Quote:

r3x29yz4a said:
Why do we need to have them there at all? Let's look at them in the context of the law and the government.
1. "I am the Lord your God who brought you out of the land of Egypt..."
This one has no real point to anyone who isn't one of the big three religions.

2. "You shall have no other gods besides Me...Do not make a sculpted image or any likeness of what is in the heavens above..."
This one specifically would violate the constitution as it is a government monument saying Yaweh is THE god, and that any other religion (or lack of religion) is invalidated. That specifically violates Church/State separation.

3. "You shalt not swear falsely by the name of the Lord..."
See above.

4. "Remember the Sabbath day and keep it holy"
See above.



I noticed how you deliberately took the situations inside of the Bible along with the commandments themselves--Effectively merging the context of the Biblical past with the secular present. Nice deceptive wordplay. In the courts, they have plaques that contain the commandment itself and not the history behind the invention of the 10 Commandents. In that rite, you miss the point of indentifying with the term "philosophy" rather than simply "faith". Just because a philosophy has roots in faith, that does not mean the philosophy is illogical.

I already addressed the content of God as a symbol of justice and order by which the country should stand by as opposed to a spiritual being. All of them actually apply rather well. Why is symbolism so hard to absorb? Is it because other people interpret it differently than you?

1) This entire country's ideals and and ability to give people rights and opportunities stem from the notions concieved at its birth. We were born into a place that gave us the ability and right to live free and equal to everyone else. In effect, we came from it. So it's rather analogous--And before you try to bring up the presence of slavery in America's earliest years, I'd just like to bring up that this country's philosophy's been refining itself for quite a while (note I mean it's own philosophy and not simply the 10 Commandments, which was included later on). All thing's start out as concepts after all (a bit like those [civil rights movements/unions]--Except they went in reverse). I'd also go on to add that it was mainly when religion interceded on state that opinions on pro-slavery lost a lot of leverage. Doesn't say much for the seperation of Church and State.

2) Again, in terms of symbolism, there is analogy between the name "God" and the term of "justice". Do not pervert the country or world with ideals other than a "justice" and especially don't say that they are more correct than said justice.

3) God(Justice) isn't your scapegoat.

4) I was actually ready to concede non-secularity of the 10 Commandments when I got to obeying the Sabbath, but then it occurred to me its nature isn't simply as a day of the week. One of the primary purposes of the Sabbath is to teach/understand about what it means to follow the 10 Commandments. Keeping it, AND its purpose for thought and education, "holy" is the equivilant of keeping it "sacred". And keeping it "sacred" is the equivilant of keeping it "relavent" and, furthermore, "meaningful". It would encourage us to make time to consider the aspects of the philosophy and understand why it does for us exactly what it does.

Quote:

5. "Honor your father and your mother..."
Nice theory, but what if your parents abused you? What if they abandoned you? What if you're dad was Charlie Manson?



"Honoring" doesn't mean to do as they do if that's what you're implying. And again, it's an ideal that the parents be the guiding force for the generations to come. Time and time again, this has been the case. So it could be said that a mother and father aren't technically the individuals who birthed you, but the ones who specifically raised you and went out of their way to teach you. And again, because this is an entire philosophy, the child would be told to honor thy father and thy mother with all other commandments in mind as well. So it would do them "honor" to turn them into the police for wickedness just as it would do them "honor" to reward their raising you with love and wisdom by responding with affection and obedience.

Quote:

6. "You shall not murder"
This is already a law, always has been. Its also common sense and nothing special.



Common sense? Nothing special????? Again, you miss the point of the 10 Commandments as a philosophy. You can't leave anything out of its rules. And I also notice how, at this point, you draw away from your prior thesis that the 10 Commandments are too religious and simply say, "It's nothing special". Where exactly do you think that law came from anyway? If you think the 10 Commandments didn't have a hand its legal ratification, think again.

Quote:

7. "You shall not commit adultery"
This falls under morals and is really not the court's place to decide.



The philosophy put forth by the 10 Commandments is meant to insure a healthy lifestyle to you and those around you. Not simply push an idea of "morals" as if it was anything so trivial. The 10 commandments is the ground root of morals, but, unlike the defintion for morals, the 10 commandments itself isn't about helping your fellow man so much as its about maintaining a state of order. Although that I will admit the philosophy on its own is a hair's breath away from being about morality, there is simply not enough about it, as it stands, to qualify as such. Loving your neighbor and respecting his individuality is about keeping a harmonious relationship within a community. If one were to expand upon "Love thy neighbor" by saying, "It's the right thing to do", it would have crossed that thresh-hold. I reitterate, however, that it hasn't done that. One could say that because this philosophy is trying to establish itself as the proper way--The right way to live one's life so as to be healthy and righteous, that it is, in fact, claiming itself as, "The right thing". This, however, wouldn't be true since the whole concept of morality has not only the undertones of living properly, but also of righteousness. Secularly, this does not exist--Because, according to secularism, the assumption that there is no true "right" or "wrong" way of doing things is predominant. i.e. We are what we are and what we do is what we do, there's no use trying to label our actions. So in the end, "living properly" for sake of health and harmony (the purpose of following the 10 Commandments) is neither "right" nor "wrong", because it makes no assertions as being either "right" or "wrong". It just tells us how we should live for the sake of living.

Quote:

8. "You shall not steal"
Again, already a law and not something that needs to be pointed out.

9. "You shall not bear false witness against your neighbor"
Don't lie essentially. Well, again that's morals or perjury. Either way its covered already.

10. "You shall not covet your neighbor's house..."
Again a morals thing that has nothing to do with the law.



Even if these are "morals things", do you think the law would want you to participate in them? If it's the court's and overall law's duty to help and encourage a better society, why wouldn't they want a decrease in, if not total destruction of, lies. Lies, envy, and adultery are what lead to things like murder and theft. Again, this is an underlying philosophy to law. i.e. "To obey the law to the best of your ability, make sure to follow the 10 Commandments." That is not a proclamation of un-secularity through the acceptance of ideals that originated within in; it is, in reality, a suggestion. Pure and simple. The entire philosophy of the 10 Commandments itself (and nothing less than the full ten) is the easiest and quickest way to a good life. No where in the court room did it say that it was the only way, just the best. In

Quote:

And they, worst of all, promote one religious idea. Which is strictly against what the founders of this country envisioned.



Uhhhhh.....No it's not. An idea that comes from a religious background is not overtly religious in nature. God, for example (your primary bane in life), has long since lost His meaning, within the government, as a spiritual presence, and has been rounded down to an ideal entity that we are encouraged to be like. Another example is the fact that killing someone is against the code of Yaweh, but it can also be against the code of a lawful government that doesn't believe in a god. That's essentially why the 10 Commandments, rather that the entire Bible, are singled out within the courtrom.

Also, promoting a certain God was not against the vision of the Founders.