don't seem to have any intention of responding when people take the time to go through them.

 

[Revoltingest]

It is there from the beginning

Given that you're a Christian, "beginning" is ambiguous.
Please define what & when your "beginning" is.

of humans made in His image and in His likeness

Is this about Adam & Eve?
No humans before them?

You tell me… I’m just answering your questions.

In a cryptic manner, eg....
"It is man hat twits morality."
What on Earth does that mean?

Each answer raises questions about what the answer means.
I get the impression of someone trapped defending the
un-defendable, & is tap dancing around clear direct answers.

 

[Kenny]

Given that you're a Christian, "beginning" is ambiguous.
Please define what & when your "beginning" is.

To the point that we are discussing (at least to my understanding) - when beginning is, is not relevance

Is this about Adam & Eve?
No humans before them?

Again, in context of what we are discussing - that question is irrelevance

In a cryptic manner, eg....
"It is man hat twits morality."
What on Earth does that mean?

The initial morality was established by God. Humans tend to reason what His standard to lesser standards. As an example, He established that a marriage should be covenantal between a man and a woman with Him intertwined in the relationship. Man that twists original design into a multiplicity of designs such as polygamy.

Each answer raises questions about what the answer means.
I get the impression of someone trapped defending the
un-defendable, & is tap dancing around clear direct answers.

Purely in your imagination. I would view it as the truth making you uncomfortable.

 

[Revoltingest]

To the point that we are discussing (at least to my understanding) - when beginning is, is not relevance

Again, in context of what we are discussing - that question is irrelevance

Makes no sense.

The initial morality was established by God. Humans tend to reason what His standard to lesser standards. As an example, He established that a marriage should be covenantal between a man and a woman with Him intertwined in the relationship. Man that twists original design into a multiplicity of designs such as polygamy.

Does this mean that other animals had no
morality until God imposed it upon humans
he created?

It appears that you believe morality stems only
from the Christian God. This is a religious
belief that's inappropriate for public schools to
teach. It's not even right for private schools to
teach such myths as factual.

Purely in your imagination. I would view it as the truth making you uncomfortable.

You'll note that I'm not the only one
who finds your posts inscrutable.

 

[LeftyLen]

My heart says yes, but my constitution says no

 

[Kenny]

Makes no sense.

Does this mean that other animals had no
morality until God imposed it upon humans
he created?

It appears that you believe morality stems only
from the Christian God. This is a religious
belief that's inappropriate for public schools to
teach. It's not even right for private schools to
teach such myths as factual.

You'll note that I'm not the only one
who finds your posts inscrutable.

I don’t find you making any sense in all of this… you are all over the place.

 

[Revoltingest]

I don’t find you making any sense in all of this… you are all over the place.

Ironic.

 

[Kenny]

Maybe it's just a cool thing to say. It is man hat twits morality.

LOL… maybe it is a new fad being birthed. Or a sentence created on the run and not reading before hitting “Save” but ons

 

[Shadow Wolf]

That’s what I just said… it was there with the advent of the slaying of Abel. Morality is the DNA that was there from the beginning. It is man that twists morality.

Then why do other prohibitions against murder exist before the 10 Commandments?

 

[Kenny]

Then why do other prohibitions against murder exist before the 10 Commandments?

In my understanding, it actually originates from Genesis 4, way before the 10 Commandments were presented. We know that it was first oral to humanity. Love knows that murder is wrong. and everything was birthed from the God who is Love.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

In my understanding, it actually originates from Genesis 4, way before the 10 Commandments were presented. We know that it was first oral to humanity. Love knows that murder is wrong. and everything was birthed from the God who is Love.

Your understanding makes no place the humans who existed before us modern homo sapiens, or even modern homo sapiens who came before the ancient Hebrews and before their religion was wrote down and formalized into what it is today.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

What does this mean in the context of this discussion?

Its a common fundamentalist protestant position that believes that ultimately morality is derived from god who gave us perfect rules to live by but that it's humans who get things wrong, twist and streth the rules and justify the ways of man are better than the ways of god.
In other words, its an effort to attack humans and play up their belief we are inherently sinful and doomed to fail and enforce thier poisonous views were are corrupt, wicked, evil sinners without their god. Inherently we just can't get things right or even do the right thing on our own and we must have their god just to have a shot and a chance at doing the right thing.
It also builds on their belief their god is everywhere and all living things naturally worship and praise him, and without him it's atheism and atheists are fools or its paganism with its false gods and sinful practices. Morality comes from him, so to reject him must mean it makes us immoral.

 

[Kenny]

Your understanding makes no place the humans who existed before us modern homo sapiens, or even modern homo sapiens who came before the ancient Hebrews and before their religion was wrote down and formalized into what it is today.

But we are talking about humanity. Who is to say that pre-humans didn’t also know?