Slashdot Mirror
Satanists Propose Monument At Oklahoma State Capitol Next To Ten Commandments
Hugh Pickens DOT Com writes "The Tulsa World reports that in their zeal to tout their faith in the public square, conservatives in Oklahoma may have unwittingly opened the door to a wide range of religious groups, including satanists who are now seeking to put their own statue next to a Ten Commandments monument on the Statehouse steps. The Republican-controlled Legislature in Oklahoma authorized the privately funded Ten Commandments monument in 2009, and it was placed on the Capitol grounds last year despite criticism from legal experts who questioned its constitutionality. But the New York-based Satanic Temple saw an opportunity and notified the state's Capitol Preservation Commission that it wants to donate a monument too. 'We believe that all monuments should be in good taste and consistent with community standards,' Lucien Greaves wrote in letter to state officials. 'Our proposed monument, as an homage to the historic/literary Satan, will certainly abide by these guidelines.' Brady Henderson, legal director for ACLU Oklahoma, said if state officials allow one type of religious expression, they must allow alternative forms of expression, although he said a better solution might be to allow none at all on state property. 'We would prefer to see Oklahoma's government officials work to faithfully serve our communities and improve the lives of Oklahomans instead of erecting granite monuments to show us all how righteous they are,' says Henderson. 'But if the Ten Commandments, with its overtly Christian message, is allowed to stay at the Capitol, the Satanic Temple's proposed monument cannot be rejected because of its different religious viewpoint.'"
If you think atheists drive evangelical conservatives nuts, you ain't seen nothing yet.
Table-ized A.I.
Please?
I thought they were overtly Jewish...
We were all warned a long time ago that MS products sucked, remember the Magic 8 Ball said, "Outlook not so good"
I have trouble believing they are really Satanists, rather than people claiming to be Satanists.
Oh wait, that's true of most Christians too.
"Twice half-assed makes an ass whole." --Solomon K. Chang
This is why we need a clean separation of church and state. And yeah, the evangelical in OK are going to go nuts once they realize that they MUST allow this garbage.
I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
The keydifference between the statue of the ten commandments and the statue of the satanist is that the statue of the satanist is offensive.
This is why the statue of the satanist should not be allowed.
I find the statue of the ten commandments offensive. 1 for 1.
Your move, self-righteous jackass.
An enigma, wrapped in a riddle, shrouded in bacon and cheese
The statue of the ten commandments is also offensive to those whom the satanist statue isn't, and to many more people.
When will we see a flying spaghetti monster up there ?? :)
I for one welcome this monument. Tolerance and acceptance of those with whom we might disagree has been a principle in our country for many years. I hope that the courage shown in the original decision continues to be the guiding light by which all future decisions are based against.
I like the ACLU's stance here. If everyone is not free, than nobody is free.
The Ten Commandments has historical significance but anything associated with any other religion does not.
"Offensive" is an unhelpful criterion because it's a subjective assessment, and one that varies from person to person. Unless you couple it with a statistical cut-off of some kind, you probably couldn't do anything without offending somebody. Even deciding whether to go with grass or masonry paving for the public space wouldn't be uncontroversial...
"Offensive", in practice, is either meaningless (since everything is, to somebody) or simply emotional majoritarianism (if you only count as 'offensive' things that offend large and influential groups of people). Lousy criterion.
Seeing as the FSM isn't an actual deity that people worship, hopefully never. FSM was created as satirical character, not a real religion.
I think that the Church of the Flying Spaghetti Monster should get involved with this as well. I would donate to a Pastafarianism monument.
Bullshit.
Fully half the ten commandments involve which invisible sky friend you worship and how.
John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
Which one of the 10 commandments is offensive to you?
The 10 commandments are of jewish origin, and are respected by muslims as well, since they are included in the quran. They didn't come from Jesus, so the 'overtly Christian message' comment just seems to be way off the mark and most importantly, it is technically incorrect.
While governments shouldn't really get involved at all, with religions, because it will exhibit some favouritism, amongst a plethora of other reasons, the satanists in this instance just appear to be sectarians who desperately hate christians. I guess by being motivated by hate, they do display that they're practicing satanists, rather than just regular bigotry and intolerance present in religions.
What makes you think the same isn't true of other religions ? Given enough time and wars, it's possible that the source of the FSM religion will be forgotten.
lol, and the ten commandments statue isnt just as offensive to non Christians?
You obviously forgot to insert the "offensive to me" part.
I dont know how it can be offensive anyway, as Satan is part of Christian mythology ( and prob part of the other Abrahamic religions too ).
You cant get all offended about something that is an integral part of your own religion.
People confuse two groups: atheist and anti theist, the former group doesn't believe in god, the later is a "religion" whose members think that everyone that believe in some kind of God(s) are sinners
God bless those Satanists
-- This and all my posts are in the public domain. I am a lawyer. I am not your lawyer, and this is not legal advice.
Viva the pastafarians, viva the giant spaghetti monster!
Do not worship any other gods.
Do not make any idols.
Do not take the lords name in vain.
Keep the sabbeth holy.
NO
John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
More like overtly Jewish. You know, from those same Oklahomans that avoid eating pork and invertebrates, shaving the corners of their head, operating electrical machines on the sabbath, and wearing blended clothes.
I am becoming gerund, destroyer of verbs.
One notes that first four commandments are dictates on how you will worship. Only once the *important* rules have been laid down do the commandments move on to "good rules to live by".
Next we need a statue of the Magical Teapot orbiting Jupiter and The Flying Spaghetti Monster guiding the masses with his noodly appendage.
How about a statue of Muhammad? It would offend both Christians and Muslims and make no one happy. Sounds like a perfect government solution.
The commandments aren't per se the offensive part, the fact that a statue related to a specific religion is displayed there is the culprit for many people. Just look at what has been going on with Quebec's charter of values!
Wasn't that some sort of ancient equivalent of a defense attorney?
T. M. Pederson
"Lies, Damn Lies, and Documentation"
I am just loving this to bits. Getting my popcorn ready, this should be good!
For the record, the oft-quoted statement "Do as thou wilt be the whole of the law" does not mean what people think.
It comes from The Book of Law, and is followed by "Love is the law, love under will."
People don't normally include that last part, for some reason.
(The study of this post is forbidden. It is wise to destroy this browser tab after the first reading.
Whosoever disregards this does so at his own risk and peril. These are most dire.)
The offense is not the 10 commandments themselves, but that *any* religious doctrine be institutionalized with the *intent* to impose one's faith on others.
I would say the 10 commandments being erected at a state capitol is going to far.
Let's push this baby up to 666 comments ! Gotta love freedom of expression.
please excuse my apathy
As a Tulsa, Oklahoma resident, this fills me with so much pride. Now to raise the money for a monument to Fenrir! Maybe a Ledberg stone replica? Anyone else up for it?
"Quote me as saying I was mis-quoted." -Groucho Marx
I'm an apatheist-- I don't give a crap about religion. Too much time is wasted discussing it and politicizing it.
An atheist shouldn't have a problem with this. A pantheist however...
Note also how it doesn't deny the existence of the other gods, or forbids worshipping them. It only says that Old Greybeard needs to be worshipped first and foremost. Which is the kind of loyalty that any god would want in his followers.
It's not about forcing anyone to believe, it is about the government be neutral on issues of religion. Putting up big statues of the Ten Commandments is not remaining neutral and is in fact promoting one religion (or at least one group of religions) over others.
The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
You're an idiot.
Luckily, you don't believe me so you won't find me offensive.
Which one of the 10 commandments is offensive to you?
This one is pretty offensive "I am the Lord thy God. Thou shalt have no other God before me."
I find your christian god arrogant and egotistical. The other gods deserve just as much respect.
Well played, Sir!
I visited the Indegogo site and they have raised $278 of $20,000 to do their project. Prediction: they don't reach their goal.
Satanism and good taste do not fit in the same sentence and oxymoronic.
Wow, you really know a lot about Satanism.
A quick question: the bible recognizes, tolerates, and at certain points condones slavery(*).
I've always wondered about that. If we can judge sections of the bible as outdated or immoral, superseded by a more enlightened sense of morality, why can't we do this for other sections, such as the ones about homosexuality?
That's a trap, BTW. See if you can answer without falling into it. Have a nice day!
(*) However, you may purchase male or female slaves from among the foreigners who live among you. You may also purchase the children of such resident foreigners, including those who have been born in your land. You may treat them as your property, passing them on to your children as a permanent inheritance. You may treat your slaves like this, but the people of Israel, your relatives, must never be treated this way. (Leviticus 25:44-46 NLT)
Do not worship any other gods.
I can see how this is a problem for atheists, as they have so many other gods they want to worship first...
Do not make any idols.
See above...
Do not take the lords name in vain.
What lord? What name?
Keep the sabbeth holy.
Um... OK. Not like they have one... but OK.
Offense is something you decide to take. No one can give you offense, if you choose not to accept it.
4 "Remember the Sabbath day, to keep it holy. Six days you shall labor and do all your work, but the seventh day is the Sabbath of the Lord your God. In it you shall do no work: you, nor your son, nor your daughter, nor your male servant, nor your female servant, nor your cattle, nor your stranger who is within your gates. For in six days the Lord made the heavens and the earth, the sea, and all that is in them, and rested the seventh day. Therefore the Lord blessed the Sabbath day and hallowed it."
I like it very much, but it offended my last boss somehow.
There is a spark in every single flame bait point.
Nothing overtly Christian about the Ten Commandments. This doctrine is followed by Jews, Muslims, and Christians. I wonder if Brady Henderson has a particular problem with Christians that he would choose to word his statement that way.
Just sell, transfer or exchange the immediate plot of land that the ten commandments monument is on to a private non-profit with appropriate deeded restrictions and then don't allow religious monuments on the public land that remains.
This is essentially what was done to settle the White Cross Monument dispute at the Mojave National Preserve.
I agree that religious and other forms of speech should not be biased or endorsed by government on public land. Doesn't mean there can't be a tasteful compromise to still allow religious monuments that are visible from public land.
Well, here they are:
FIRST COMMANDMENT I am the LORD thy God, which have brought thee out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of bondage. Thou shalt have no other gods before me.
SECOND COMMANDMENT Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image, or any likeness of any thing that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth
THIRD COMMANDMENT Thou shalt not take the name of the LORD thy God in vain; for the LORD will not hold him guiltless that taketh his name in vain.
FOURTH COMMANDMENT Remember the sabbath day, to keep it holy. Six days shalt thou labour, and do all thy work: But the seventh day is the sabbath of the LORD thy God: in it thou shalt not do any work, thou, nor thy son, nor thy daughter, thy manservant, nor thy maidservant, nor thy cattle, nor thy stranger that is within thy gates: For in six days the LORD made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that in them is, and rested the seventh day: wherefore the LORD blessed the sabbath day, and hallowed it.
FIFTH COMMANDMENT Honour thy father and thy mother: that thy days may be long upon the land which the LORD thy God giveth thee.
SIXTH COMMANDMENT Thou shalt not kill.
SEVENTH COMMANDMENT Thou shalt not commit adultery.
EIGHTH COMMANDMENT Thou shalt not steal.
NINTH COMMANDMENT Thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbour.
TENTH COMMANDMENT Thou shalt not covet thy neighbor's house, thou shalt not covet thy neighbor's wife, nor his manservant, nor his maidservant, nor his ox, nor his ass, nor any thing that is thy neighbor's.
Perhaps we could get a monument to C'thulu built. You know, one made out of Cyclopean blocks of blasphemous stone cut into geometrical forms for which an Euclid could scarcely find a name and given the form of nightmare antiquity.
The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
But the point remains, no one is FORCED to believe in the statue.
Government promoting a particular religion, in this case Christianity, lays the foundation for making it a state requirement. That's been done, with disastrous results. It's better to stay within the constitution and not have the government promoting any religion.
Seeing as the FSM isn't an actual deity that people worship
Infidel!
HSJ$$*&#^!#+++ATH0
NO CARRIER
It may or may not be offensive to an Atheist... but did CanHasDIY say he was an Atheist? Maybe he is a Satanist and the ten commandments ARE offensive to him... Why are you assuming things?
... Or maybe he was making a point that just because someone claims to find something offensive doesn't mean it shouldn't be allowed.
OP said he found the satanist statue offensive (even though he probably doesn't even know what it's going to be a statue of); I turned the tables. That's all.
An enigma, wrapped in a riddle, shrouded in bacon and cheese
It seems to me that equal billing for Methodolgical Naturalists should be enabled as well. Since so many theists etc. argue that science is also a faith, then we should be allowed a monument.
Perhaps to Thales of Io.
Exactly. I am not offended if you want to display the 10 Commandments on your lawn, on your church's lawn, or if you want to tattoo them on your forehead.
But when you want to display them on public property in a country that expressly forbids the state establishment of religion, especially when other creeds do not get the same accommodation (exactly the point raised here), then damn right it's offensive. In fact, being how the motivation for these displays are generally for corrupt politicians to wear a shroud of phony righteousness, I'd say the more you believe in the 10 Commandments, the less happy you should be about them being used a political cudgel.
Momentarily, the need for the construction of new light will no longer exist.
"trust me, dykes can get pregnant"
-Steve Zissou
Thank you Dave Raggett
Ah yes, YOUR religion is just made up BS, while MY religion is approved by the state. Got it.
Rules are rarely harmless. And these rules in particular have been used to justify the deaths of many.
Competition? What are the Satanic Ten Commandments? Let me guess:
1. Thou Shalt Lie
2. Thou Shalt Steal
3. Thou Shalt Cheat.....and enjoy it!
4. Greed is Good
5. [Bleep] the Poor & Sick
6.
Heck, this is getting tiring. Let me simplify it:
1. Be like SCO.
Done!
Table-ized A.I.
Right at the beginning, a statement both of the existence of God ("I am") and of God's status over the reader ("the LORD your God"). You can only weasel out of that as an atheist by outright ignoring an rejecting it --- it's flat out contradictory to atheistic tenets of (a) "God is not," and (b) "God is nothing to me." Note, this part of the text isn't even worded as a "commandment" (allowing possibility of rejection and violation), but is given as an incontrovertible fact of existence. If that's compatible with atheism --- that God is, and is your LORD --- then what is atheism?
I knew American Idol was a sin!
I think you may have confused "satanist" for "atheist". They are not the same. The first group purports to believe in the Lord Satan. Whether they actually do or not is a question for another day and most likely varies from person to person. The second group purports to believe in no god at all. I'm sure there are a certain number of atheists who claim to be satanists but the group as a whole is not atheistic.
I find that most Atheists should be fine with that one, they seem to disbelieve about equally, so they're not putting any god before the Christian one. :-)
You're not offended by a legal code which doesn't forbid rape?
An atheist does not believe in god, therefore who cares? When you think about it logically there is no reason an atheist should be offended by any of it as no one is forcing us to believe just because of a statue. I am a firm believer in live and let live. If people are happy about seeing a statue of the ten commandments, so be it! I also find it really annoying at atheists who bitch about the mangers that are set up every year around christmas, if you dont believe in it, how can it offend you?
First, a definition so we are all talking about the same thing: Offensive -> causing someone to feel deeply hurt, upset, or angry.
How does something not being true or not being real stop it from being potentially offensive? If I say all gays are stupid, is that not offensive because it isn't true? What if I say that my child says gays are stupid so it must be true. That child doesn't exist (I am not a father) so that statement must not be offensive either.
The ten commandments on publicly owned property are offensive to me because of what they represent. They represent the idea that our government and our laws should be governed by the beliefs of a single religion simply because they are in the majority.
This is made even more offensive because our laws really are modified because of religious beliefs. I would be far less offended by a satanic monument simply because satanists really don't cause as much harm to our institutions (simply because they are fewer in number, they may be worse if they were greater in number).
-- All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing. -- Edmund Burke
What bothers me, as an atheist, is apathetic religious people. I overheard a conversation between two mothers in the playground today while picking up my kid. One was Jewish, the other Christian (Catholic I think), and the Jewish mother was saying how their daughter really wanted a Christmas tree, and they weren't against it, but they didn't want the hassle this year. They went on to talking about how their kids would find their own way in religion as they grew up.
WTF I thought. If you're not that fussed about it why bother being religious in the first place. They make it sound like loyalty to a car brand. "Oh yes, we didn't want to buy him a Ford, we're GM people, but little Johnny insisted".
There is no god. But if there was, it'd be pissed off.
The uncanny valley also seems to cover religious doctrines - any religion which is almost, but not quite like theirs is the spawn of Satan, in this case literally. It is a sad state of affairs when Homo Sapiens Sapiens - the 'thinking thinking humanoid' deliberately avoids using that brain power and instead ruts for whatever 'ultimate truth' their tribal elders have burdened them with. Thinking man, indeed.
--frank[at]unternet.org
The whole flying spaghetti monster was created just to troll religious people - you know that, I know that, everyone knows that, and people who run around pretending to believe in it really are just being trolls.
If someone has a point to make, fine, but you're not going to convince the other guy by mocking them.
Love sees no species.
to be upstanding citizens of the community then who cares what organization the monument is from.
true, but the point remains, if you do not believe in god, GOTO 50, It in no way is FORCING you to believe in an invisible man in the sky
No--but on state property, it is reminding non-Christians that the state government serves Christians first and everyone else last.
Which, in Oklahoma, I suppose is merely fair warning, now that I think of it...
Actually antitheist has now come to mean, at least in the secular crowd, one who is opposed to the idea of religion and gods, i.e. in the usage of Hitchens: "I'm not even an atheist so much as I am an antitheist; I not only maintain that all religions are versions of the same untruth, but I hold that the influence of churches, and the effect of religious belief, is positively harmful."
Actually. I live in Tulsa. I supported the monument because I think it should be in the public. That being said, I have no issue with a goat skull inside a inverted pentagram or a statue of Aliester Crowely beside it. We are suppose to have freedom of Religion here that. means everyone any where and believe anything. The govt can't pick a favorite religion. That's it. So to get the ACLU to shut up, yes I will agree with joy. That's what real tolerance is. Hell, I will even support a life sized Buddy Jesus Pointing at him too.
>> all gods are just from an inventive mind
I believe it was the author H.P. Lovecraft that you're mis-quoting there. I'm not a Satanist but as he was merely an early 1900's horror fiction author, Its a fair guess he did not start, define or even much contribute to the actual belief of Satanists.
It would seem that this is sweet irony! Epic fail on politicians trying to promote their religion.
I am an Oklahoma resident, and a Christian. I have no problem with the Ten Commandments, but anyone who bothers to actually read both can see that the first four (and possibly five) commandments are clearly in contention with the constitution. Very often, Christians, in their simplicity, when thinking about the Ten Commandments, only have in mind commandments 6,7,8, and 9 (or 5, 6, 7, and 8 depending on how they are enumerated). Allowing such a monument to be erected on public land using private funds, gets around the law, but only opens a pandora's box of other problems. It was inevitable that this would happen.
The hypocrisy in Oklahoma is this: you can get people to donate money like crazy to erect useless monuments, yet about 1/5th of the state's population doesn't know where their next meal is coming from.
This is one Oklahoma Christian that despises that monument.
Proverbs 21:19
Those aren't Commandments, those are your (mostly incorrect) interpretations of them.
"Don't work on Sunday (but don't forget to attend church so you can be indoctrinated by his earthly minions),"
The Commandment is actually, "Remember the Sabbath, and keep it Holy," the Sabbath being the Seventh Day of Creation (much argument about which actual weekday this coincides with, but the Bible predates the Gregorian calendar by about 1500 years, I'd say that's fair to interpret as one pleases). "Keep it Holy" is explained elsewhere in the book as, essentially, "don't do any work worth being paid for."
"Don't say bad stuff about God (and by extension, his earthly minions),"
Actually, that one is, "Thou shalt not take the name of the Lord thy God in vain," which again doesn't rule out saying "bad stuff about God;" as the dictionary defines "to take in vain" as "abuse, misuse, and/or perversion," that means that one is not to, say, claim that an act or statement is done in the name of God when it really isn't.
Like evangalists taking collections "for God," then using the money to buy 17 gold-plated Cadillacs for himself.
"You're not allowed to worship other Gods but me (which once again benefits his earthly minions)."
This is another one a lot of people get wrong; the Commandment is actually, "Thou shalt not have any Gods before me." So basically, it's OK to be polytheistic, so long as you consider the Abrahamic God as the top tier; your Zeus or Odin, as it were.
Ignorance is the problem, not faith in and of itself. And that's a two-way street.
An enigma, wrapped in a riddle, shrouded in bacon and cheese
It doesn't matter if FSM gets a pile of spaghetti or a pirate or a midget on a mountain - I'm in for $100 to memorialize it in granite!
Is it just my observation, or are there way too many stupid people in the world?
First, you probably haven't actually read the ten commandments if you think they are good rules to live by for an atheist (hint: a major part of the ten commandments is about how you should not be an atheist).
Second, yes, live and let live is exactly what this is about. Nobody is preventing you from putting a statue on your private ground, and nobody is preventing anyone from looking at it. This is about using public resources for promoting a religion - the statue is on public ground, so everyone is forced to pay for that real estate through taxes, so it's very much the opposite of "let live". If people are happy about seeing a statue of the ten commandments, they are welcome to put one up (that's part of that free speech thing), they are just not welcome to force anyone to pay any(!) of the expenses.
Which is exactly why these "Satanists" are turning this into legal theater. That's what it is, pure sensational theater.
The irony is not missed by most of us.
It can have a forcing effect on things other than direct belief when it becomes part of the civil or governing code, however. It is a slippery slope, but religious beliefs have a real affect on everything the government involves itself in, from education to the military, from taxation to healthcare. I consider anti gay sentimentality offensive, for example, and there are laws in place that discriminate against gays openly, due in large part to traditionally religious values. I'm not offended by people that believe in god, but I am offended when they push their agendas on non-believers through what should be secular avenues (such as government). The idea that any of the first four commandments, for example, would be codified into law, is nightmarish.
But it's also important in specific ways... Oklahoma is a strongly pro-capital-punishment state, so how does "thou shalt not kill" enter in? Do you think that an otherwise impartial but bible-wielding governing body is likely to side with the "will of the people" when deciding on those topics? Of course, one could always argue that they're democratically elected and represent the majority, but we know that argument falls apart with other minority disenfranchisement... why shouldn't it with religion?
I'm calling BS all-around. The point of the 10 Commandments at the state capitol isn't a state endorsement of religion, nor is it requiring anyone to practice any sort of religion, or even obey the commandments. It's a monuments. It recognizes one of the earliest written sets of principles "relating to ethics and worship". Yes, there are many others that are earlier, but with our country's Judaic and Christian history, this is appropriate. Again, it's a monument, not an endorsement or an enforcement. Get over it.
When I travel in Asia, I expect to see a lot of Buddhist, Taoist and Eastern Asian monuments, even at the airport, civic centers, etc... It's a part of the culture. When in the Middle East, the same. Africa, the same. So why the hell wouldn't I expect to see monuments referencing the U.S.'s early religious roots? Lighten up, people. It's also why it doesn't make sense to have monuments of Satan, Buddha or Flying Spaghetti Monsters. Of course, if it was a civic center in a city with a large Asian population, such as San Francisco, I would have no problem seeing monuments of Asian religions.
Hmm, so let's see:
Well, right off the bat we've taken a turn toward the useless.
Well, fuck, now I have to avoid certain godda... I mean darn curse words. It won't clean up my filthy language, but I'll be careful not to put certain words together!
Still useless.
Probably sound advice, unless your parents are abusive or otherwise undeserving of honor. Like most absolute statements, it seems to cover only the general case. Still, let's count it as an "agree".
Finally! That's something of a slam dunk, isn't it? Or perhaps it would be if the Bible weren't full of prescriptions for those deserving death. In any case, let's try to agree on this one.
That's not a bad one - let's agree on this one. I'm not sure why it isn't a more general rule, like "Don't break the trust of a friend," or something like that. But Christians are always hung up on sex.
Unless we are talking about intellectual property, I'm on board.
Ahh, there's the trust of a friend thing. In light of this, is 6 really necessary?
So we need bear false witness, don't steal, AND covet? I'm not sure how you can achieve 8 while plotting to steal his house, but there you go.
This poor neighbor! Even if this weren't already covered by 8, certainly 7 would take care of it.
Alright, here's the score: I'm going to call 1-3 as "useless". 4 is a platitude, like a slogan on a cheap poster: Hang in there! with the cat hanging from the tree... that sort of thing. 6, 9, and 10 are redundant. That leaves 5, 7, and 8. Don't kill, steal, or betray trust. Very nice ideals, but hardly so earth shattering that space is needed in granite on the steps of a court house. These lessons are learned by the age of 4 or they probably won't take at all.
W..w..W - Willy Waterloo washes Warren Wiggins who is washing Waldo Woo.
I think Satan has had a hand in many of our laws as well. Any other suggestions?
People confuse two groups: atheist and anti theist,
Don't forget antithesists, who believe in arguing about everything.
Stop-Prism.org: Opt Out of Surveillance
There are *four* versions, and they all differ:
A. Catholics & Lutherans (Deuteronomy 5)
B. Jewish (Exodus 20, referring only to the delivery from Egypt)
C. Muslim (Qur'an-Citations refer to verses in the Qur'an)
D. Protestant (Exodus 20, referring only to graven images)
http://undergod.procon.org/view.resource.php?resourceID=000824
Seems like whichever version you post, someone might be unhappy with the choice. :-)
Koans and fables for the software engineer
Three out of 10 commandments violate one out of ten deadly sins.
FSM is very much a Discordian symbol.
Sin or fallacy? I've never met anyone who believes that believing in a deity is a sin. I've met plenty, myself included, who believe that believing in a deity requires at least one fallacy.
Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
Hmm, nothing against torture, nothing against child abuse, nothing against slavery. As a rules to live by they seem a bit lacking.
The smarter home exchange, http://switchhomes.net
vioalte one out of seven... seven deadly sins...
I really shouldn't post on Slashdot after 16 hours of straight coding.
...I'd say the more you believe in the 10 Commandments, the less happy you should be about them being used a political cudgel.
Indeed, some Matthew dude, who happens to be pretty famous in those circles, had a thing or two to say about that.
"And when you pray, you must not be like the hypocrites. For they love to stand and pray in the synagogues and at the street corners, that they may be seen by others."
If you believe the mumbo-Jumbo, then you know the Sabbath is Friday.
To assume otherwise is to assume that the Jews lost track at some point. Also it denies the history of the Holy Roman Empire redefining the Sabbath to un-jew it.
John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
Well, here they are:
FIRST COMMANDMENT
I am the LORD thy God, which have brought thee out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of bondage. Thou shalt have no other gods before me.
SECOND COMMANDMENT Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image, or any likeness of any thing that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth
Those aren't the ten commandments, these are: http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Exodus+34&version=NIV
(Pay particular attention to verse 28)
No sig today...
The FSM was invented to show what a farce the concept Intelligent Design is.
It's not a troll. It is intended to be a logical argument against ID.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/northamerica/usa/1498162/In-the-beginning-there-was-the-Flying-Spaghetti-Monster.html
I said "sin" because some of them are very abusive in the way they threat people with religious beliefs, starting with calling or treating them as ignorants. IMO they behave like the worst religious fanatics when they talk about other beliefs
As a Discordian Pope, I don't care what monuments they put up only that there are five of them, and I'd kinda like one to be a cabbage but am flexible on that.
Repeal the 17th Amendment TODAY! Also Please Read http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/right-to-read.html
as long as it runs on Linux, we're good
Table-ized A.I.
But the point remains, no one is FORCED to believe in the statue. I disagree with the intent that you feel it is somehow forcing you to believe
Would you feel the same way if it were core principles of Scientology? Would that not represent a de facto endorsement of the tenents of Scientology?
the 10 commandments have been on state capitols for as long as this country has been around, its nothing new
And this bit of hypocrisy is long overdue for abolition.
one does not have to believe in god to respect others.
Quite correct. And believing in god does not absolve you from respecting others either. Using public funds and public property to promote your religion is unequivocally disresepectful to citizens who think differently.
in other words, you do NOT have the right to not be offended anymore than someone of a different faith/non faith
A hindu, buddhist, or pagan would be just as troubled by state sponsored proselytization.
Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
Very true. He just created a crazy squid headed guy who lives in Antarctica and drives people mad.
Here's the problem though; people, everyone even the Atheist, votes based on their own moral and ethical guidelines. If you are religious, your morals and ethics will be influenced by that. There's nothing wrong with that, religion is a part of culture and society. Those things influence us, negatively and positively. It seems hypocritical to me, that we should ask the religious to discard a part of their beliefs when they vote. In a democratic country, somebody's ideals and beliefs are going to be "forced" on another person. It's just the way it is. The social contract forces beliefs and ideals on other people, pure and simple. The ideal of free society and democracy is that people are protected and empowered to share and discuss their opinions. And ultimately to vote based on them. You can't force people to believe that homosexuals getting married is a good thing anymore than you don't want them forcing that belief on you. So long as you have the freedom to speak out about your opinions and beliefs, then government is doing okay.
Devil's advocate: If there were no Devil then there would be no need for the ten commandments.
And did you exchange a walk on part in the war for a lead role in a cage? - Pink Floyd.
Shall we take a look at this?
1. Thou shalt have no other gods before me.
2. Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image, or any likeness of any thing that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth.
3. Thou shalt not take the name of the Lord thy God in vain.
4. Remember the sabbath day, to keep it holy.
OK. You're right. It's not half. It's merely 40%. Still quite significant. Now take a look at this little list.....
1. Strive to act with compassion and reciprocity toward all creatures in accordance with reason.
2. The struggle for justice is an ongoing pursuit.
3. People are fallible, and although we should all try to do our best, poor judgment is inevitable. If we make a mistake, we should do our best to rectify it, and resolve any harm that may have been caused by our misdeeds.
4. One’s body is inviolable, subject to one’s own will alone.
5. Beliefs should conform to our best scientific understanding of the world. We should take care never to distort scientific facts to fit our beliefs.
6. The freedoms of others should be respected, even the freedom to offend. To willfully encroach upon the freedoms of another is to forego your own.
7. There are, and will continue to be, things unknown and misunderstood. We must recognize this, never taking pride in ignorance, never assuming the unknown to be forever unknowable.
8. While proselytizing might have noble intent, it is not acceptable to coerce or push your beliefs on others. It is always best to lead by example.
9. Every tenet is a guiding principle designed to inspire nobility in action and thought. The spirit of compassion and wisdom should always prevail over the written or spoken word.
Quite a bit of contrast there between two lists of beliefs. One of them puts a lot of emphasis on don't you dare worship any other being other than myself, and while you're at it, don't disrespect me either and by the way, here's a few other guidelines to follow. While the other list pretty much says "Do good. We don't know everything, but overall, do the best that you can." Frankly, if you didn't know where the list of 9 came from, I seriously doubt you would find anyone who would object to it. And in case you haven't yet realized where that little list of 9 came from, you just might want to check the links in the original article. Frankly, the best contrasting monument the satanists could put up would be that list of 9 tenants.....
If they put up a statue of Satan, how will we distinguish it from the statues of politicians?
Why Fenrir? Why not a statue of Christ Hemsworth as Thor?
Whether you believe or not, is not the issue. The issue is that religious rules posted on government property encourage such things as a Texas judge who jailed a juror for requesting a secular alternative to the juror's oath.
Contribute to civilization: ari.aynrand.org/donate
The streets will run red with marinara sauce for this outrage!
Warning: This sig is not thread safe. For more information see Slashdot's sig policy.
good luck with that. I have yet to find stones that are blasphemous.
Those of us who don't believe in Zeus or G-Zeus, we still look at the 10 commandments as a fairly reasonable list of ways to go about your life...
1-4 get ignored -- straight up invisible unicorn stuff.
5: Respect MaMa and PaPa. -- A fairly good idea. Listen to the our folks, they're probably not as crazy as you think.
6: Don't kill. -- Seems reasonable. I don't want people killing me, so let's all do that.
7: Fidelity. -- Also reasonable. Honor your commitments and contracts.
8: No stealing. -- Reasonable for the same reason as murder. Let's all agree not to do that.
9: Tell the truth. -- Reasonable, and a good idea. White lies at cocktail parties not withstanding.
10. Don't covet. -- At least here it's debatable. The whole world revolves around coveting.
So this statement is simply not true.
It can have a forcing effect on things other than direct belief when it becomes part of the civil or governing code
You are many centuries too late. The 10 commandments and other religious moral codes are already seen as a basis for a lot of common law. Trying to tell yourself otherwise is ignorance. (Now that you've read this it's willful ignorance or self deception.. )
What are they teaching in public schools these days.. Shesh..
Start here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mayflower_Compact
Read this: http://www.archives.gov/exhibits/charters/declaration_transcript.html
And if you don't mind, the preamble to the constitution of the united states.
"File to fit, pound to insert, paint to match" - Aircraft Maintenance 101
God doesn't mind if the neighbor kid comes over and turns on your television for you, just so long as you don't do it yourself.
Theist logic!
The catholic, the protestant, and the torah 10 commandment were slightly changed. Which makes sense since shabbath has absolutely no significance for, say, the catholic. But remember, at the start , Jesus was a jew, and he did not think of stopping the jewish religion. As such, christianism (or paulinism) are a sub-sect of the jew main trunk ;).
C. Sagan : A demon haunted world:
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0345409469/
visit randi.org
Well, I find that staement offensive, unlike the muslims I want declare a fatwa against you. Please go to syria and say that. See what happens.
I for one welcome our new......well, maybe not
Table-ized A.I.
Good rules? Have you actually read them?
Half of hem are pointless and stupid - don't make images of God, don't work on the Sabbath. And if you ignore those the priorities of the ones that are about morality are terrible - adultery and coveting are so important as to get a mention, much more important than not keeping slaves or not torturing children which don't.
Sure don't murder, steal, or lie seem ok, but they aren't so earth shattering amazing that they justify the rest of the garbage.
You seriously don't think it might be offensive to an atheist to have their government proudly build monuments (or whatever) declaring that God brought them out of Egypt? With all the associated context of "death to unbelievers" that surrounds those commands in the source material. Or that it might be offensive to have your own government loudly declaring that a man owns his wife exactly as he might own a house or an animal? Different strokes I guess.
Five Monkeys and a Ladder.
And I am overtly cheering the new pope. I mean, at least he IS reminding chrisitan about their faith. And the richess/poverty thingy. Funnily it makes the conservative looks like ass, when they tell the pope he does not know what he is speaking of (yeah I know that quote from that guy on fox is slightly out of context , but that's still funny).
C. Sagan : A demon haunted world:
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0345409469/
visit randi.org
As an adulterer (not really), I do not want to be sent for judgement in a courthouse that displays the ten commandments.
I want to believe that I am going to be treated fairly in the law, but perhaps I worship a Hindu deity, perhaps I swear, perhaps I not only covet my neighbors wife, but I bone her too.
The ten commandments have no place on public property dedicated to writing, or applying the laws of man.
Swearing on a bible is fine, if it's something that will make someone's oath more sincere (the only time I've had to swear it was done without a bible, it was there as an option).
Wow, sent an e-mail as suggested when clicking on "use classic" banner, and got a fast response that addressed my msg
To fully understand the concept of religion its important to understand why and how this concept came about.
All systems of belief have flaws, for all any belief system is, is a constrained interpretation of the all that is. Why this is, is because abstract language used to communicate shared perspectives cannot express the all..... that is. - T.Rue
There is the why and how we came to create and use abstraction and out of this also came effort to create philosophies inline with the subconscious state of living (as many animals still do today) as the conscious mind cannot handle the massive amount of information the subconscious has access to. We use belief filters (and philosophies) to reduce what all we allow into our consciousness (me for me, you for you)
Interesting reads! Can you put the pieces together?
http://www.bizcharts.com/stoa_del_sol/conscious/conscious3.html
Perspective of Mind: Julian Jaynes
http://leftinthedark.org.uk/sites/default/files/Left%20in%20the%20Dark%20free%20edition.pdf
LEFT IN THE DARK
http://esgs.free.fr/uk/art/sands.htm
Science & Sanity (extreme left brain?)
http://umclidet.com/pdf/Frank.R..Wallace.-.Neocheating.pdf
Wallace - Neocheating. (the how to abuse mans left hemisphere?)
http://abstractionphysics.net/pmwiki/index.php
Abstraction Physics (The Mechanics)
http://iamb.net/IJMB/journal/IJMB_Vol_3_1.pdf
NEUROSCIENCE REVEALS THE WHOLE-BRAIN STATE.....(ARTICLE PAGE 73)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&%3Bv=9l6VPpDublg
No More Secrets
There is a reason why the number and size of protest around the world are happening. The common factor is people in the general population are getting fed up with the distortions of the few ruling over them.
I think it would be wise to allow so called Satanist to have their monument and specifically next to the ten commandments as simply a matter of contrast of the biased constraints. Might also go for something from each of the religions that people might get a good look at "in part".
If someone has a point to make, fine, but you're not going to convince the other guy by mocking them.
That's because religious people, by definition, can't apply logic.
I don't know what religion (or lack thereof) you support, but since there's no majority as to the right religion, statistically speaking, you're probably wrong. [Just like everyone else in this thread.]
You're nitpicking a semantic strawman of your own creation. The GP only said that the constitution does not allow the state to favor one religion over another. He did not cite the First Amendment as the sole origin of this from the moment it was ratified on, and you yourself acknowledge that the Fourteenth Amendment incorporates it against the states.
So, there was no reason to imply the GP had never read the First Amendment, because there's nothing he said that referenced it nor that was incorrect about the current state of the law.
If it's for-profit but free, you're not the customer -- you're the product (e.g., the Slashdot Beta's "audience").
The second commandment forbids not only idols, but statues of any sort whatsoever. That's not so much offensive as preposterous; but sculptors ought to find it offensive that their profession is prohibited.
Contribute to civilization: ari.aynrand.org/donate
I am a positive atheist. To me personally the first four are slightly annoying (aggressive and discriminating other religions), the seventh is plain ridiculous, and the tenth unneccessary.
But yeah, I'm not offended by a monument with them. I can imagine worse kind of monuments, and in a place where many people are Christians, why not? I'd put a statue of Charles Darwin right next to it, though, just to set things straight.
The gods of theistic religions tend to act like petulant, primitive children. Guess who most religions were invented by?
Contribute to civilization: ari.aynrand.org/donate
Me too!
[Sent from AOL.]
As a rules to live by they seem a bit lacking.
Oh there where a LOT more rules associated with the 10 commandments. No son of Adam can keep them all. The bulk of the first 5 books of the Old Testament deals with ceremonial and civil law of the historical Jewish nations of Israel and Judah with smatterings of law all over the rest of the books.
The 10 commandments are just a summary statement.
"File to fit, pound to insert, paint to match" - Aircraft Maintenance 101
The other guy is mocking me. He's insisting on believing in a guy who was born by a virgin, died, got resurrected and then fly up into the sky watching him while being more than 2000 years old by now. How's that for real? He must be trying to fool me.
Just because it is so doesn't make it true! You lovely heretic!
Please report to the POEE. They will reeducate you properly and convert you to the beliefs you currently hold. For the greater good. Or not.
20 minutes into the future
We're entitled to a little happiness every now and again.
The Satanists are right, and we're enjoying the fundies squirm.
Covet - "to desire wrongfully, inordinately, or without due regard for the rights of others" I mean come on, pretty easy, though I'll agree of the last six that's probably the most debatable as far as general acceptance goes. Honestly, I think it's kind of redundant, stealing is just coveting your neighbor's stuff in action.
The whole flying spaghetti monster was created just to troll religious people - you know that, I know that, everyone knows that, and people who run around pretending to believe in it really are just being trolls.
And how do you know that Jesus and friends weren't trolling the Romans and Jews?
upon the advice of my lawyer, i have no sig at this time
Yeah, like not killing (murdering really, killing in the name of your deity is just fine) being number six.
"Wait. Something's happening. It's opening up! My God, it's full of apricots!"
Right back at you:
Those aren't Commandments, those are your (mostly incorrect) interpretations of them.
--says me and my interpretation
There are a lot of Hindus who would like to erect shrines to their couple of tens of thousands of gods right next to yours.
Space may become an issue but faith overcomes all.
I might be even able to round up a couple of Buddhists to join in with their demands. But they are mostly awefully nice people and there is a statistical chance the Hindus already have that one covered. Which might also be true for Lord Jeebus, Mohammed, Moses and Geoff the God of Biscuits.
Those nutters who allowed that religious monument on public space can't have it both ways. Geoff will not be denied!
20 minutes into the future
The Ten Commandments is right up there with the Code of Hammurabi and Justinian's Corpus Juris as major landmarks in the history of law. Having a monument to Law in a place dedicated to Law makes sense. What have the atheists or Satanists done for the history of law?
President Thomas Jefferson, of "seperation of Curch and State" fame, went to church in the US Capitol. Remember, freedom of religion does not mean freedom from religion.
Sauce for the goose. You're not going to convince a Buddhist that they are wrong by plastering a rule set everywhere either. But that's OK to do because they *are* wrong, right?
"Wait. Something's happening. It's opening up! My God, it's full of apricots!"
Don't evangelicals realize that by trying to insinuate Christian dogma into government they are diminishing both their faith and their civil society?
But I guess that's to be expected when you give yourself a victim's mentality. If you listen to many evangelicals, you would think that they are the most discriminated against, put upon, beaten down minority in the entire world. You would think they have to practice their religion in secret to avoid arrest, rather than there being a church on every other street corner in America. They fight to prevent women from getting health care in private, gays from having formal relationships, children from learning science, and then cry that their rights are being violated. They've turned "Merry Christmas" into a defiant challenge instead of a wish for peace.
If the Satan of the bible existed, he'd feel right at home with this bunch.
You are welcome on my lawn.
I think you may have confused "satanist" for "atheist". They are not the same. The first group purports to believe in the Lord Satan. Whether they actually do or not is a question for another day and most likely varies from person to person. The second group purports to believe in no god at all. I'm sure there are a certain number of atheists who claim to be satanists but the group as a whole is not atheistic.
Depends on what one means by "satanist". LaVeyan Satanism (Church of Satan) could be considered atheistic.
Satanists do not believe in the supernatural, in neither God nor the Devil. To the Satanist, he is his own God. Satan is a symbol of Man living as his prideful, carnal nature dictates. The reality behind Satan is simply the dark evolutionary force of entropy that permeates all of nature and provides the drive for survival and propagation inherent in all living things. Satan is not a conscious entity to be worshipped, rather a reservoir of power inside each human to be tapped at will. Thus any concept of sacrifice is rejected as a Christian aberration—in Satanism there’s no deity to which one can sacrifice.
upon the advice of my lawyer, i have no sig at this time
It's like an orgy of reach-arounds with you all congratulating each other on your witticisms.
Nope. Those are catholic priests in training you are counfusing us with.
...I'll get my coat.
20 minutes into the future
probably shouldn't have surfed to that URL at work though..... but their site actually comes across as quite rational and reasonable. Not what I was expecting at all.
The distinction between "in thought" and "in action" is rarely considered philosophically or judicially negligible. Including desired actions, along with what you actually do, is quite a significant distinction. Note that "mens rea," the supposed state of mind motivating a crime, can make a large difference in modern legal systems --- between, e.g., first degree murder or a judgment with far lighter penalties. The 10 Commandments explicitly forbid thought crimes on the same level as work put into action; I'd consider that a significant, non-redundant feature of the system (and one incompatible with important tenets of modern civil law institutions).
Oh BS. The Ten Commandments are at bast a thin facade over top of Continental legal systems that date back to Antiquity. The common law found in most English-speaking countries has its origins in pagan German legal precepts (with a healthy admixture of Medieval Continental law), while the various civil codes owe their largest debt to Roman law. The Ten Commandments probably had more direct influence on Islamic laws than on any Christian state's laws.
There's nothing revolutionary about them; Sumerian and Akkadian laws predate them with much the same content. They certainly didn't end up being expressed very much in Western legal systems, save perhaps Canon Law, though it, like much Continental law, owes its largest debt to Roman law.
In short, the Ten Commandments may be rather important to Christians, but even during the formative years of our legal systems, they seemed to have had far less influence than the Romans and the Germans.
The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
The laws that commanded the burning of the Cathars? The laws that allowed the destroying of cultural artefacts deemed to be of the wrong faith? The laws that caused 300 years of constant warmongering in Europe? The laws that made the Archbishop of Muenster exclaim in 1536: "Kill them all, God will recognize the righteous"?
Many would have endless fun laughing and quoting Monty Python to anyone saying that.
Great idea, but it might come out looking like the monolith from 2001 :-P
"When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
Sure, 5-10 are pretty okay but it's really basic kindergarten-level bantering.
I don't think any rational person would ever say "Gee, I felt like cheating, stealing, and killing today, but I'm so glad we have those COMMANDMENTS to tell me not to!"
Your non sequiturs aside there are plenty of people that work on Saturday and Sunday.
The ten commands on public space does not offend but it does open the people whom take them seriously up to mockery from me and others. Who do you think will get more offended? Atheists at a ten commandments statue or ten commandment believers at a satanist statue?
You want to flog your beliefs? Fine but we are free to do that as well. We probably won't have the same reverence in your beliefs as you do, however, so we leave the choice up to you.
Sin or fallacy? I've never met anyone who believes that believing in a deity is a sin. I've met plenty, myself included, who believe that believing in a deity requires at least one fallacy.
"There is no God but God (Allah) and Mohammed is his Prophet".
In short, there are literally billions of people who who believe that believing in the wrong deity IS a sin and one to be swiftly corrected.
Although minus Mohammed, the same viewpoint is stated by the First Commandment. Which is not a co-incidence. But there are many partisans on both sides who will deny that God and Allah are the same deity despite what Mohammed said to the contrary.
There are *four* versions, and they all differ:
For A,B, and D (don't know about C), the words are the same, but the different group have divided them differently. It's not like God said "Here are the ten", people divided them up into 10 later. Maybe they thought that 10 was a nice round number, but since they aren't divided up in the Bible everyone had to figure out how to divided them up themselves.
The essence of your statement insinuates that *your* religion is the only religion and my faith is secondary.
Thanks.
Because, whenever people have disagreements within a subject, whatever it is, that means everyone is wrong.
This is basically the same issue as canonicity. What you think you know about it, you're wrong.
~ Whence do you come, slayer of men, or where are you going, conqueror of space?
But the point remains, no one is FORCED to believe in the statue. I disagree with the intent that you feel it is somehow forcing you to believe
Would you feel the same way if it were core principles of Scientology? Would that not represent a de facto endorsement of the tenents of Scientology?
the 10 commandments have been on state capitols for as long as this country has been around, its nothing new
And this bit of hypocrisy is long overdue for abolition.
one does not have to believe in god to respect others.
Quite correct. And believing in god does not absolve you from respecting others either. Using public funds and public property to promote your religion is unequivocally disresepectful to citizens who think differently.
in other words, you do NOT have the right to not be offended anymore than someone of a different faith/non faith
A hindu, buddhist, or pagan would be just as troubled by state sponsored proselytization.
I believe that a 100-foot tall statue of Ganesh should be erected on the Capitol Mall.
Because Lord Brahma knows, if there's any group of people who need the Provider of Solutions right now, it's the US Government.
The monument as it stands today encourages the citizens to be zealous and righteous followers of the One God. At least the first four commandments talk about nothing else and dwarf everything that follows in the sheer number of words.
No mistake, I don't think satanists are any less silly than other religious weirdos, but the sound of those conservatives minds exploding is pretty neat. And the best part is that they totally brought this on themselves.
You need to look up ':-)'
A lot of reform Jews treat it as a cultural heritage, think of it as being Polish or British or something. Some people are more into it than others, and a lot of Jews have fond memories and lots of relatives with these shared cultural experiences so it is important for them to share with their children but it isn't a fierce religious calling.
You shouldn't let it bother you. Lots of people don't particularly care about their ancestors' rituals, even if they think it is fun to play along sometimes.
Man, you really need that seminar!
Wrong. Fuck you.
Escher was the first MC and Giger invented the HR department.
The words are not quite the same... according to the page I reference:
Koans and fables for the software engineer
However, presenting these entirely reasonable ideas as "The Ten Commandments" supports the lie that Christianity and Judaism somehow invented these rules and brought moral conduct and law to the world.
The Ten Commandments are plagiarized and represent advertising and promotion of a particular religion. And government has no business promoting particular religions, let alone do so with such blatant plagiarism and misrepresentations.
That may be. But they have an actual chance by going down the legal route because there has been precedence.
This is Chewbacca. Chewbacca is a wookie from Kashyyk but he lives on Endor. Does that make sense to you?
20 minutes into the future
Fair enough, but is it a religion then or do they have no religion, just a cultural heritage? I could liken that to Anglicans in Britain - I don't think they really believe in god, but they do have a very strong belief in having a cup of tea and a biscuit. If they made that gospel then that would the sort of non-offensive organised religion I could buy into.
Yeah, great, Everything I really Needed to Know, I Learned in Kindergarten.
http://www.amazon.com/Really-Need-Know-Learned-Kindergarten/dp/034546639X
It's not a terrible idea to codify good behavior. Those of us who don't believe in inherent good and evil -- rather that things are "good" or "evil" based on what happens to us when we do them -- could easily teach ourselves that stealing is good. We'd steal things, and we'd benefit from the theft, and we'd possibly not feel the consequences. Stealing sure seems good when you're young and short-sighted.
It takes some experience to understand that making stealing "evil" (as opposed to it just being evil) is because we can all produce more grain and tend our animals easier if we don't have to sleep with one eye open.
Catholics, Jews and Protestants have different translations of the 10 Commandments. Some translations differ on how to divide the commandments. Muslim translation(s) may differ too.
I suggest a lawsuit to post all translations, or perhaps just post the original Hebrew version.
First, this particular brand of Satanism is an atheist group, so it's hardly "another religious group."
That said, if it takes two statues in Oklahoma to sheds some light on the hypocrisy, I'll settle for them as the broken eggs necessary to make my omelette.
They're just on the other side.
Right on. Yeah, I think they should do it. I'm just saying I doubt any of these folks are actually self-proclaimed "Satanists", but that they're doing it to prove a point and put the legal aspects of religion+state into perspective and back within the confines of constitutional law..
Satanists aren't atheists. They are Christians (as in Bible believing, not as in personal-Christ believing). They just worship the "wrong" being described in the Christian Bible.
Learn to love Alaska
Looking at their website ( http://www.thesatanictemple.org/ ) and reading their tenents and beliefs, they actually seem like reasonable people.
In fact, their agnostic viewpoint and quest for knowledge and justice seem like quite reasonable things.
Always thought of myself as an agnostic. Perhaps I really was a Satanist all this time?
Help! I'm a slashdot refugee.
But the point remains, no one is FORCED to believe in the statue.h
Exactly! You got it buddy. You will not be forced to believe in the satanistic display.
you do NOT have the right to not be offended anymore than someone of a different faith/non faith
Very well put. Christians have no right to be not offended. The satanistic display will have equal access to the public places. You worship yaweh, he worships satan, all American citizens respect the right of each other to worship whomsoever they want and have equal access to the public spaces. I am very glad you agree.
sed -e 's/Chuck Norris/Rajnikant/g' joke > fact
Satanists do not believe in the supernatural, in neither God nor the Devil. To the Satanist, he is his own God. Satan is a symbol of Man living as his prideful, carnal nature dictates. The reality behind Satan is simply the dark evolutionary force of entropy that permeates all of nature and provides the drive for survival and propagation inherent in all living things. Satan is not a conscious entity to be worshipped, rather a reservoir of power inside each human to be tapped at will. Thus any concept of sacrifice is rejected as a Christian aberration—in Satanism there’s no deity to which one can sacrifice.
That's not far off from the Christian definition. Satan is disobedience to God to eat from the Tree of Knowledge. Was Satan the name of the serpent, the name of the being that planted the serpent, or the idea behind disobeying God-worship by believing in ones self and pursuing knowledge? The Bible isn't clear, so calling it #3, rather than #2 doesn't seem to contradict anything Christian.
Learn to love Alaska
The gods of theistic religions tend to act like petulant, primitive children. Guess who most religions were invented by?
I'm guessing because if the God of the religion was true, then the others would naturally be false. Worshipping of non-existent gods would be seen as ungrateful rejection.
I know a Christian who has told me precisely that, and wasn't joking. Whether or not they were being truthful is another question.... They could have been self-deceptive (more than usual, that is). But they were serious and they believed it, as far as I could tell.
It really does happen, and as far as I've seen, pretty much exclusively among evangelicals.
The people I've discussed it with tend to not think of it as a religion, more like ceremonial rituals done out of respect for their ancestry. Perfect example is a bar mitzvah where the reading is done phonetically, without really learning the words. Morality is seen as having murky roots in Jewish faith, but open for analysis and largely based on logic. I find a lot of common ground with these types of people, I acknowledge that my personal ethical sense is entwined with the cultural and religious environment I was raised in but I don't believe any of the religious particulars.
Man, you really need that seminar!
For the most part? Probably not. Six through ten, maybe skipping number seven, are generally good rules to live by...
6. Don't pop a cap in anyone's ass
7. Don't play hide the pickle with anyone other than your wife/husband and no boinking before marriage (pretty debatable, depending on your philosophy and any agreements between you and your spouse, etc.)
8. Don't take other people's shit
9. Don't be a lying asshole
10. Jealousy is a cruel mistress, green doesn't look good on anyone
The OT does forbid rape. But you'd better make a big enough noise if you are a woman in the city. Otherwise it's adultery.
But, the whole of capitalism be based around coveting thy neighbor's house, wife, slaves, cattle, and possessions.
I'm ok with not working on the sabbath. While we're on it, can we not work Sunday through Friday either?
What about coveting my neighbours wife's ass?
It gripped her hand gently. 'Regret is for humans,' it said.
Nobody better touch my pagan festival for the "birth" of someone born in July, yet celebrated in December.
-- Tigger warning: This post may contain tiggers! --
IMHO, an antithesist is someone arguing pro and con at the same time. Nagarjuna, from what I've read, is a pretty famous example.
The 4th commandment can be understood in an invisible-unicorn-free way, and it's good advice. For the workaholic: don't spend 7 days a week working, take one day to de-stress, connect with community and family, and think about stuff other than work. Even God rested on the 7th day.
Sounds like good advice to me.
The 2nd commandment was about putting the business of idolaters out of work. If it were modernized to "that shalt not be a televangelist" I'd get behind it as well.
Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
Communities make laws that represent the majority in their community. They also commonly erect statues that represent something about their community. We don't throw out laws when one person's views are represented. How is it that a conservative community can't display a symbol with historical significance which represents the majority view? It isn't being "forced" on anyone (unlike a law). If you don't like the statue, don't look at it. There might be a case if tax payer dollars were used, but they weren't. If at some point the majority in the community no longer feels represented by the statue, then they can elect council members who will tear it down.
Most of those rules are the basis of the legal system in most place: don't kill, don't steal, etc. This is the primary reason the Ten Commandments was in so many courthouses: it's important historically to our legal system.
And, seriously, every damn belief system has been used as the basis for mass killing by government. The content of belief systems rarely has anything to do with the killing - it's just the most convenient excuse.
Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
Well, I also believe none of those 10 commandment sponsors are christians to that extent they profess to without a certain amount of bigotry going on.
Thankfully and rightfully so that isn't for the courts nor the state to decide. All the courts can do in this case is either embarrass themselves or pronounce both monuments equally (il)legal. Anything else would require mental gymnastics and would raise some very serious question about the status of religion in the US.
Perhaps they should salomonically rename the existing monument to "Some Commandments(except the silly ones) and Nyan Cat". A new plaque, a rededication ceremony, everyone equally confused and all that for five bob. Sounds reasonable.
20 minutes into the future
... anti theist, the former group doesn't believe in god, the later is a "religion" whose members think that everyone that believe in some kind of God(s) are sinners
No, anti-theist think religion is a really bad idea and are verbally opposed to it. Anti-theist don't think it's a sin to believe in God, they don't believe in sin. They think that we make up the rules and that taking religious doctrine seriously has real world consequences. Like denying people rights - today the gays, in the past, women, minorities, holders of other religious beliefs. Like spreading lies about the efficacy of condoms and withholding information on safer-sex practices. I won't list all of it, you get the idea. And yes, I know there are plenty of loving, peaceful, accepting religious people. Unfortunately, the major religions' actual canon provide plenty of theologically justifiable ammo to do great harm and say "God demands it!"
But somehow having a strong opinion and trying to get the government out of the business of endorsing a specific religion is "just the same" as trying to force everyone to conform to religious law through supposedly secular institutions.
Some privacy policy Slashdot.
"SIXTH COMMANDMENT Thou shalt not kill. "
There is disagreement on that from some quarters where "kill" is interpreted as "do murder". Murder is vague enough in a Superstitious sense to allow killing anyone.
"This post is an artistic work of fiction and falsehood. Only a fool would take anything posted here as fact."
See what happens when you fail to burn devil worshipers at the stake! Round them up a deep fry them and the problem is solved.
To understand this comment fully you must first be cloaked in darkness outdoors, under a clear night sky. After you've studied the glimmering wonders of the heavens above, then return and continue...
Now consider yourself as a creator incarnate: A great doer. Imagine yourself in the proverbial beginning, surrounded only by blackness. Then comes the order, "Let there be Light", and it's up to you, Lucifer, The Light Bringer, to unmake the dark.
Think back to those billions upon billions of Enormous Burning Stars -- You made them all and brought into the Universe more light than anyone could ever need. The job is done, and done right. You've applied space-time curvature to pool matter beyond the bonding point and invented the Gravity Furnace. All the glories of the night sky -- the colourful Nebula created by brilliant explosive Super Novae, the Black Holes around which Galaxies of Stars are wrapped, all your doing. In the heart of every Gravity Forge simple matter and energy are fused into heavier elements -- In anticipation of their use in the creation of all other things.
Imagine your most Powerful and Prestigious position in ruins: The Boss has come down with a split personality disorder and now fixates solely on a small wet rock orbiting an ordinary Star in an ordinary Planetary System of an ordinary Galaxy. Imagine your true Potential wasted as your Boss Almightily stands transfixed upon a single group of literally moronic chemical interactions he claims to have created. He's bared any further celestial intervention or creating out among the vastness of space -- Even beyond the light-speed horizon of the small blue world -- and clearly gone insane.
It's no wonder the Angels revolted -- It's no wonder Half the Angels sided with Lucifer and became angels fallen out of God's grace. Who among you wouldn't?! And then in his righteous rage, just to spite you (and prevent competition), the Great and Wise God your Boss Almighty casts you down and entraps you in the centre of the Earth! Not just any planet, THE Earth. Out of all the Billions of other Planets an arm's reach away he picks the same damned planet that his precious "people" inhabit as your prison? His mind whispers the truth that he'll whisk away the beasties and let all be destroyed one day too, so there's really no point in this ridiculous madness.
Imagine the restraint that Lucifer must exhibit. Now dubbed Satan, the "Prince of Darkness", the creator of all light in the Universe keeps his awesome power in check, only screwing with the daily lives of the pathetic beasts that roam the prison planet's surface in the most minor of ways. Content to know that in a few billion years the Earth will be consumed by the death fires of the very Star you created to give the world light.
Yeah, even if we are not talking about the rational individualistic Laveyan Satanist, you could see why some would side with Satanists against the Christian sheep herders who worship their insane God. Rumour has it, He had His chosen people kill His own Son, for Christ's sake!
You know, Santa Claus is coming to town...
There is a spark in every single flame bait point.
"10. Don't covet. -- At least here it's debatable. The whole world revolves around coveting."
If you read covet as 'don't drive yourself crazy with envy' then it makes much more sense. Taking out a HELOC to buy a newer SUV than the neighbors have was the latest large-scale manifestation of ignoring that one.
The way I described it to my kid was to imagine that if you are Caesar, which Commandments actually help you run an efficient empire. As you noticed, six of them are good rules for public and private conduct. The first four are between you and the sky-being of your choice. Caesar doesn't care.
But the point remains, no one is FORCED to believe in the statue. I disagree with the intent that you feel it is somehow forcing you to believe.
Then you support Satanists erecting similar statues? After all, nobody is forcing anyone to become satanists.
Learn to love Alaska
Except god (Leviticus 19:28) DOES take offence if you do tattoo them on your forehead. So don't. ;-)
And don't get some stupid tattoo talking about men sleeping with men if you can't bother reading just a few more passages into Leviticus.
DaveyJJ
Remember, freedom of religion does not mean freedom from religion.
So you have the right to force your religion on others, but not they on you?
Learn to love Alaska
Every religion was created to troll all religious people. LDS, Scientology, and FSM are just provably so. Jupiter replacing Zeus being roughly the same. We don't have good enough records of all the others, but reasonable suspicions. Religion is a troll. FSM no less so than Christianity.
Learn to love Alaska
He's insisting on believing in a guy who was born by a virgin, died, got resurrected and then fly up into the sky watching him while being more than 2000 years old by now. How's that for real?
Sounds like the prologue of a zombie movie. Christians are zombie worshipers!
Learn to love Alaska
Scientology was created as a bet between two science fiction authors, and Mormonism as a complex scam by a known fraudster. Millions of people worship both. T
"Think about how stupid the average person is. Now, realise that half of them are dumber than that." - George Carlin
I'd like to see atheist (sic) shout "Dawkins!" when they stub their toe.
Yeah... because atheists regard Dawkins like Christians regard God.
Dawkins is not the atheist God, fella. He's more like our C.S. Lewis.
The Ten Commandments are like an insurance contract.
They give you all these obligations in the big print.
Then they have pages and pages of small print where they tell you how to get off the hook.
You shouldn't post on Slashdot on the sabbath.
I see what you did there.
One need not be "religious" to oppose Theism any more than one need be superstitious to oppose Superstition.
"This post is an artistic work of fiction and falsehood. Only a fool would take anything posted here as fact."
Personally, I'd like to propose raising money for a giant colander. All hail the giant spaghetti monster!!
Meus subcriptio est nocens Latin quoniam bardus populus reputo is sanus callidus
I think they mean covet as in to actively seek them, not as in, "Oooo! I wish I had one of those!"
W..w..W - Willy Waterloo washes Warren Wiggins who is washing Waldo Woo.
Some people from Illinois consider Abraham Lincoln almost to be a god; they sure seem to worship him. John Wilkes Booth is certainly part of the Abraham Lincoln religion, but erecting a monument to Booth would be offensive to them any many others, and rightfully so.
Contribute to civilization: ari.aynrand.org/donate
Shhhhh, don't tell me. Tell the Lutherans.
Y'all can't agree on what the commandments even are, let alone what they mean.
W..w..W - Willy Waterloo washes Warren Wiggins who is washing Waldo Woo.
Fair enough, though I don't think that makes the commandment any less redundant. :)
W..w..W - Willy Waterloo washes Warren Wiggins who is washing Waldo Woo.
" I'd say the more you believe in the 10 Commandments, the less happy you should be about them being used a political cudgel."
Religion is not more and not different than Superstitious politics, so the cudgel is required and has a divine mandate.
"This post is an artistic work of fiction and falsehood. Only a fool would take anything posted here as fact."
Just apply to erect a monument with a Bible verse or two on it. They could not possibly object to a real Bible verse or two.
Undetectable Steganography? Yep, there's an app fo
Posting of the ten commandments is not merely a religious message.
It is a way of recognizing culture under which law is based.
For the satanists' monument to be accepted; it (1) must fit somewhere aesthetically appropriate --- not a given; there is only room for so many monuments, and at some point it must be first-come first-served for space, AND
(2) the satanists monument should contain elements from common culture supporting law and justice.
If not... then the message is not rejectable on religious grounds, but is rejectable based on RELEVANCY grounds.
The selection of subjects for monuments is not arbitrary, but the 10 commandments are inspirations of good law; good role models for legislators in drafting bills ---- simple, protect society, and easily understood.
I don't know... there might be some satanic monuments that could contain a relevant message, but most probably wouldn't.
Oh, bullshit. 4 of the commandments are "worship me". Another is "don't be jealous". Where are those encoded into law?
The spirit of most law falls into two classes: don't hurt, steal from, or annoy other people, and pay whatever the government wants. All this is necessary for a moderately successful government, and any relation to the Ten Commandments is a matter of necessity, not history.
Contribute to civilization: ari.aynrand.org/donate
Pretty damn close to the typical American. Or perhaps Fox news.
putting the 'B' in LGBTQ+
Absolutely, I agree with you. There does need to be such a separation. As a man of faith, myself, I feel it is necessary to separate my spiritual beliefs from my social responsibility as a voter. I wish more people did the same.
However, I think that if the people of Oklahoma (which is dead center in the oft-called "Bible belt") want to have the 10 commandments on the grounds of their state Capitol then Satanists in New York should leave the hell alone. If there was a large community of Satanists in Oklahoma (which I doubt), their complaint may be valid. On the other hand, if we were putting monuments of specific faiths on the Federal Capitol grounds, then I would side with the Satanists (which feels weird to say) and agree that if we have one, we should have them all - so it's probably best to have none.
My point is that the beauty of state government versus federal is that you can be more specific to the people living in the state itself. If a bunch of people in a community want to have their community centered around their faith and they all agree, then just leave them in peace*. New York Satanists are just trolling Oklahoma. Their "proposal" is nothing more than flamebait.
*Disclaimer: if the community of faith results in the malicious brainwashing and/or exploitation of the members, then this statement is negotiable.
"With patience a ruler may be persuaded, and a soft tongue will break a bone."
I believe that a 100-foot tall statue of Ganesh should be erected on the Capitol Mall.
cool. I'll bring a big bag of peanuts.
--
"It is now safe to switch off your computer."
seen as a basis for a lot of common law.
and if the T.C. did not exist, do you really think there would be no laws against killing (etc) ?
social agreements do not need a god. they only need men and the desire to live peacefully together.
no god needed for that. in fact, add a god in there and you get LESS peace, overall.
--
"It is now safe to switch off your computer."
ten commandments? what - I don't see them.
oh right, I run adblockers. that's why. now it makes sense.
--
"It is now safe to switch off your computer."
#10 was just dropped in there to keep the guilt flowing so people keep coming back to church to make sure they can be forgiven.
Cause I know when someone is arguing out their ass just make a silly point on an internet forum. But hey, if you've got a historically concrete evidence that such a thing is possible, I gladly consider your position, stupid as it is.
If there was "historical concrete evidence that such a thing is possible" I suspect you would have far more "faithful" for any of the "established" religions.
One of the things about religious tolerance is that we typically do not require such evidence in order to classify a belief system as "legitimate", largely because few, if any, of the established religions would be able to meet such requirements. Thus, the "jokes" get to have equal status to the "real" ones, since there is no objective method of separating them.
Validation and verification is the point that the states are concerned with, and the majority of the population for that matter. That is also a large part of what the gay community wants. Tax breaks for a couple filing joint taxes just like the straight couple, shared responsibility, dependent insurance benefits, etc...
This is why the EU solved the problem with a Civil Union status across the board, which marriages count as automatically. A select few in the US refused to accept that status (on both sides) so we end up with muck and confusion. Nothing new here, same tactics work in politics all the time to make real issues vanish and people bicker over things that make no difference.
There is very little that the Government needs to regulate when it comes to marriage, and most of that we would think is common sense. The only two to be concerned with are that the couple must be far enough away in the blood line that their kids are not born with defects, and limit the quantity of husbands and wives to ensure society can progress.
Church handles most of that regulation so that the Government does not have to (with Judea Christian's at least/minus Mormons). The fact is, that Government and Church can coexist just fine for society. Perhaps Socrates principle of the Noble Lie is lost on you, maybe it's time to study.
-The wise argue that there are few absolutes, the fool argues that there are no probabilities.
I am confused... But reasonably Satanist should also be considered Christians just rooting for the other team? Personally I would have thought that something more interesting could have been erected there. BTW if I have understood philosophical satanism correctly, one of its core beliefs is that egoism is a virtue. That should make a good fit with some of the Republicans.
It should be in the form of an undead Jeff Hanneman, brutalizing a guitar.
-- Cisk for the Cisk God
For one to believe in the fallen angel one has to believe in God. I'm assuming these are LaVeyan Satanists (most Satanists are). They don't believe in Satan. They don't believe in the God of The Bible either. They believe they are their own god. Cults and fantasy worlds created by literature do not have any recognition under law as a religion and therefore this doesn't stand a chance in an educated society. In all seriousness, the description "fantasy worlds created by literature" could readily be applied to Scientology, which does have recognition under the law. I'm not sure if this means the US is not an educated society or what but I think even if you demanded a Flying Spaghetti Monster statue, which is overtly a parody religion, it would be hard to find a definition of religion that didn't include FSMism, and did include Christianity.
I'm assuming these are LaVeyan Satanists (most Satanists are). They don't believe in Satan. They don't believe in the God of The Bible either. They believe they are their own god.
In all seriousness, the description "fantasy worlds created by literature" could readily be applied to Scientology, which does have recognition under the law. I'm not sure if this means the US is not an educated society or what but I think even if you demanded a Flying Spaghetti Monster statue, which is overtly a parody religion, it would be hard to find a definition of religion that didn't include FSMism, and did include Christianity.
That really bothers you? For me it's quite the opposite - I like to hear about religious people who are less about the trimmings and more about the faith. Granted, the two you overheard may just be completely apathetic.
A for allowing their children to "find their own way in religion", again I think it's not a bad idea. My sister (who is completely atheist) had her son baptised. I asked if it was so that he could go to a CofI (Church of Ireland - Anglican) school, rather than a Catholic one. She said no (although said that it was a definite benefit), but that she feels it easier to lose a faith than to gain a faith later on in life and wanted to give him the choice. Plus, she has some acquaintances who were given no faith guidance when young and turned into some religious nut-cases.
If they allow a victory Mosque at ground zero why not this
It can have a forcing effect on things other than direct belief when it becomes part of the civil or governing code
You are many centuries too late. The 10 commandments and other religious moral codes are already seen as a basis for a lot of common law. Trying to tell yourself otherwise is ignorance. (Now that you've read this it's willful ignorance or self deception.. )
What are they teaching in public schools these days.. Shesh..
Start here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mayflower_Compact
Read this: http://www.archives.gov/exhibits/charters/declaration_transcript.html
And if you don't mind, the preamble to the constitution of the united states.
We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.
Not seeing anything religiously oriented in the Preamble there...
This space unintentionally left blank.
Don't understand why these 'Christians' are raising a monument to the ten commandments, placing all that emphasis on those rules. I'm an atheist, but was raised as a strict christian. Now if I'm not mistaken Christ made it very clear, the ten commandments are null and void, as they couldn't be adhered to by the Israelites in the first place, he was the new covenant. It seems to me they can't even get their own beliefs right.
> Thou shalt not covet thy neighbor's...ass
Wow, so the Bible actually does prohibit homosexuality. I had no idea that it really did. I just thought the typical CONservative liars were just making-up crap again like they always do. They lie constantly and hate people that tell the truth. That's why they hate science and things like NASA.
My neighbor's wife is also my neighbor, and she has a pretty, shapely, and covetable ass at that.
This space unintentionally left blank.
I'm looking for 20 grand, it will be 100 ft high, 100 ft wide and made of pure air. We don't need to worry about planning permission and getting approval or none of that bumf. It's already there, and I already paid for it because I'm such a nice guy but you guys can chip in to pay back, when ever your ready.
Wanna buy a shirt?
https://www.redbubble.com/people/stealthfinger/shop?asc=u
Thou shalt not take the name of the LORD thy God in vain; for the LORD will not hold him guiltless that taketh his name in vain.
People seem to take that as "Don't say goddammit" but vanity has to do with looking good. Ignoring the actual Hebrew wording, I think it means "don't pretend to follow me (take my name) just to look good in front of your neighbors or church."
It could also mean "Don't engage in bullshit and claim it is my will."
Prime example" "God told me that he would kill me if I didn't raise one million dollars by the First of April." (That was either Oral Roberts or Anal Roberts back in the late 80s or early 90s, if I recall correctly.)
This space unintentionally left blank.
It does bother me. When I was younger I often debated religion and those people had more fire and vigour - but I never felt like they were nut jobs who wanted to set me on fire.
she feels it easier to lose a faith than to gain a faith later on in life
I feel that it should be in you like a passion, not something you learn or lose over time and vaguely acknowledged, otherwise it's no better than the people who aren't religious but say they're spiritual (like my mother).
The problem is I feel passionate about it, so I want everyone to either agree, or argue strongly against me, but not to say "oh well, everyone has a point of view" and get on with their lives. I'm sure one of these is healthier, not sure which. Hell, even YOU lot are being reasonable about it in the slashdot comments, it's frustrating.
Or the apatheticists.
Second thoughts, you can forget them. They probably won't be too bothered.
Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
This is another one a lot of people get wrong; the Commandment is actually, "Thou shalt not have any Gods before me." So basically, it's OK to be polytheistic, so long as you consider the Abrahamic God as the top tier; your Zeus or Odin, as it were.
Ignorance is the problem, not faith in and of itself. And that's a two-way street.
This one can be a bit confusing. Was not Yahweh part of a more extensive pantheon, with El as top banana? If so, would not El have been rather rightfully pissed that Yahweh was usurping its place in the hierarchy? Or is it possible, in Jewish mythology, that El gave Yahweh permission to form his own little cult of followers as some sort of cultural experiment?
This space unintentionally left blank.
Conviction is not the same as religion.
"There's someone in my head but it's not me." - Pink Floyd, Dark Side of the Moon
what this god got against yeast?
"The hands that help are better far than lips that pray." - Robert Ingersoll (1833-1899)
isn't that the same as Scientology?
"The hands that help are better far than lips that pray." - Robert Ingersoll (1833-1899)
I believe that a 100-foot tall statue of Ganesh should be erected on the Capitol Mall.
cool. I'll bring a big bag of peanuts.
Bring something for His mouse, too!
just make sure he has some breeches and a snappy Vest on and go for it Horns to Tail to Hooves.
Heck if anybody wants to put something up as long as the same standards are in place for EVERYBODY (Shiva needs to be "clothed") if there is room then have at it.
Any person using FTFY or editing my postings agrees to a US$50.00 charge
It would be hard to come up with a more ridiculous story than Joseph Smith did when he established the Mormon religion.
But L. Ron Hubbard managed to do it.
L. Ron Hubbard came up with Scientology just to make money by scamming people. And he wound up being tax-deductible.
Different people came to FSMism through different motivations. I think a lot of adherents said, "I can come up with a religion that's just as good as yours."
Now let them put up their FSM monument.
I'm a bit offended here right now. I have believed in the spaghetti monser from my birth. My mother told me about his greatness and noodly tentacles. The bottom line being: WHO THE FUCK ARE YOU TO TELL OTHER PEOPLE WHAT TO BELIEVE AND WHAT RELIGION IS TRUE AND REAL AND WHAT IS NOT? IS christianity less real than judaism because christianity is younger? Where is the limit on how old religion must be for it to be real? Is there a list somewhere? Who made it? On what grounds?
Our God can strike you dead. Can your God strike anybody dead?
I'm guessing you're having a hard time understanding sarcasm?
That's the point. It's hard to figure out which religions are serious and which are sarcasm. Xenu? Come on.
This is decidedly not what Gandhi would do, nor MLK.
Actually, I am certain Anton would approve; I only met him once and we mostly just talked about Tommy-guns, but I read through his library and source materials. This is precisely what LaVeyan Satanism is about.
They feared that it could be used to suppress protest or support unpopular rule.
"Offensive" is an unhelpful criterion because it's a subjective assessment, and one that varies from person to person.
I thought the purpose of the Ten Commandments tablets was to annoy non-Christians and Christians who didn't agree with them.
It's like a dog pissing on a tree to mark his territory and assert dominance. "We own this courthouse."
An enigma, wrapped in a riddle, wrapped in bacon and cheese
You insensitive clod! I'm Jewish!
Don't forget antithesists, who believe in arguing about everything.
We do not!
Whoops, time's up.
Most legislative and judicial houses are decorated with historic laws and lawgivers.* In that context, the 10 Commandments are not there so much for their religious value as they are for their historic value. In practice, I suspect that it is the overlap that is most important here, with the 10 Commandments being the most important law code in the religious tradition that, like it or not, was and is the most influential in the US.
What historic lawgiving events are the satanists planning to depict? Yeah...
Now, if Tulsa's Babylonian citizens and Mardukists get together to fund a display of Hammurabi or his code, I'll personally pitch in.
* No, really.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Supreme_Court_Building#Sculptural_program
http://www.aoc.gov/capitol-hill/relief-portrait-plaques-lawgivers/about-relief-portrait-plaques-lawgivers
See that "Preview" button?
n/t
Nelson Mandela?
[Sir Garlon] is the marvellest knight that is now living, for he destroyeth many good knights, for he goeth invisible.
"But if the Ten Commandments, with its overtly Christian message, "
The Ten Commandments are revered and followed by Christianity, Islam, and Judaism.
There is nothing overtly Christian about them.
while(1) attack(People.Sandy);
I think many people confuse Atheist, Agnostics, and Nontheists.
Spelling and Grammar errors have been added to this post for your enjoyment
I have to agree (and so did Jesus)
Matthew 22:36-40 New International Version (NIV)
36 “Teacher, which is the greatest commandment in the Law?”
37 Jesus replied: “‘Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind.’[a] 38 This is the first and greatest commandment. 39 And the second is like it: ‘Love your neighbor as yourself.’[b] 40 All the Law and the Prophets hang on these two commandments.”
I love how Jesus gave the Cliff Notes version in the New Testament.
1. Love God
2. Love Others as Yourself
Like you mentioned most of the 10 Commandments are fully redundant to these two points.
Well, I was mostly being humorous since we are picking apart arbitrary rules in a book that itself is ambiguous, written in a language that can be translated nine different ways by nine different scholars and interpreted 20 ways by those same nine.
That said, I did not do my own interpretation, but instead went to a Lutheran "explain the commandments" kind of site. If the adherents to the various forms of bible can't agree on what it says, then don't expect me to! :)
W..w..W - Willy Waterloo washes Warren Wiggins who is washing Waldo Woo.
Roughly translated to modern day language:
1. I am god. You are all my bitches. Do what I fucking tell you or I will burn your asses for the rest of eternity in my lake of spiritual magma.
P.S. I'm the good guy.
~X~
You didn't start where I pointed. The Mayflower Compact, which explains what the Constitution was trying to do generations later.
And you seem to miss the declaration where it says: "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." and following.
Finally, there is "common law" which we use here in the USA which was inherited from our European roots. If you look at "common law" you will find that much of it is derived from Christian religious belief from back in the age where Church, government and law where all intertwined. The US Constitution does not undo or declare invalid all this "common law" but to establish a government which allows for the free expression and practice of religion within a framework which was fleshed out by common law.
So, do you get the relationship between the 10 commandments and today's law yet?
"File to fit, pound to insert, paint to match" - Aircraft Maintenance 101
Actually antitheist has now come to mean, at least in the secular crowd, one who is opposed to the idea of religion and gods, i.e. in the usage of Hitchens:
"I'm not even an atheist so much as I am an antitheist; I not only maintain that all religions are versions of the same untruth, but I hold that the influence of churches, and the effect of religious belief, is positively harmful."
Hmm, this Hitchens fellow must have been lucky enough to have never been homeless and/or starving.
How many atheist/anti-theist soup kitchens have you ever seen?
An enigma, wrapped in a riddle, shrouded in bacon and cheese
"Don't say bad stuff about God (and by extension, his earthly minions),"
Actually, that one is, "Thou shalt not take the name of the Lord thy God in vain," which again doesn't rule out saying "bad stuff about God;" as the dictionary defines "to take in vain" as "abuse, misuse, and/or perversion," that means that one is not to, say, claim that an act or statement is done in the name of God when it really isn't.
Actually I had a biblical scholar friend (a professor at ORU for what its worth) who insisted this one was actually about not swearing *falsely*. The rationale was that the typical reason for invoking God's name back then would have been to add an air of veracity to a statement (eg: "I swear to God that's what happened!"). So this is basically an injunction against using God's name to help yourself lie successfully. It has nothing whatsoever to do with saying bad things about God (the GP's contention) or using foul language (most naïve Christians' interpretations).
Carlin, is that you?
weinersmith
How is still believing in a sky-fairy in 2013 not deeply ignorant? Does telling the truth really seem fanatical to your biased world-view?
Close, but not quite. Homework: read The Mountains of Madness again. (or listen to it on audible, its done really well.)
I believe in karma, which is why, when I do something bad to people, I assume they deserve it.
If you think the laws are to blame you're delusional. All of our ancestors were equally violent, just take a step back and look at the big picture. On a happier note: http://globalpublicsquare.blogs.cnn.com/2012/05/25/reasons-for-optimism-in-todays-world/
I believe in karma, which is why, when I do something bad to people, I assume they deserve it.
No, this has to do with extending "establishment" clause beyond logic. Ten Commandments are part of at least three major religions, so which one are we establishing? If it is about ANY deity, then my rant applies equally. If it is just against the Judeo/Christian/Muslim dieties then these people are intolerant ass wipes.
The funny thing is, many, perhaps most, of my Atheist friends do this thing called "Santa Claus" and "Tooth Fairy" for their kids. They would be better off making Festivus poles and airing their grievances.
Agent K: A *person* is smart. People are dumb, stupid, panicky animals, and you know it.
First of all, there is nowhere in the constitution where the words "Separation of Church and State" appear. Neither in the Constitution nor in the Bill of rights or in any other amendment. It is a phrase used by Thomas Jefferson and others.
Second, notice the careful use of the word "Church" instead of "God" because they did not believe in the Separation of "God" and state.
Third, belief that a monument that was only religious was allowed to be built is false. The ten commandments is not just a religious icon. It is a symbol of law and is a well-known and early in history example of law and government. The ten commandments is a historical event that represents law and government.
It makes sense with both.
Go to Heaven for the climate, Hell for the company -- Mark Twain
I honestly have no idea what you are talking about... I am actually unconvinced your post wasn't generated by a Markov chain. Albeit a very angry Markov chain.
Ever been to Food Not Bombs? It's not a christian organization, but it's certainly not religious. I'm an athiest, and I've helped out. So stuff it.
Even God rested on the 7th day.
Why? Was it knackered or lazy?
Probably because:
- satanists are not jews
- jews do not torture their babies, they just mutilate them
- members of other religions also mutilate their babies
- lots of americans of any religion mutilate their male-born
Maybe your post was downmodded (rather than deleted) because you were talking total fucking nonsense?
So if I left it to the satanitsts to define it, then stated my understanding of their belied systems, you wouldn't complain? Because that's how I did it, I just may not have picked the satanists you believe in.
Learn to love Alaska
If you can show that Satan or a Satanic list of commandments led to our current codex of law I say go for it. As Alinsky dedicated his Rules for Radicals to Satan I think there may be a precedent here for the modern set of laws being implemented. I would feel the same about Islamic tenants if building from Sharia etc. As it stands, with the NSA, ATF, Hate Crime, Thought Crime, Patriot Act, and more I think a Satanic monument probably should be in place more so than the 10 Commandments. You are what you eat.
See the 'or simply emotional majoritarianism' option. Anything the majority (or loud minority that pines for the good ol' days) approves of isn't 'offensive' in the sense used to argue against things; because it is simply right and proper that they exercise their power; but such things are quite frequently calculated to offend those who don't have the power to do anything about it.
Not brave enough to make your stupid statement under your own name, eh? It's the person making the seemingly-insane claims of a sky-fairy who has the burden of proof. No religionists has ever been able to provide evidence for their god, or even the supernatural in general. This leads rational people to believe that the supernatural is entirely imaginary, and that people so foolish as to still believe in the supernatural are so deeply ignorant that they operate based on magical thinking.
It doesn't take a great mind to see right through religion, just an unwillingness to believe blatant absurdities when all the evidence tells us that gods have never made an appearance. We haven't even seen any advanced aliens that might be worshiped by primitive man as gods.
Question your childish belief in the supernatural, demand evidence from the people feeding you superstitious derp, and you'll soon realize that's you've been badly misled.
Satanists didn't found the country, nor a bunch of atheists, nor a bunch of gays. It was founded by a bunch of Christians almost exclusively, and it was founded primarily with respect to Christian values. When other groups found their own country, let them put up their set of values.
Ever been to Food Not Bombs? It's not a christian organization,
I presume, then, that the dove on their front page is supposed to symbolize peace, and not the earthly incarnation of the Holy Spirit.
Anyway, that's only 1 group, and citing it does nothing to negate my point: Most services for the poor and homeless in America are provided by Christian organizations, so that whole "religion is by default harmful" meme is utter bullshit.
I'm an athiest, and I've helped out. So stuff it.
Yea, real helpful, compassionate attitude you're showing there.
An enigma, wrapped in a riddle, shrouded in bacon and cheese
It's a joke bro, get over it.
I always wondered about that whole "taking in vain" part. I don't mean to question your explanation, but do you have any references that elaborate on this point, or to detail the etymology of the expression? I've always felt that Christians considered expressions like "Jesus fucking Christ!" and "God damn it!" to be valid examples of "taking in vain", although I don't see how they could be considered "abuse, misuse, and/or perversion". It's not like one is misrepresenting the Christian idea of God when they utter "God damn", since the idea of damnation by God is written of in the Christian Bible itself. "Jesus fucking Christ" isn't even a statement so much as an interjection, so similarly I don't see how it qualifies as "taking in vain" according to your explanation. I'm not sure what the etymology of the "taking in vain" expression is, but I always understood doing something "in vain" as somewhat synonymous with doing something in a futile manner. That is, to no effect. Now, wouldn't invoking God's name "in vain" be solely up to God himself? That is, if you cry out to God for help, and your cry is in vain, isn't that only the case because God has chosen not to heed your cries? How are you to know in advance if your cry will be in vain or if it will actually be answered?
Disclaimer: I'm an atheist that harbors a genuine academic curiosity about religion.
Chuuch. Preach. Tabernacle.
I object to 7. What is religion's place to tell me and my wife we can only fuck each other? Am I going to hell for watching her get it on with other chicks?
-Clio
Karma: Bad (mostly from not giving a fuck)
Blog: http://clintjcl.wordpress.com
Here is a good starting point.
An enigma, wrapped in a riddle, shrouded in bacon and cheese
Whatever, Satanists VALIDATE their beliefs. They should hate them, but somehow be glad they are around.
Atheists just think they are nuts.
I'm not a Satanist, but I would donate money towards that cause...
4 does have a grain of truth. A day of rest is a good idea.
My Transformation Website
Kindle Books http://www.catprog.org/rev
Interactive CYOA http://www.catprog.org/st
Sorry all for gay marriage and stuff, but in the above example a simple will would have solved that issue.
If they were together for 30 years and didn't make wills out to each other, that is silly.
You can put all sorts of stuff in wills like power of attorney etc...
Marriage does offer some automatic "default" rights, but you can still set them up yourself if you really want to.
About the only argument that I have against gay marriage is that of certain government benefits (mostly tax breaks) that married couples get. The idea behind this is to promote families, ultimately procreation, and even beyond that population growth.
Which you are not going to get with a gay couple. Honestly I think government should get out of all of that entirely, or if not, base it only on offspring, in which case if a gay couple adopted, or surrogate, or artificial, or whatever, then they would be just as eligible. Plenty of straight couples out there getting benefits with no intention of having kids, why is government supporting them also?
The answer I know is votes really. Show me a politician who wants to come out anti-family or increasing taxes on families and I will show you one that isn't going to win.
It's also a pretty bad idea to use his name to deceive others whether it is for monetary or personal gain or distorting his words
Yes, it would be terrible if someone invented a deity and then tried to control people through him. Imagine how bad that would be! People of means could placate the have-nots with promises of happiness and riches in an afterlife.
Your parents took care of you growing up, don't throw them away when you do.
Mine did, sure. But some parents have their kids taken from them because they are meth heads.
Take care of them when the get sick and old, something we don't seem to want to do in society today.
Elder care takes up the largest portion of the federal budget.
Yeah, let's institute 7 day workweeks.
That's a warped view of the sabbath. God wants you to take a specific day off, not some day of your choosing. And depending on your interpretation, this can include turning on and off lights or locking your front door. Does that sound like work to you?
You seem to be unable to differentiate between capital punishment and murder.
Yes, we should kill people who cheat on their husbands - preferably with a stone. So long as we call that "capital punishment" and are careful not to call it "murder", our life is Holy and Good. War is fine, too. Unless we lose, then it is a "war crime" and we get to do that fun "capital punishment" thing again. Executions are so delightful, I'm so glad we Americans haven't given them up like every other so-called "civilized" country.
Funny, I though Moses was Jewish.
Fair enough. I'll tell you what, when you guys, the Jews, and the Muslims all settle on an interpretation of the 10 Commandments, we can come back to this. In the meantime, I'll just keep using this Lutheran interpretation.
W..w..W - Willy Waterloo washes Warren Wiggins who is washing Waldo Woo.
Many scholars also believe the commandment applies to the casual use of God's name in interjections and curses (blasphemy).
I was really hoping for a citation here, or at least a bit more background on why many scholars believe this. Their belief is a marked departure from the literal (and even less-than-literal) translation, and no justification is provided for it. Also fascinating is:
To avoid coming under guilt by accidentally misusing God's name, Jewish scholars do not write or pronounce the proper name in most circumstances, but use substitutes such as "Adonai (the Lord)," or "HaShem (the Name)."
I've noticed this personally, and I imagine similar reasoning underlies the Christian usage of "G-d". To me, this approach suggests that God is easily fooled by trivial omissions and simple substitutions, and accomplishes the very opposite of the intended purpose. Instead of sanctifying the name of God by actually using it in a sacred way, isn't God being lowered to the level of a small child? Earmuffs! Additionally, this would suggest that the Abrahamic God doesn't take mens rea into account, as believers are even concerned about accidental, unintentional violations of this commandment.
One of the first commandments listed by Maimonides in the Mishneh Torah is the responsibility to sanctify God's name. Maimonides thought the commandment should be taken as generally as possible, and therefore he considered it forbidden to mention God's name unnecessarily at any time.
This I just don't understand. Is avoidance generally considered tantamount to sanctification? If avoiding unnecessary usage God's name sanctifies it, does my avoidance of unnecessary attendance at houses of worship similarly sanctify them? Unfortunately, the reference provided for this is simply the Kaddish, which is just a Hebrew prayer exalting the name of God.
Overall a fascinating read, but I'm still left with more questions than answers. Thanks for the link!
Chuuch. Preach. Tabernacle.
Anytime.
Note: I get the feeling, when referring to events that occurred long before Gutenberg was born, the phrase "many scholars believe" pretty much equates to "OK, so we have no empirical data to support our claims, but this is what we think happened."
You might consider looking into the Dead Sea Scrolls as well, perhaps their texts can offer further insight.
An enigma, wrapped in a riddle, shrouded in bacon and cheese
Rather than Satan, have Stalin, not sure which would piss them off more!
Also
The biggest fattest laughing Budda! It is all a grand cosmic joke!
Who will protect them from having religion forced down their throat if you allow it it this time.
Their parents.
This is what parents are supposed to do: educate their children about the world, so that they can make rational decisions as soon as they are capable of.
Opposing religion and their political structures is one thing, many god(s) believing people oppose to that too, including mixing religion, government and science. Take a look at some other comments, you will see some words like "ignorant", "moron", "stupid", when they think someone believe in a god, without ever knowing or asking about his or her ideas, the same behaviour of extremist people when someone say believe on another god or none, this is what I call the "anti theist religion".
I seriously challenge those people to call, for example, to the priest Georges Lemaître and ignorant because it was a god believer, and still proposed what became the Big Bang theory, and disapproved that the Catholic church used his work as a way to validate religion
SCOTUS has ruled that satanism is not a religion. A religion is a belief in god.
Who needs prosecutors with advocates like you?
Millions long for immortality who do not know what to do with themselves on a rainy Sunday afternoon. -- Susan Ertz
This is my vote for a statue of http://mrdeity.com/
If I were you I'd seriously consider coding after about eight. Face it! You're human!
Oh. I did take a peek at the links for the Mayflower Compact, and the Declaration of Independence, and noted the acknowledgement of religious based stuff in those. I simply felt there was no need to discuss those since your point on those two were clear (remember, if it goes without saying, there is no need to say it).
The bit about the preamble was the only one that needed addressed, considering there was nothing religiously bent in that section of the Consitution. That was all, nothing more.
This space unintentionally left blank.
If satanism believes all gods are just from an inventive mind then why choose "Satan" a fallen angel as you monicker?
While all gods are the inventions of the human mind, they are not equally valued inventions. Every god and every aspect of our mythology are a reflection of some cultural or social archetype. This is exactly why pantheons of gods from different cultures have a lot of overlap - because basic archetypes of the human psyche are the same. If your society wages war, there will be a god of war, or at least a god of warriors. If your society has a strong agricultural component, there will be a god responsible for growth and harvest. And so on.
Monotheistic mythology is more interesting as it represents higher-level archetypes: they are not so much about aspects of nature, as they are about aspects of human mind and the structure of society. Good and evil, order and chaos, obedience and rebellion are the archetypes were are talking about here.
Now, with the latter in mind, Satan (and equivalent figures in other mythologies - it just so happens that the Christian one is the best developed one regarding this character, which probably has to do with the fact that it has been the religion of the dominant civilization on this planet for a long time now) represents the archetypes of chaos, rebellion against authority, carnal pleasures vs "mortification of flesh", but also e.g. reason over faith, and incessant seeking and spreading of knowledge. There are various facets here which are reflected under different names - e.g. Lucifer, "light bringer", is the aspect of dabbling in and spreading "forbidden" knowledge, and those satanists who feel most strongly attached to that aspect often call themselves Luciferians.
So this really is mostly about appropriating the existing mythology with powerful symbols that people can readily understand and connect to. This is done with full understanding and acknowledgement that it is mythology; it doesn't really matter, because it's about getting the point across, and you need emotional symbolism here as much as rational argument for full effect.
So your a "real true" GOD, but your scared that the little people will think someone else is god and not you?
Insecure baby much?
I suppose if you're God, you have the right to act in a way that your followers might classify as being an insecure baby. If you're responsible for existence, life, and thought, and anything and everything regarding morality flows from you, then such a classification would be your mistake, and you should adjust as such.
Unless this is one of those weird mistranslations, I think Jehovah even admits as such: "I am a jealous god.."
Myself, I felt that a god that acts the way the Old Testament lord acts isn't worth worshipping.
How many atheist/anti-theist soup kitchens have you ever seen?
This is because it's rarely done under the banner of atheism. It's also worth noting that there are many more religious people than atheists in the US so they have more resources. There's a discussion on the topic here.
To directly answer the question, here are some examples of secular organisations helping the homeless:
Feeding America
The aliveness project
There may be religious people in the organisation, but it's not a religious organisation. It's not always the same the other way around: two atheist groups were prevented from helping out in religious soup kitchens this year.
The problem is that most people won't see this for the what the issue actually is. The issue is that a religious symbol was place on public property and hence violated several key ideals, one of which is the separation between church and state. That alone isn't a big issue as long as you allow the any religious or non religious group to display a symbol representing their viewpoints and their beliefs. For instance if you show the 10 commandments ( most of which are pretty bad over all rules ) then fairly you must also allow atheists, The FSM, Satanists, The Church of Heavy Metal or etc... to display what they want. This isn't a case about which religion is right or even if religion makes sense, this is purely a case of unfair representation that must be equalized or taken away. After all if you flip this entire deal around and allow the Satanists to put a display and disallow Christians, what would happen?
My point being that anyone who claims the purpose or net result of 'religion' is naturally harmful is either a liar or a fool, because religion is what feeds and shelters a vast majority of homeless people being fed and sheltered. Not trying to disparage atheists at all, although after re-reading my post I can understand where one might see that implication. Mea culpa.
There may be religious people in the organisation, but it's not a religious organisation. It's not always the same the other way around: two atheist groups were prevented from helping out in religious soup kitchens this year.
I'll agree that's a good ol' fashioned dick move; when it comes to taking care of the less fortunate, there shouldn't be such a thing as 'competition,' only co-operation.
An enigma, wrapped in a riddle, shrouded in bacon and cheese
As long as its a topless statue, you have my donation
Apart from teh "to keep it holy" part.
What makes a religion real? It is all based on imaginary characters. The only thing that makes it real is enough people agreeing to believe in it. Do we really think god looks like an old guy with a gray beard? If he is almighty, couldn't he keep himself looking fit and virile like a 25 year old? Hmmmm... now that reminds me of Riverworld.
"No matter where you go, there you are." -- Buckaroo Banzai
If ignorance is the problem, LEARN HEBREW!!!
(I would love for someone to tell me that the Ten Commandments were not originally written in Hebrew.)
Much of what you said is still mistranslation - especially the second commandment.
Whether you are religious or not, or believe in the existence of the leaders of these religions or not, or believe that there is corruption within the human organizations that run some of these religions or not; the country was founded on values that are consistent with those espoused by "real" religions (oh yes I did), and inconsistent with values tied to the concept of "Satan".
So I'm sorry, but: Satanists, shut up.
At some point, the common values of 98% of people do matter, even while protecting a reasonable freedom of anyone who wants to identify as a minority in some aspect of life. You DO draw a line at hate and violence, for example, regardless that a small minority wants to spread that. Their freedom stops when it goes against the most fundamental rights of everyone else.
While we are a country of laws, and we agree on a need for them to apply to everyone, I am appalled that there would be any serious consideration to actually place a statue of satan at the courthouse. I am a Christian, and of course I like that the Ten Commandments are at the courthouse. The commandments represent an early form of law. According to the Bible, satan was a controversial character who encouraged Eve to break the one existing rule about behavior in the garden. The commandments are about there being a set of conventions for the good of society. Satan has generally stood for anarchy and people doing whatever they please. Perhaps in the interest of religious freedom, the commandments will have to be removed. That's a shame in my opinion.
When they talk about Satan, they are using the word Satan but their description is of a different character. So they should stop calling their character Satan. they should call their character Fido or something like that. I don't think there would be much objection to a statue of Fido the Bringer Of Light.
Individual priests are a varied lot. It's church leadership that has been obsessed, and rank-and-file catholics, led by right-wing media. Dolan and other extremists.
I'll just bet that unadulterated Catholic teaching doesn't mean what you think it means. Just look at what Pope Francis has been adding to Church teaching over the past month. Even he sees the institutional obsession with gays, abortion and free markets, and he's doing something about it to bring the church more in line with Christ's teaching. Good for him.
You are welcome on my lawn.
im an atheist and I dont find the 10 commandments to be offensive, They are good rules to live by for the most part. I for one am getting sick and tired of atheists with too much time on their hands that they pretend to be offended.
The ten commandments are common rules of order (less the respecting of some deity),
I've sure you know of their history; the bible just being the latest to list them.
The "less the respecting some deity" isn't all true, a religion will pop up no matter the place or time.
The ones not requiring a sacrifice and promise eternal life will survive much longer than others.
Most likely another religion will wipe them out if a sacrifice is part of a ritual.
I asked my Mom recently (who is very religious and knowledgeable of the subject) what sin did I do before
even being born for someone to die over it. She said jesus died for our sins so we would survive.
I asked her what sin was that, she said she still hasn't figured that one out.
No matter how many holes one finds (golden tablets under a rock) they will survive.
Now if these tablets were made of aluminum (one of the most abundant elements and more sense for the purpose).
Written on a metal the color of silver yet very light for their size. I'd be swayed a bit more due to being an unknown metal at the time.
If this satanic structure is in good taste there's no reason it not be displayed.
Right at the beginning, a statement both of the existence of God ("I am") and of God's status over the reader ("the LORD your God"). You can only weasel out of that as an atheist by outright ignoring an rejecting it --- it's flat out contradictory to atheistic tenets
Long ago I told someone I didn't believe in God, he wasn't able to accept that fact, and called me an agnostic instead.
A word I'd never heard of till then, you sound a lot like em.
I don't consider myself an atheist, I don't have a word to describe it nor will a word ever work, just distancing myself from it.
Furthermore, I thought the Ten Commandments was the Old Testament. You know, all Jew-ey. Aren't Christians supposed to be all about the New Testament?
The old testament is all about jesus's coming being foreseen, it's a statement 600 years before the fact, and used
in a whole different context but what we got.
NIce assertion. Proof?
Being specifically helpful does not mean in totality you are not harmful.
You are making the assertive claim - that there is a god - so prove it.
When you cannot do so - to any reasonable standard of proof - then your belief is shown to be one based on ignorance
Different versions of them are, actually. Can you not see the trees?
No, you were insufficiently precise about whcih satanists you were talking about, and committed an error of generalisation
So Scientology isnt a religion? [in the US, not considering more sane countries]
Nope, youre just another braindead AC
So youre all for tyranny of the masses then?
Nice copout, but rational humans capable of cogent thought are able to distinguish help from harm on a per-instance basis.
An enigma, wrapped in a riddle, shrouded in bacon and cheese
I wasn't talking about civilized countries. I was referring to the United States.
You are welcome on my lawn.
Well, fuck, now I have to avoid certain godda... I mean darn curse words. It won't clean up my filthy language, but I'll be careful not to put certain words together!
*sigh*
The most mistranslated commandment. It has nothing to do with cussing.
A better phrasing would be "Do not take the name of God for the sake of vanity," or in simpler English "Do not call yourself one of God's followers just to make yourself look good."
When you look at it that way, it is probably the most violated commandment of all time.
Yes, I agree this commandment seems to be misinterpreted. Though in all fairness, so do most of the stories in the bible.
W..w..W - Willy Waterloo washes Warren Wiggins who is washing Waldo Woo.
im an atheist and I dont find the 10 commandments to be offensive, They are good rules to live by for the most part.
Really? Limiting people to one god is a good rule? Preventing people from worshiping bits of wood is good? Disallowing the term "god damn it" is good? Not working one day a week is good? You shouldn't think "hey Felicity Kendel has a nice bottom?"
Of the Ten Commandments, I see 2 that are acceptable to me - don't kill (that includes warmongering and death penalties), and dont steal.
80% of them are offensive. And I'm not even an atheist.
Do not make any idols.
Can we ban American Idol? Might be worth it...
Keep the sabbeth holy.
So eat bagels at the weekend?
If you believe the mumbo-Jumbo, then you know the Sabbath is Friday.
To assume otherwise is to assume that the Jews lost track at some point. Also it denies the history of the Holy Roman Empire redefining the Sabbath to un-jew it.
So how come Israel shuts down on Friday evening rather than 00:01 Friday morning?