10 Commandments to go on State Capitol

[rwarn17588]

Our economy is in the crapper because people actually take a moment to analize things instead of believing any old fable that is passed on to us? 

Huh huh huh huh huh. He said "analize." Huh huh huh huh huh.

[patric]

From the Whirled, the bastard tried to pull the plug on educational TV:

"...state Reps. Mike Reynolds, R-Oklahoma City, and Mike Ritze, R-Broken Arrow, argued that the Oklahoma Educational Television Authority, the Oklahoma Arts Commission and the Human Rights Commission should be stripped of state funding"

[guido911]

From the Whirled, the bastard tried to pull the plug on educational TV:

"...state Reps. Mike Reynolds, R-Oklahoma City, and Mike Ritze, R-Broken Arrow, argued that the Oklahoma Educational Television Authority, the Oklahoma Arts Commission and the Human Rights Commission should be stripped of state funding"

Sounds good to me. The first two are not that important given the economy and the last provides a service redundant to the EEOC (although I like the folks down there).

[guido911]

Well it's about time. The ACLU suing to tear down crosses honoring war vets:

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2009/may/25/aclu-dead-wrong-on-cross/

Apparently Jewish and Muslim vets are offended or something

[cannon_fodder]

For the sake of argument:

They are suing to remove a 7 foot cross on Federal Land that was put up as a memorial to WWI soldiers and want it replaced with a memorial that honors all vets, not just the Christian ones.  The notion that this case has implications into other war monuments is just false.  It would have implications on monuments on public land that are devoted to one religion and purport to honor all Americans.  Furthermore, the argument that the crosses or other symbols are cemeteries would be affected is another false fear.  The headstone at a graveyard is an individual or family choice and does not purport to be governmental nor for all the soldiers/Americans.   I also think the argument that the cross is not really a cross, but is meant to mimic the fallen soldier memorial (rifle in the ground) is another disingenuous argument [just like pretending the 10 Commandment aren't really a religious symbol). 

Not that I'm really invested in this matter at all.  It has been there since 1934 and wasn't really erected by the government.  At this juncture I think there is an argument that the monument is part of the landscape and identity of the space.   I think there is little danger that someone will wonder through the desert and think the National Parks service, Department of Defense, or whomever else is endorsing Christianity. 

However, I also think many of the same people arguing in favor of leaving this cross us would be happy to see it torn down if it was a Crescent Moon.  Religious monuments are great, so long as they are YOUR religious monuments. 

[Conan71]

This is about some dip-sh!t civil liberties attorney trying to make a name for himself by trying to tear down an historic monument which has been there for 75 years.  This cross wasn't about trying to establish an official government religion, it was about honoring war dead.  This seems to me to have been a free exercise of religion, which our government has no right to restrict.  If Muslim and Jewish folk want to erect their own monuments adjacent to it, fine.  I simply don't believe that you tear down a 75 year old monument just because some ACLU a**hole thinks it might offend 10 or 20 people.

[guido911]

This is about some dip-sh!t civil liberties attorney trying to make a name for himself by trying to tear down an historic monument which has been there for 75 years.  This cross wasn't about trying to establish an official government religion, it was about honoring war dead.  This seems to me to have been a free exercise of religion, which our government has no right to restrict.  If Muslim and Jewish folk want to erect their own monuments adjacent to it, fine.  I simply don't believe that you tear down a 75 year old monument just because some ACLU a**hole thinks it might offend 10 or 20 people.

Yeah CF, what he said! 

I am tired of these BS publicity lawsuits over religious icons that have been in place for generations. I do not see this effort as any different than those that want to change the name of a city because of a Christian reference.

[cannon_fodder]

And in this instance I largely agree.  But many of the characterizations of this suit are false.  As I said, this one isn't a big issue for me.

[swake]

And in this instance I largely agree.  But many of the characterizations of this suit are false.  As I said, this one isn't a big issue for me.

Bad and misleading reporting by the Rev. Sun Myung Moon's Washington Times Newspaper?

Say it isn't so...

[cannon_fodder]

10 Commandments Monument in Haskell ruled to be an unconstitutional State Endorsement of religion. 

The 52 page opinion from the 10th Circuit  voted 3-0, with the Opinion written by a conservative judge from Oklahoma City, to overturn a lower court ruling and held that the monument was an unlawful endorsement of religion by the State.  It failed the Lemon test:

To pass constitutional muster, a challenged government action must: 1) have a secular legislative purpose, 2) have a principal or primary effect that neither advances nor inhibits religion, and 3) not foster an excessive government entanglement with religion.

The Court held that to a reasonable observer the primary purpose of the monument is to advance the Christian Religion in Oklahoma.   Governmental action must not have the effect of enhancing nor prohibiting religion.   Hard to come up with an honest goal accomplished by the monument other than that.  Even if you assume, arguendo, the we are a Christian Nation, the monument serves to reinforce the current status quo religion or allude to the supposed Christian nature of our laws.  Which is another way of saying the monument means Christianity is more important in the United States than any other religion.

To which supporters just said "Hell yes it is."  While probably true, it is not a position the government can advocate.  Which is kinda the point.

The full case can be found at:
10 Circuit Court of Appeals, 06-7098
- - - - - -

Keep in mind the Haskell County monument was on the Courthouse lawn with other long-standing monuments to which the residents of the county deemed their heritage.  It was distinguished from other monument cases because the display was not part of a larger scheme and/or it was challenged before it became an established part of the community. 

The monument in Texas which Oklahoma lawmakers are attempting to mimic was initiated by a private group, placed in a common area with other monuments promoting a common scheme, and not challenged for 60 years.  The Oklahoma monument was dictated by state law, is part of no scheme, and will be challenged very quickly.  Which explains why the "Oklahoma attorney general expects legal challenge to Ten Commandments law." 

Thanks for wasting my tax dollars.

But hey, no need to waste the monument they have already raised funds for.  The vast majority of CHURCHES don't have a 10 Commandments monument in front of them.  Maybe, just maybe, we could put monuments to religion in the yards of religious institutions.

[Gaspar]

There is certainly no hypocrisy within the Supreme Court. I guess they haven't looked at their own building(s) in a while.

We cannot escape the fact that our laws were based on Judeo-Christian principals.  This was a philosophy of living in a community and passed through several religions over the last 2,000+ years.  The fact that it has survived as the basis for western law is astonishing. 

Liberals, get your torches and chisels ready, and head to the Supreme Court building, because you have a lot of work to do.  Destroy these graven images.




Better get up there with a chisel.

Oh, yeah. . . Inside and around the Supreme Court Building and courtrooms.

[swake]

There is certainly no hypocrisy within the Supreme Court. I guess they haven't looked at their own building(s) in a while.

We cannot escape the fact that our laws were based on Judeo-Christian principals.  This was a philosophy of living in a community and passed through several religions over the last 2,000+ years.  The fact that it has survived as the basis for western law is astonishing. 

Liberals, get your torches and chisels ready, and head to the Supreme Court building, because you have a lot of work to do.  Destroy these graven images.




Better get up there with a chisel.

Oh, yeah. . . Inside and around the Supreme Court Building and courtrooms.

http://www.snopes.com/politics/religion/capital.asp

[tim huntzinger]

I find it interesting that there are more zodiac signs in Washington DC than any other capitol city.

[FOTD]

10 Commandments Monument in Haskell ruled to be an unconstitutional State Endorsement of religion. 

The 52 page opinion from the 10th Circuit  voted 3-0, with the Opinion written by a conservative judge from Oklahoma City, to overturn a lower court ruling and held that the monument was an unlawful endorsement of religion by the State.  It failed the Lemon test:

The Court held that to a reasonable observer the primary purpose of the monument is to advance the Christian Religion in Oklahoma.   Governmental action must not have the effect of enhancing nor prohibiting religion.   Hard to come up with an honest goal accomplished by the monument other than that.  Even if you assume, arguendo, the we are a Christian Nation, the monument serves to reinforce the current status quo religion or allude to the supposed Christian nature of our laws.  Which is another way of saying the monument means Christianity is more important in the United States than any other religion.

To which supporters just said "Hell yes it is."  While probably true, it is not a position the government can advocate.  Which is kinda the point.

The full case can be found at:
10 Circuit Court of Appeals, 06-7098
- - - - - -

Keep in mind the Haskell County monument was on the Courthouse lawn with other long-standing monuments to which the residents of the county deemed their heritage.  It was distinguished from other monument cases because the display was not part of a larger scheme and/or it was challenged before it became an established part of the community. 

The monument in Texas which Oklahoma lawmakers are attempting to mimic was initiated by a private group, placed in a common area with other monuments promoting a common scheme, and not challenged for 60 years.  The Oklahoma monument was dictated by state law, is part of no scheme, and will be challenged very quickly.  Which explains why the "Oklahoma attorney general expects legal challenge to Ten Commandments law." 

Thanks for wasting my tax dollars.

But hey, no need to waste the monument they have already raised funds for.  The vast majority of CHURCHES don't have a 10 Commandments monument in front of them.  Maybe, just maybe, we could put monuments to religion in the yards of religious institutions.

One of mine already does and they are real big. Bigger than anyone else's.

It's a house of worship, not a church.

(Devil knows Spartacus and you are not Spartacus)

[Townsend]

http://www.snopes.com/politics/religion/capital.asp

No way...you mean an email about religion and our government is not 100% truthful?  No way.

NO WAY.