Roy Moore continued. Who are the law breakers?

While I believe that the Ten Commandements do not go against the constitution, and I am very conservative, I also believe Roy Moore was wrong. He was wrong because there is no mandate to post the Ten Commnadments iether by scripture or by State or Federal Constitutions.

At the point his boss told him to remove them, he should have. His bosses reasons were wrong but he was at the same time right by virtue of the fact that he was the superior officer of the court.

Removing the Ten Commandments is silly and at the same time grevious. But Roy Moore handled this wrong. I am sorry to say.

 

Well now Dale, I think I see the point of divergence between the two of us with this quote:

While it's not necessarily his faith I expect him to leave at home, I do expect him to leave anything at home that would bias his judgement. For example: If a judge were Muslim and overseeing a case involving a Muslim on one side and a Christian on the other, I would expect the judge to be able to see both sides of the case clearly without being bias toward the side of the person who shares his religious belief.

In the same way I expect a Christian judge to be able to lay aside the biases he may hold because of his Christian beliefs and judge fairly between Christain and nonChristian. I don't believe that this necessarily constitutes a denial of ones faith.

When Moore defied the court order, he created doubt about his ability to judge fairly without forcing his religious views on those who don't believe the same as he.

When God allowed the creation of this country, He allowed our fore fathers to put this little clause in our Constitution that allows for freedom of religion. Freedom of religion by necessity also means freedom FROM religion if one so chooses.

We Christian's can't have our cake and eat it too. If we don't want the possibility of being told we must become Wiccan or tolorate Wiccan symbols on the walls of our courthouse(in the name of decoration of course), then we must not put ourselves in the position of forcing our views others and decorating our courtrooms with Christian symbols.

 

How do you reconcile the 1st Amendment with the 1st Commandment?

 

There are lots of libertarians who believe in God(I cannot tell you what percentage any more than I can tell you the percentage of those on the Authoritarian Left or Authoritarian Right who believe in God). Libertarians(except for a few extremists) do not advocate no law. We simply want limited government. We want the government to do only what individuals and groups of individuals cannot do for themselves - such as national defense, the courts, the police.

And a large segment of we libertarians is PRO-LIFE - www.l4l.org.

 

If the authors meant Christian demonination, they would've written "Christian denomination" - they were very literate and not all of them were strictly Christian.

You're confused - the preamble does not mention God or Creator. It speaks of Justice, Liberty, Tranquility but not of God. The Blessings are of Liberty not of Christ.

You're right that this was not meant to advance paganism and it was not meant to advance any particular religion. Not so much an acceptance of all religions, but certainly a tolerance of them.

Civil law was based on God's word as well as the Enlightenment, the Rights of Man (aka humanism), common law, etc, etc.

Christians, who constitute something like 85% of the population, including most if not all polititcians, judges and military are being persecuted? How exactly?

The Greek Goddess? Um, which Greek goddess and how is she represented at what federal courthouse?

1st Commandment: Thou shalt have no other gods before me.

1st Amendment: Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

Your interpretation of the 1st Amendment is that any religion may be established as long as it's Christian? I don't think so.

 

Inconsistant to have a symbol of law and justice in front of a courthouse? Well, not really.

Um, yeah right, those Themis worshippers are taking over the country!

It's more than a little dishonest to pretend that anyone believes in an actual Goddess of Justice, that the modern depictions of Themis are anything other than a conceptualization of law and justice which are entirely appropriate for a courthouse.

 

Daisey said, "How do you reconcile the 1st Amendment with the 1st Commandment?"

The probable reason for the first amendment was actually based on three separate events and the fact that England had a state official recognized church.

1. In June of 1700 Massachcusetts passed a law that ordered all Roman Cahtolic priests to leave the colony with 3 months or face the penalty of life imprisonment or execution.

2. in 1702 (month not known) the Anglican Church of England was established as the official church of Marryland. This official church was supported by an imposed tax on free men, male servants and slaves.

3. In November 1706 South Carolina established the Anglican church as the official church.

It would seem that purpose was to keep a state religion from being formed. I am not entering your debate just providing some info.:smilewinkgrin:

 

Dale, I have to say that we do agree on something! We were in agreement this far:

(I figured out the quote thing!raise: )

Now for what we disagree on:

This is a false logic. There are many athiests who willingly follow the law without acknowledging God. Also, in my opinion, Muslims, Buddists, Wiccans and the like all worship a false god, but they are still expected to follow the laws of the land. And they expect in turn to be treated fairly by that law even though I think they worship something false.

Ken dealt with your opinion of Libertarians better than I.

You are correct. Everyone hold biases that are specific to themselves, even judges. A Muslim judge may think I worship God the wrong way. But if he bases his decision of my guilt or innocence, whether or not the insurance company cheated me or takes my children away from me, solely because I am a Christian, then we have a judge with a problem.

Judges are there to judge based on the laws passed by Congress and not on what the Bible says, what the Koran says or even what Confuscious says. Unfortunately, Judge Moore could not remove the doubt that he would be able to judge based on the laws of the USA instead of on the law of God. (and even we Christians can't always agree on that)

Now I know it goes against the grain of Christian's to not use the Bible as the superior law, but that is the conundrum that our Founding Fathers left us with. Since God left certain things up to the intelligence of man to decide, the FF decided on our method of deriving laws as best and fair to all. So if a man is unable to judge a secular matter based on secular law then it is very possible that he will make less than a fair judge.

It isn't the acknowlegement of God that is the problem. The problem is the putting forward of one man's interpretation of what God's law requires ahead of the laws of the government. We have laws in this country that attempt to bring as much freedom as possible to every person regardless of their religion or lack of religion.

As for the rest of your post: If Christian's don't like the way this country is run they need to do one of two things: Put their money where there mouth is and buy an island somewhere and form their own country where only Christians are allowed or get busy, get to work and change the hearts and minds of the people in this country. That in turn will lead to changes in the laws regarding abortion and child molestation.

 

Does the New Testament, or Old, specifically? I know most Christians do but does Christianity?

 

First off, if this is implying that I have taken taken the Lord's name in vain you better be perpared to quote it! I don't take lightly such accusations.


Now back to the topic:

Remember you asked!

Lu 20:20And they watched him, and sent forth spies, who feigned themselves to be righteous, that they might take hold of his speech, so as to deliver him up to the rule and to the authority of the governor.Lu 20:21And they asked him, saying, Teacher, we know that thou sayest and teachest rightly, and acceptest not the person [of any], but of a truth teachest the way of God:Lu 20:22Is it lawful for us to give tribute unto Caesar, or not?Lu 20:23But he perceived their craftiness, and said unto them,Lu 20:24Show me a denarius. Whose image and superscription hath it? And they said, Caesar`s.Lu 20:25And he said unto them, Then render unto Caesar the things that are Caesar`s, and unto God the things that are God`s.

1pe 2:13Be subject to every ordinance of man for the Lord`s sake: whether to the king, as supreme;1pe 2:14or unto governors, as sent by him for vengeance on evil-doers and for praise to them that do well.1pe 2:15For so is the will of God, that by well-doing ye should put to silence the ignorance of foolish men:1pe 2:16as free, and not using your freedom for a cloak of wickedness, but as bondservants of God.1pe 2:17Honor all men. Love the brotherhood. Fear God. Honor the king.1pe 2:18Servants, [be] in subjection to your masters with all fear; not only to the good and gentle, but also to the froward.1pe 2:19For this is acceptable, if for conscience toward God a man endureth griefs, suffering wrongfully.1pe 2:20For what glory is it, if, when ye sin, and are buffeted [for it], ye shall take it patiently? but if, when ye do well, and suffer [for it], ye shall take it patiently, this is acceptable with God.

Ro 13:3For rulers are not a terror to the good work, but to the evil. And wouldest thou have no fear of the power? do that which is good, and thou shalt have praise from the same:Ro 13:4for he is a minister of God to thee for good. But if thou do that which is evil, be afraid; for he beareth not the sword in vain: for he is a minister of God, an avenger for wrath to him that doeth evil.Ro 13:5Wherefore [ye] must needs be in subjection, not only because of the wrath, but also for conscience` sake.Ro 13:6For this cause ye pay tribute also; for they are ministers of God`s service, attending continually upon this very thing.Ro 13:7Render to all their dues: tribute to whom tribute [is due]; custom to whom custom; fear to whom fear; honor to whom honor.

See also the above scriptures.

All of Psalm 2 hasn't happened yet.

If the Founding Father's had intended for the Bible to be the ONLY source for the laws of our country, why do you suppose they bothered to write a Constitution? A Bill of Rights? Why not just use Moses' law as it was written?