Heeeeee I’m not too surprised.
The real problem with Moore wasn’t neccessarily that he snuck the monument into the courthouse in the dead of night, but more on his open opposistion of homosexuality and the interference of his religious beliefs in his rulings.
Not to neccessarily that open opposistion to homosexuality is bad, but when being gay means that you’re guilty of your crimes, then thats something to worry about.
The whole monument thing is stupid, it shouldn’t have been there, and the hooplah that has arisen from this spectacle is laughable. People are going apeshit over this, when it isn’t even a serious issue - a courthouse is a government building, and should show no secular religious affiliation. The ideals of seperation of church and state are what this country is founded on, even if it isn’t in the constitution and stated in that way, that’s the truth.
seperation of church and state… they might as well remove “In God We Trust” from our currancy.
ain’t gonna be long now before us christians will be hunted down because of our beliefs. hell, if I talk about God in my school, I could get in trouble, but if someone else talks about islam or wiccan or anything else, nothing is done… we’re gonna be singled out one way or another, but I don’t care… I do what I believe is right no matter what law says… if I can bring one person to Christ but in the same time be persecuted (or however you spell it) for it, then I’ve done my job.
Most non-christans aren’t low enough to impress their religon on others. Unlike, hunting down the pagans in the early day, and the spanish inquisition. Frankly your religon is yours and it gets annoying when you flaunt it.
“In god we trust” was added to the coins during the civil war in an effort to impress the ideal that the union was on the side of god when it came to the issue of slavery, which was that slavery was wrong and against the beliefs of christianity. This was pushed by a group of puritan priests. It was added to our paper money during the 1950’s in another effort to help root out communisim in the states, since it is common belief that communists are athiests (which I believe is true, communisim preaches athiesim).
In 1903 Teddy Roosevelt wrote a letter to the Secretary of Currency or whatever he’s called saying that he thought putting the phrase on our money cheapens it, in that the phrase is supposed to invoke feeling, which is why it’s put on our monuments. Our money is not used to invoke any such feeling, which is why he thought it was innappropriate.
You can’t get in trouble for talking about your beliefs in school, and if you do, press the issue and you’ll win. You can bring a bible to school and read it if you want. The deal is that public, government owned schools cannot show any secular religious affiliation since they are technically government buildings.
Bringing people to christ is your buisness, however I think it’s inappropriate. It isn’t your job as a christian to convert others to your beliefs, but rather to maintain faith in your beliefs, and yours alone.
Actually it is a christian’s job to convert others; it won’t get the person into heaven, but they’re sorta supposed to do it out of principle.
But the other thing is right; talking about christianity isn’t wrong if you’re a student; it’s if you’re in charge and you, say, put a prayer on the morning announcements (which is how this all started) that’s plain wrong.
I disagree, how is it a christians job to convert others? There are missionaries for that, and they have devoted their lives to doing so, but Orakio is no missionary.
Well, according to the bible, everyone can witness in their own way. Again, it’s not a “job” so much as something any christian is supposed to do in everyday life.
But I don’t see how they are supposed to do so. Is it in the bible or something?
The bible kinda says to witness in everyday life. Don’t ask me to quote anything, I don’t have a bible in my brain (the holy works of the Bene Gesserait Sisterhood is another story). It also says that doing so will probably make them unpopular, yadda yadda yadda.
I don’t have time to voice all my opinions. But i think christians should find something better to make a stand about. The guy had to sneak it in at night for cryinout loud. He must have known what he was doing was wrong to do that. I can agree that since it is a federal building, and a federal judge told him to remove it that he should.
Now Sorc, yes, Jesus did preach that Christians should spread christianity to everyone they can. But most neglect that he told them to move on to someone els if they arent recieved. Paul even says that christians should obey the laws of the land. Jesus said “give unto cesar what is cesar, give unto god what is god’s”.
Using this metaphore in todays terms, the Federal Courthouse
belongs to Cesar(the government), so this Judge should let the government have it, and since being a judge is against Christianity in the firstplace, he should resign his job(another topic for discussion).
But all in all, i’m not saying that it’s hurting anything by being there. But the Courthouse is federally owned and the guy should remove the statue… and them christians need to find something better to make a bloody stand about ! there are people being killed in war and they are worried about a bloody statue… people!
I just want to comment that it seems like in every era of American history, the South has stood against progress.
<img src=“http://www.rpgclassics.com/staff/tenchimaru/td.gif”> I’d like to know how you can sneak into a place with a 5300 lb statue.
Curtis, the South wasn’t necessarily against progress inthe Civil War. Slavery wasn’t even the main reason they were fighting. I;m n ot saying it shoudlnt have been or anything, i agree that slavery is wrong. But there were many other reasons for the south to try and revolt. I’m not gonna get into them now at 4:41 in the morning, but the North used slavery to gain more support for the war. Robert E. Lee was one of the smartest generals and tactitions in American history, he whipped the Mexicans in the mexican war, turned a bunch of poorly equiped farmer into an army that kept the civil war going on for… however many years it went on…
Though i can somewhat agree with why the south fought, i am glad they didnt win. Instead of there being one nation, there would be two, ( i wouldnt exist because of my mississippian roots)
And two nations with past agression side by site would be easily dominated by an outside force, especially if they are played against eachother… yawns i’m off to bed…
Originally posted by Orakio
ain’t gonna be long now before us christians will be hunted down because of our beliefs.
With all due respect, Orakio, but anyone who honestly believes that is not only extremely paranoid, but delusional as well. That’s something I’d expect from the Moral Majority, Orak. I’m hoping you’ll be a bit more reasoned than that.
But in today’s victim culture, it’s assumed that if you’re not for it, you’re against it. People who speak out against Affirmative action are considered racists. People who want a separation of church and state are considered to be wanting the downfall of the religion.
That’s not true. Christians will probably never be persecuted. Even with the separation of church and state, America is predominantly Christian. Also, no religion should be persecuted in America, despite how distasteful, as long as they don’t break the law. In any case, Christians are under LITTLE TO NO THREAT of persecution in America.
Here’s a thought for you though, what if an Islamic organization arose that sought the same things some Christian organizations seek from the government. Cries of supporting terrorism abound. That would be persecution.
But back to the subject.
But why do people want the government to be a Christian government than a secular? Do people forget some of the abuses perpetuated against pagans, Jews, and Muslims… along with who knwos how many “heretic” groups who simply had different interpetation of the Bible than the Catholic Church? Mind you, this was when the Catholic Church was the MOST POWERFUL orginization in the world. They made sure Church and state were married. Perhaps they’er hoping such a thing coudl rise again and they could have power within such an organization?
For current examples, I can talk about several places where Christians ARE persecuted for thier beliefs. Mind you, in many, if not most of those places, church and state are married, or there is an extremely heavy push to such a marriage. What would be acceptable about a Christian government? Christians not being persecuted, but others?
No. I don’t trust people enough, no matter how righteous they are. People are human. And to think that someone overly “righteous” and fearful of other religions, or perhaps someone wanting to drum up a litlle popularity… to think of what they can do…
Now, back to the main subject:
Western law is based mainly off of two things: Judeo-Christian law, and Roman law.
However, I cannot understand why he must acknowledge God to serve as a judge, especially with secular law. As I said above, the fact that Judeo-Christian law forms part of the base for modern law, so that point can be conceded. However, it remains SECULAR law in a SECULAR nation. It also sends a message that athiests, pagans, and so on cannot be judges or anybody in a position to create or interpet law, because they do not acknowldge God the way a Christian does.
I can’t understand the uproar though, I understand that there MUST be a separation of church and state, and NO religion, Judeo-Christian or not, should be aided or hindered by the government. Well not without like aid to other religions: remember, all churches are tax-exempt, I believe.)
But the monument doens’t bother me really. It’s just the undue uproar and some of the meaning behind it.
Originally posted by Born_Loser
Now Sorc, yes, Jesus did preach that Christians should spread christianity to everyone they can. But most neglect that he told them to move on to someone els if they arent recieved. Paul even says that christians should obey the laws of the land. Jesus said “give unto cesar what is cesar, give unto god what is god’s”. Using this metaphore in todays terms, the Federal Courthouse belongs to Cesar(the government), so this Judge should let the government have it, and since being a judge is against Christianity in the firstplace, he should resign his job(another topic for discussion).
Oh, and Born_Loser: being a part of a religion is not exactly a disqualifier of federal employment at any level. Many Christian judges have been fair and just, and have respected the separation of church and state. Neither God nor state ever mentioned that all government officials must not be Christian, but to respect such a separation.
If anything, he should resign for his radical views. Radical views in a jusge is alright, ubt if they allow those views to impede true justice…
Yeah, but the main reasons the South wanted to secede were against progress. They believed in states’ rights. I believe states’ rights are against progress; you need a strong, centralized federal government to stand against the rest of the world, and to preserve order at home. Some historians believe that if the South had succeeded in seceeding, the Southern states would have quickly split up into several different nations, to be exploited by Europe. The South was against ratifying the
Consitituion in 1789; the South was against the abolition of slavery, and after slavery was abolished the South continued to keep its black population in a near-slave state until the 1960s; the South supported segregation until almost present-day; the South is against the separation of Church and State. How can I make myself more clear?
One last thing: I agree with Nate that Robert E. Lee was the best general at the time, that during the Civil War the South had better generals and better fighting men than the North did. Southern men had grown up learning how to use guns and ride horses, whereas a large percentage of the Northern army was made up of newly arrived immigrants. I’ve heard a recurring story about the Civil War, and the story goes: When the Civil War broke out, Abraham Lincoln asked the head of the Union army at the time, a man named Winfield Scott(the greatest American military genius of the 19th century) who should lead the Union army, and Scott replied: “If there is one man who can lead the Union army to victory, that man is Robert E. Lee”. Of course, this was before Lee announced that he was going to stay loyal to his home state of Virginia and fight for the Confederacy. Heh.
Originally posted by Orakio
ain’t gonna be long now before us christians will be hunted down because of our beliefs. hell, if I talk about God in my school, I could get in trouble, but if someone else talks about islam or wiccan or anything else, nothing is done
You christains already persecuted mouslims and wiccans, now it’s your turn to be preyed upon =p
said by the suspended judge
“… To do my duty, I must acknowledge God."
If it were true there wouldn’t be courts and everything that’s law-related would be solved in the church.
It isn’t your job as a christian to convert others to your beliefs, but rather to maintain faith in your beliefs, and yours alone.
The bible tells us to be missionaries in our own field, and to tell people the good news that Jesus died for us. If we kept it to ourselves, it would be rather selfish of us. True, I am not a certified missionary, but I have been one since I was 13.
You christains already persecuted mouslims and wiccans, now it’s your turn to be preyed upon =p
It’s true, but I can’t approve of what some christians do and call themselves christians. The bible says to “Be Kind to one another.” To “Love thy neighbor as thyself.” and to “Treat people as you would be treated.” I have no problems with muslums or wiccans, and I don’t say anything against anybody of other religions, I just give them the news.
In fact (off the topic a bit) I believe that if EVERYBODY worldwide practiced “Love thy neighbor as thyself”, then this world would be a much better place. They don’t have to believe in a religion if they want, but that one commandment is what all law should be summed up into. But alas, it will never happen in my lifetime.
Originally posted by Orakio
In fact (off the topic a bit) I believe that if EVERYBODY worldwide practiced “Love thy neighbor as thyself”, then this world would be a much better place. They don’t have to believe in a religion if they want, but that one commandment is what all law should be summed up into. But alas, it will never happen in my lifetime.
Forgive me if I’m wrong, but isn’t that essentially the point of all religions?
I’m not positive, but a few religions adapted from the bible anyways (except the jewish religion)