"In God We Trust!!"

[LONEEAGLE]

:D The judge in the south where the TEN COMMANDMENTS are in stone in front of a bldg., I think he's got more guts than most...A lot of people call us people from the south Red Necks. Well this Redneck says, if the ACLU, and other nutty groups don't like to look at it, they don't have too. Maybe we should ask him if he'd like to Run for President....You know what America needs? We need another Harry Truman as our President...He wouldn't take any S***from anybody....and he'd let you know...But now we got to kiss everyone's A****so we don't "OFFEND". And what the hell is Powell doing going to the U.N. again? Another resolution? What do we need another resolution for? The U.N. can't enforce any resolutions because of IDIOT'S LIKE THAT FRENCH PRES., and other of our so called "ALLIES?" This entire thing it just plain SUCKS....DROP THE NUC. LET THEM REBUILD THEIR OWN DAT BLAME COUNTRY. WE GOT RID OF WHAT BUSH WANTED. THE EAGLE HAS SPOKEN.

[richgitz]

This is only the First Phase. Next will be taking all referances to
God off of all our currancy. Before you know it, the site of Churchs
will offend someone, and they make it law to demolish all Churchs.
There's a LOT of SH*T that I see everyday that I don't like, does
that mean it should be banned. This Country better wake up be-
fore it's too late. The ACLU and the Liberials are a bunch of Com=
mie BAST**DS. :yes:

[Devildogg4ever]

This redneck will have to agree with both of you! At the rate this crap is going,
the word God will probably be against the law all together!

[mrbsox]

Been watching this transpire (the Alabama Judge), and waiting to see if he gets hit with the 'contempt' charge and the fine. $5,000 per day. <br />
<br />
And then I thought of what would happen, IF AMERICA...

[Barrio_rat]

I won't say which town it is... Don't need the ACLU coming in and messing things up... There is a town that I've been to that has the 10 commandments up in front of the city hall. I thought it was very nice. There's also a statue of an elk, I suppose some anti-hunter veggie eating freak would want that taken down to.

[top1371]

Ok, I'll stick my neck out.

I do not have a religion. Therefore I do not think my tax dollars should pay for anything to do with religion, period. I should not pay for the upkeep or of purchase of religious monuments.

If you think I am wrong you need to look at it from my perspective. And if it is alright for YOUR religious artifacts to be placed and up-kept with my taxes, then it should be ok for every wacko cult to place theirs in that building also. What would you say if a Buddhist group wanted to use your taxes to pay for a shrine downtown?

I hope the judge does time. If it were me, they would surely lock me up.

Top Out...

[greybeard]

Tha's not the issue Top, & you know it. It is going to cost more to relocate the monument than it cost to build it to begin with. It has already cost more in legal fees than all the upkeep since the monument was placed there. If private funding paid for all of it, you would still not approve of it. The monument in Ala doesn't affect you or me in the least. We don't pass by it, we don't read it.
No one is asking us to, no one is forcing us to. And, unless we are paying Alabama state taxes for some bizarre reason, we aren't footing the bill for it in any real way shape or form.
The reason the complaint was lodged was that a few atheists didn't like seeing it when they entered the building. I don't think my tax dollars should be spent on court cases to pander to a minority opinion.

There is a huge group of Americans who believe the armed forces make too much and that military retirement benefits should be discarded completely. Doesn't fit your perspective does it? Don't whine when they get their way. Political correctness just plain sucks!!!
And no, they wouldn't dare lock up any atheist. They're currently the darlings of the media.

[Barrio_rat]

Originally posted by top1371
Ok, I'll stick my neck out.

I do not have a religion. Therefore I do not think my tax dollars should pay for anything to do with religion, period. I should not pay for the upkeep or of purchase of religious monuments.

If you think I am wrong you need to look at it from my perspective. And if it is alright for YOUR religious artifacts to be placed and up-kept with my taxes, then it should be ok for every wacko cult to place theirs in that building also. What would you say if a Buddhist group wanted to use your taxes to pay for a shrine downtown?

I hope the judge does time. If it were me, they would surely lock me up.

Top Out...

You are correct Top. If tax dollars went to build this then tax dollars should be equally spent on other religious and non religious monuments of importance to any particular group.

There are two points made in this argument of, for and by Judge Moore, they are that private dollars went in to build and place the monument where it now sits and private dollars were donated to make the arguments in court to keeping the monument in place. Also, as the Judge Moore puts it - I know there are those who disagree with him - that this country was founded on Christian principles and ideals. They were not Muslim, nor Jewish, not atheist or agnostic nor even pagan - they were Christian. The judges argument is based on that alone. Our government has a double standard when it comes to religion and it needs to end. It needs to be settled one way or another.

Either the government upholds the 1st Amendment and allows those who wish to and believe in God to worship God as their doctrine prescribes - this would be for ANY and ALL religions, so long as they do not infringe on the rights and liberties of others. A person who prays, I don't think, infringes on anyone’s rights. Or the government takes ALL forms of any god and/or deity out of the public, out of any publicly funded facility or building and out of any material that these buildings may produce. The congress would no longer be allowed to pray before a session, the US currency would have to be altered, the statues of any god or goddess would have to be removed, many national symbols would have to be taken down or altered and the oath's that the president, members of congress, judges and the military takes would have to be changed.

There was a case of a child in school who was expelled or suspended because he prayed in class before a test. I would be willing to bet if a Muslim kid were to kneel down and face Mecca and pray to Allah, he would not be expelled, suspended or disciplined in any way. There should be no double standard.

I think the Supreme Court is unwilling to hear this case for many of these reasons (and probably more). I don't think they want to have to make this decision. If they do hear this case, any decision they make will be met with harsh ridicule as well as approval.

[yellowwing]

The anthiests have had better lawyers and been lucky in catching more sympathetic judges. Look at the Constitution we all took an Oath for.

''Congress shall make no law establishing religion, or to prevent the free exercise thereof, or to infringe the rights of conscience." ''Congress shall make no law establishing articles of faith, or a mode of worship, or prohibiting the free exercise of religion, . . .''

Nothing in displaying the 10 Commandments makes it an official US religion. The law that makes it illegal to pray at football games does "infringe the rights of conscience" and limit "mode of worship".

I hope it does go to the Supreme Court. Then all this mess might finally be resolved.

[LONEEAGLE]

Hey Whoa ya'll!!!! I agree with all of you....and respect your opinions...I didn't aim to stir up a hornets nest...but it's good. Cause it gets each one of us thinking about what we should be thinking about, in any manner, and that is our creator, right? I don't care myself if they put up Budda, a Cow, or a 1965 Ford Mustang...:-)....M.O.N.E.Y. seems to always come into it when anything with a religious tone starts....Money is evil...I know. I lived with my sis 'n law, a multi-mil., until we finally got our own place and I really did some observing. Not tryin' to judge, but with my observations I found that her money was her life...And she brags on it....She wouldn't give a dime to any Charity, but will go to a gamblin' boat and drop a couple thou in a heartbeat. The man in the bible came to Jesus and asked what he had to do to be a follower? Jesus told him to get rid of all your wealth. (not exact quote). What did he do? He rode off....Our Taxes are spent on the making of every piece of currency which has "GOD" printed on it. So it doesn't matter what, how, where, we will be taxed, but in this case, not in Ala. The entire point is, that we as good people should recognize that our Creator and his Wonderful ever loving forgiving Son Jesus, came into this world to free us...And if you have freedom, not like a democracy, but, freedom of your inner most self, you should thank our Lord and nothing else matters....I want to thank all you OUTSTANDING MARINES, for your posts. And like I said I respect each and everyone's point of view, and I hope this dialog will continue....THE EAGLE HAS SPOKEN.

[leroy8541]

I will have to agree with richgitz, except I believe this is actually the second phase, first phase was taking the confederate battle flag off from all the southern state flags. The Native Americans wanting to remove any slander to thier heritage by removing school mascots with any relation to them I.E. Fla. Seminoles ect.
If everyone would mind their own business and leave everyone else alone this would be a more peaceful place to live.
Heres what offends me, faggots on the T.V., Gay rights,and Queers in general, the ACLU. I don't see a whole lot of effort to remove this obscenity from public.

[firstsgtmike]

I think a major point has been overlooked in this discussion.

If the protester was a private individual, that would be one thing, but a Supreme Court Judge (state or federal) has a responsibility to uphold the law until it is changed.

He has shown by his actions that if you disagree with a law, you have the right to ignore it.

Several have commented on the use of their tax dollars. I ask you this:

Suppose the issue was that the head of the IRS was discovered not paying his income taxes because he didn't believe the government had the right to collect taxes from individuals.

If elected or appointed leaders have the right to ignore laws they disagree with, why don't we?

[greybeard]

There is a huge difference between law-------& justice.

[ivalis]

" In God we trust" did not appear on US currency untill 1956, as a result of McCarthy inspired hysteria. When I started in school, "under god" was not part of the pledge of allegiance.

I wish you folks had a clue about the history of this country.

[greensideout]

We understand ivalis, we are all stupid about American history, except for you of course.

Thank you for regurgitating the history lessons of left wing liberial college professing pukes.

They did shape a lot of good minds. Sad.

[Barrio_rat]

First of all I’d like to state that I am enjoying this very much. Whatever one’s belief is, it shows what a great country we live in - and have all served - where we can have such a dialog.

First Sgt Mike, I like it when you make points. Whether I agree or disagree with you, I usually end up thinking “why” and am better able to focus my opinion/comments. It can either reaffirm my position or it can help me to change my opinion. For that I thank you. Now to your point. I believe, from what I’ve heard Judge Moore state in his many interviews, that he thinks he is following law - not that he is ignoring law. As to whether he is correct or not, that is a matter of many opinions and a matter for, I think, the Supreme Court to rule on. Part of his argument has been that in his oath he swore before God. The higher courts have ruled that since God is invoked at all occasions of the court it has become “ceremony” and therefore has no meaning. Judge Moore believes that because God was brought into the courts and was part of the framework of our nation, it does have meaning - no matter how it is “interpreted” today.

As to the head of the IRS. If he were to be following law and because of law did not pay taxes, I think he would also not collect taxes. If such a law to collect taxes was not in place, I’m sure congress would make changes immediately.

Ivalis is correct on when the money was printed with “In God We Trust” and when the Pledge of Allegiance had “under God” added - though, in retrospect, it has been found that McCarthy was not wrong about the communist threat to our nation. However, these points can go back and forth all day and probably into a few weeks. God was written into the Constitution of the United States. God was sworn before by our first president and that has continued up to our latest president. George Washington even stated that a leader must have faith in order to lead effectively. God was a part of the lives of our Founding Fathers and they brought God into government with them. As I understand the First Amendment, it was that government would not endorse any religion nor have our nation be defined by any one religion - such as the Muslim countries have done. Or even as England had done when their king was Catholic one day and became a protestant the next, making the entire country protestant within the Church of England - and unhinging the Irish. And I don’t say that they are wrong but rather that by observing or endorsing only one religion you alienate others, something I think our Founding Fathers did not want to do.

Fundamentally, this is a Christian nation, by about 86%. In our nation the majority rules. Yet too, because of the system that our forefathers designed, the minority has a voice and their rights are also observed. That is what makes this such a difficult case. I personally believe the monument should stand (though I would not have suggested it be placed in such a location) but I can understand that some could find it offensive - due to their own beliefs or that their beliefs are not equally observed or paid tribute to - and that it is a splitting of hairs to state that no religion is being “endorsed” when it is the Ten Commandments.

This debate could go on for years. Here are some points. As God is mentioned on the monument, could it be interpreted as you will not take YOUR God’s name in vain? Does it have to be the Christian God? Could your god be Zeus, Odin, Tor (Thor for you non-Scandahoovians), Buddha, or even some goldfish you favor? Or, to keep the Sabbath. To my understanding, a Sabbath is a holy day - pagans have holy days, as well do Muslims, Jews and the multitude of other religions in this world. Could it not be interpreted to mean the Sabbath of YOUR religion should be kept? Because it is presented in the form of the Ten Commandments, which is universally recognized as Christian, people do tend to (and rightfully so) associate it with the Christian God. And that is how it goes back and forth. Both sides have valid arguments and both sides have a weakness to their arguments - due to the many laws and interpretations of the laws over the past 226 years.

How’s that for a nutshell?

[firstsgtmike]

Barrio_rat, <br />
<br />
I appreciate the recognition. I make an observation, back it up with reasons, and await a discussion. Many times, I, too, learn from the rebuttal. <br />
<br />
As I've stated several times...