T Nation

First Amendment


Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof...

Then why is the government trying to impose athiesm on everyone?

How is the Ten Commandments thing in violation of this? Where does it say that we have the right not to see any religion?

And why is history being looked at as religious descrimination? Our country was established with the idea of inalienable rights, and that's what happened. It's history.

What happens when we start taking away from the very things that this country was established on? What rights do we have when we take away the inalienable rights? Is it rights given to us by the government? If they give it to us, then they can take it away, too.

What's going on??


What the fuck are you talkin about now. What Government is forcing you to abandon your religion?

Tell me, Neil, did a man in a black suit and a 9 mm knock on your door and tell you if you go to church one more time you'll be meeting Jesus personally?

Or did a grey man with big bulging black eyes tell you aboard his spaceship - you know, at night, with no witnesses?


What do you consider the "inalienable rights"?

And are you saying that our nation was built on the Bible?

We just need to define some things before this becomes a huge flame war.

And how is taking the 10 commandments out of a courthouse imposing atheism? I see it as showing equality of religion. There is nothing wrong with the 10 commandments; they are great rules to live by. I just don't see why we should limit religious representation in our nation to just Judeo-Christian expression.


If you're talking about the Ten Commandment thing it's like this: The Founding Fathers are well proven to have been Deists. As such they believed strongly in a God but not so much in the trapping of any individual church or "religion". Remember England had an official church.

While 6 of the 10 commandments agree with just about any religion the remaining four aren't so universal. That' leaves us with a government that is pushing one specific religion out front of the others which makes people of other beliefs a bit nervous. They may not be starting an official government church but when you start pushing the ideology of one specific one it amounts to the same thing.

In God we trust on the money isn't very specific, the Ten Commandments are. They might as well be saying that Jews, Muslims, and just about any other religions just aren't as good, which makes their followers second class citizens. That's not the inclusive country the old guys started.


Do you live in North Korea maybe? If you do you have a point. If you dont - stop crying you baby. Mommy will be there soon.


Jared nailed it - the 10 commandmens are part of only certain religions. If a muslim went to court, he'd be screwed.

It's called justice for all, not some. We just made things equal for everyone regardless of religion. Isnt that what our country's all about?

And dont tell me you need to preach about God's commandments in a courthouse after you've killed someone. You dont.


If a judge is forced to remove the ten commandments, then that's prohibiting the free practice.

Now, if the judge is basing things off the ten commandments, then he is not doing his job, and that's a separate issue.

Just having it there isn't hurting anyone.


Having a picture of a naked lady there isn't hurting anyone either. Nor is a temple to Satan hurting anybody - it's not like you'd actually have to worship him, but in case you do, it's there.

Placing religious paraphernalia in a government building is sponsoring it, thus violating a separation of church and state. There would be no reason why a temple to Satan couldn't be placed right next to it. Religion is too personal to legislate.


My bad. Need to end those damn italics. Emphasis not added. :slight_smile:


Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof...

By having the Ten Commandments in a court room, no law was made respecting a religion, and no one is prohibiting the free exercise of anyone's religion.


guys, we do you even bother to respond to him?

He is clearly emotionaly disturbed and gets off on the attention. Just let his stupid posts die and be done with him.


Neil - You're dumb. You have personality issues. No one likes you. Go away. It's too late to try and fit in now.


Well, Neil, having the court house made into an image of Jesus wouldn't be making a law either. Maybe we should do that. Well, we do have a phallic symbol for a monument (Washington), so I guess we should balance it out.



If you ask me, it's about the judge being a pain in the ass and wanting to push buttons. I don't think there's a need for it, and frankly, don't want to see that sort of thing in a court room. There's no need for a judge to flaunt his religion. It's like a gay guy doesn't need to flaunt his sexual preference - no body cares and no one really wants to see that. It's just an issue of people being a pain in the ass.

Can government employees be fired for being a pain in the ass like I could be? lol


As a judge he is an actor of the state. I wouldnt think that having the muslim ten commmandments, or hindu ten commandments or whatever would be right. I am a christian but i cant force you to believe my religion over yours.


Okay folks, I gotta agree with Niel on some of this. The monument to the Ten COmmandments being ruled to be removed, when taken as an isolated incident, seems like it supports the first ammendment. And all you taking ridiculously extreme examples to try to make an arguement by similarity, I think you're off base.

So, what is that larger picture that this is just ONE symptom of? Here's a couple of other examples.

  • Courts ruling that the inclusion of "one nation, under God" in the Pledge of Allegiance makes it a prayer, and is thus not allowed in schools. Thankfully, lawmakers have backed off this one and said that the students cannot be REQUIRED to recite it.

  • Schools are prohibited from teaching creationism, and can only teach evolutionism.

The fact is the Supreme Court ruled that secular humanism IS a religion. So, how is it that the government institutions that are only allowed to display symbols of secular humanism NOT falling under the definition of a government sponsored/supported religion?


brider, I'm not very familiar with the 10 commandments case, but I, too, agree with some of Neil's thoughts, though I disagree with much of his reasoning.

I just don't see the reason why the 10 commandments should be in the courthouse.

And what's the common defintion of secular humanism? It will help to clear that up before any ensuing discussion.


Schools are prohibited from teaching creation science (not creationism, which is something different) in science classes because it's not scientific. If a teacher wanted to cover creation science in a comparative religion course, or an english course, that'd be fine.


Great points, brider, and I agree with you.

Although I agree there needs to be a separation of church and state, at times it can be a fine line to walk. And like it or not, this nation was founded on Christian values.

I may torch you occasionally, Neil, but I um, well, (just say it, dammit!), okay - I do agree with your basic premise on this one.


Just one little nit pick:

"In God we trust on the money isn't very specific, the Ten Commandments are. They might as well be saying that Jews, Muslims, and just about any other religions just aren't as good, which makes their followers second class citizens. That's not the inclusive country the old guys started."

Jews, Muslims and Christians believe in the same God. The differ in holy books and who the prophets were, and weither the Messiah has come or not, but the God is the same.

In any case, this is getting out of hand. There are colleges now that REQUIRE students to take classes in Islamic Civ, including reading the entire Koran. You can bet the ACLU would be all over them if any student was ever forced to read the Bible (outside of a Christian college of course). The drive seems to be to remove anything involving Christianity, often from monuments and buildings that are quite old.

If a Mosque wanted to donate a monument to a city that displayed one of the verses from the Koran they have every right to do so. And the city should display it. But removing monuments with anything Christian on it JUST because it is Christian is going a bit far.