Do you have adblock enabled?
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Chron)   And lo, Government officials still do not understand the separation of church and state. And yea and verily, the Lord did say, 'Pull thine head from thine arse.'   (chron.com) divider line 135
    More: Dumbass  
•       •       •

1144 clicks; posted to Politics » on 30 Aug 2006 at 1:50 PM (8 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



135 Comments   (+0 »)
   

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Last | Show all
 
2006-08-30 11:09:24 AM  
Two of the three judges on the appeals panel found that the Bible was not initially a religious symbol but was transformed into one in 1995, when the monument was refurbished and neon lights were added around the open Bible.

Yup, that did it.

Neon on a monument is just stupid, anyway.
 
2006-08-30 12:13:59 PM  
The bible was not a religious symbol?!?

Apparently, if you had the corpse of Christ himself on your goddam dining room table, it wouldn't be a religious symbol, either.

Damn activist judges.
 
2006-08-30 12:19:45 PM  
And the march crusade towards the U.S. becoming a theocracy continues.

Fixed it for me.
 
2006-08-30 12:42:57 PM  
hillbillypharmacist: The bible was not a religious symbol?!?

Depending on the setting, no. It can be presented in a historical or even a literary context.
 
2006-08-30 12:59:57 PM  
Unless they were using the bible to prop open a courthouse door or prop up a short table leg, it's a religious symbol on display. If someone proposed a monument featuring the koran, I doubt those two assneck judges would have the same opinion.
 
2006-08-30 01:11:21 PM  
ArcadianRefugee: Depending on the setting, no. It can be presented in a historical or even a literary context.

Oh, I suppose you're right.

*pouts*
 
2006-08-30 01:32:50 PM  
ThatDevGuy: Two of the three judges on the appeals panel found that the Bible was not initially a religious symbol but was transformed into one in 1995, when the monument was refurbished and neon lights were added around the open Bible.

What the hell kind of monuments do they have down there in Texas??

A neon bible?
 
DAR [TotalFark]
2006-08-30 01:51:00 PM  
I'm OK with them keeping the Bible in front of thier old Civil Courts building just as long as the following texts are sitting right there next to it.

Bhagavad Gita
Bahai Texts
Buddhist Texts
Confucian Texts
Corpus Hermeticum
Dead Sea Scrolls
Divrei Torah
Enuma Elish
Ethiopian Texts
The Egyptian Book of the Dead
Gnostic Texts
Hindu Texts
Islamic Texts
Jain Texts
1st and 2nd Books of Jeu
Mormon Texts
Nag Hammadi Texts
Old Testament Apocrypha
Old Testament Pseudepigrapha
Pistis Sophia
New Testament Apocryphal Acts
New Testament Apocryphal Apocalypse
New Testament Apocryphal Gospels
Taoist Texts
Sepher Yetzirah
Shinto Texts
Sikh Texts
Tibetan Book of the Dead
Urantia Book
Zen Texts
Zoroastrian Texts

/I have no idea what some of those texts are about. Off to google them......
 
2006-08-30 01:59:14 PM  
Clark: O God, ease our suffering in this, our moment of great dispair. Yea, admit this kind and decent woman into thy arms of thine heavenly area, up there. And Moab, he lay us upon the band of the Canaanites, and yea, though the Hindus speak of karma, I implore you: give her a break.

Ellen Griswold: Clark...

Clark: Honey, I'm not an ordained minister; I'm doing my best.
 
2006-08-30 02:02:14 PM  
Municipalities should have the right to display according to the wishes of the people of the municipalities. If a community is predominantly jewish, then jewish customs would logically rule the day. A baptist community would set Baptist morays, and mormons would set mormon ways. its no different than obscenity laws. The morals of the community and the elected officials should hold sway. If an islamic community decided they want to display a koran, and the majority of the elected officials concur, then let it be.

I'm sick of one or two religious freaks (ie adventists, wiccans, jehovahs, etc.) btiching and causing good and decent community traditions to be discarded.

Protect the minority, but also realize that there is a reason they are the minority (not dealing with race).
 
2006-08-30 02:06:48 PM  
monster87:

Municipalities should have the right to display according to the wishes of the people of the municipalities. If a community is predominantly jewish, then jewish customs would logically rule the day. A baptist community would set Baptist morays, and mormons would set mormon ways. its no different than obscenity laws. The morals of the community and the elected officials should hold sway. If an islamic community decided they want to display a koran, and the majority of the elected officials concur, then let it be.

Sue, in other countries, here in America that is a violation of the establishment clause.
 
2006-08-30 02:06:50 PM  
One more time: Put your hand on the bible and swear to uphold the constitution; don't put your hand on the constitution and swear to uphold the bible.
 
2006-08-30 02:07:23 PM  
Sue = Sure
 
2006-08-30 02:07:59 PM  
If I'm reading it right, the bible appears to have been part of a monument to some guy. If that's the case I don't see a problem with it.

When I first read it, it sounded like it was a display of the bible, by itself. In that case, I would be against it.
 
2006-08-30 02:09:41 PM  
Wow monster87, the "there are more of my type here already" argument.

Way to be the melting pot!

Too bad the American Indians didn't scalp your Purtanic lot when you landed your boat on their continent.
 
2006-08-30 02:10:45 PM  
The bible is not an historical text. Historical texts describe events that actually happened, and are usually subject to peer review.

The bible is a work of fiction. I mean, do people really think that things like the parting of the Red Sea or Noah's Ark really happened?

/this being the US, I guess the answer is yes
 
2006-08-30 02:15:21 PM  
AgeOfReason

I don't think any municipality other than maybe communities which have more borderline religious groups would try to establish that everyone has to be a certain religion. The establishment clause at a minimum prevents establishing a national religion. Elected folks bring their religion with them. I don't expect them to check their religion at the door.

I've grew up in a solidly baptist town. i remember Christmas celebrations that were a blast. I remember everyone getting together, even the non-christians. They didn't celebrate the birth of jesus, they just enjoyed the food and company.

/hastily typed and thought, but this is generally how I feel.
 
2006-08-30 02:18:26 PM  
Should have put some spinners on that shiat, yo.
 
2006-08-30 02:19:15 PM  
"Historical texts" are primary source material like the dead sea scrolls, which is very different than "history books" which is what you describe and are tertiary sources.

So, yes the Bible (or at least old versions) are historical texts. So are greek myths, Shakespeare Folios, the Magna Carta, etc.

That said, I can't help but laugh at a Bible with neon. Texans....sheesh...
 
2006-08-30 02:20:39 PM  
Municipalities should have the right to display according to the wishes of the people of the municipalities.

Why do you hate the Constitution?
 
2006-08-30 02:24:37 PM  
Don't atheists have anything better to do than cry to activist judges about being offended by the beliefs of others?
 
2006-08-30 02:28:14 PM  
monster87:

I don't think any municipality other than maybe communities which have more borderline religious groups would try to establish that everyone has to be a certain religion. The establishment clause at a minimum prevents establishing a national religion. Elected folks bring their religion with them. I don't expect them to check their religion at the door.

You are incorrect here, it applies to all levels of government in the US. While they are not expected to "check" their belief's at the door, they may not legislate in favor of one religion over another for the purposes of that religion.

I've grew up in a solidly baptist town. i remember Christmas celebrations that were a blast. I remember everyone getting together, even the non-christians. They didn't celebrate the birth of jesus, they just enjoyed the food and company.

I like my pagan festival decorations as well, but when the town is promoting one religion exclusively over all others then they are in violation of the Constitution. Leave the feasting on the flesh of the baby jeebus to the local church and homeowners.

/hastily typed and thought, but this is generally how I feel.

I really don't care how you feel, and you should not care how I feel. What I care about is that our government does not violate the Constitution. I know that my tax dollars should not be gong in support of one local sect of a cult or congregation.

It also works both ways. If the government is giving $ to a religious organization they had better not be discriminating. So for every catholic church getting funding from the government women had darn well be allowed to hold the same jobs as men and birth control had best be offered on their health insurance plan. I am sure that the catholic church has no desire for the government to intrude and set policy within their organization.

The two entities of church and state shall remain separate, it is better for both of them.
 
2006-08-30 02:33:04 PM  
Why would anyone of faith want to allow their religion to be corrupted by government?

Separation of Church and State is good for both Church and State.
 
2006-08-30 02:33:36 PM  
SkinnyHead:

Don't atheists have anything better to do than cry to activist judges about being offended by the beliefs of others?

It is about fair and equal treatment, about the use of government $, and the right to the free exercise of religion. Once the government steps n to establish one sect or cult over others then all of the above mentioned is violated. It is not about being offended it is about the government enacting unconstitutional laws and supporting unconstitutional actions.

In a hundred years when things have changed and your government is using your $ to put up decorations for the god Xenu and his volcano or compelling your children recite a oath to the prophet Smith or Mohammed how will you respond?
 
2006-08-30 02:34:59 PM  
Folks like ya'll have brought this country to a soulless place. A soul less minority in conjunction with a nation that has tendency towards apathy spells diaster.
 
2006-08-30 02:35:47 PM  
inFARKshun:

Why would anyone of faith want to allow their religion to be corrupted by government?

Separation of Church and State is good for both Church and State.


Bingo, take government $ and you need to follow EEOC, Title IX, and workers rights to organize collectively biatches. Don't like it? Maybe we should leave the two things separate then?
 
2006-08-30 02:37:06 PM  
monster87

spells diaster.

I cannot breathe, I am laughing so hard. That's priceless.
 
2006-08-30 02:38:08 PM  
2 and a half minutes. i was wondering how long before that elicited a comment. Gotta have fun sometimes.
 
2006-08-30 02:38:20 PM  
SkinnyHead

If you would ever use the phrase "activist judge" to mean something other than "judge who followed the law" or "judge I disagree with" you might get a bit more use out of it before being laughed at.
 
2006-08-30 02:39:30 PM  
Shut........UP

And nobody had a problem with it until they put neon frickin' lights around the Bible in the display.

I'll say it again.

NEON FRICKING LIGHTS. Is there a Constitutional ban on bad taste? Please?
 
2006-08-30 02:40:31 PM  
monster87:

Folks like ya'll have brought this country to a soulless place. A soul less minority in conjunction with a nation that has tendency towards apathy spells diaster.

That is just mindless drivel and you know it. It is folks like us who have given those like you who so willingly subject themselves to authority the freedom they so passionately cherish. The defense of separation of church and state has allowed you and your "soul" to be free to worship how you wish. Hell you can even start your own cult if you want and are free to speak and try to persuade others.

America is not, never was and shall never be a theocracy no matter how much you desire it.
 
2006-08-30 02:41:10 PM  
trueaustinite:

I cannot breathe, I am laughing so hard. That's priceless.

I was just about to go there.... LOL
 
2006-08-30 02:42:23 PM  
Don't atheists Christians have anything better to do than cry to activist judges about being offended by the non- beliefs of others?
 
2006-08-30 02:47:24 PM  
folks like you?

I had family members on both sides of my family fight and die during the civil war.I had two uncles die in battle during World War II. My father served in World War II. I missed a war thankfully, but my nephew is serving with the Navy right now. If your family has served this nation in any capacity, I thank you. But minority chatter boxes who by the age of 25 have figured out a better way for everyone to live need to be sent to timeout.

Who said anything about Theocracy? All you people are thinking on a national level. This is a local issue. It deserves a local ruling. Damn federalists.
 
2006-08-30 02:56:11 PM  
AgeOfReason: It is not about being offended it is about the government enacting unconstitutional laws and supporting unconstitutional actions.

The lawsuit in this case was brought by atheist of the year Kay Staley, who "...testified that she is offended by the Bible display in the monument because it advances Christianity and it sends a message to her and to non-Christians that, because they do not share the Christian faith, they are not full members of the Houston political community."

http://www.ca5.uscourts.gov/opinions/pub/04/04-20667-CV0.wpd.pdf
 
2006-08-30 02:56:15 PM  
don't get your collective pannties in a bunch. another couple of years texas will be part of mexico again...thank goodness.
/please take new mexico and arizona too
//leave vegas, though..cool?
 
2006-08-30 02:56:44 PM  
SkinnyHead: Don't atheists have anything better to do than cry to activist judges about being offended by the beliefs of others?

don't religious people have anything better to do than cry to activist judges about their monuments on public land?

kinda cuts both ways....it isn't as if every public building just comes with a 10 commandments or bible monument. some asshat has to put it there.

save some condemnation for that direction too.
 
2006-08-30 03:03:36 PM  
SkinnyHead

Oh noes, a person was given a .jpg with their name on it from a website they probably never even heard of before it happened! It must be a liberal conspiracy, everybody panic!
 
2006-08-30 03:03:48 PM  
Mr. Clarence Butterworth: Don't atheists Christians have anything better to do than cry to activist judges about being offended by the non-beliefs of others?

They certainly do.
 
2006-08-30 03:04:30 PM  
monster87:

I had family members on both sides of my family fight and die during the civil war.I had two uncles die in battle during World War II. My father served in World War II. I missed a war thankfully, but my nephew is serving with the Navy right now. If your family has served this nation in any capacity, I thank you. But minority chatter boxes who by the age of 25 have figured out a better way for everyone to live need to be sent to timeout.

I figure nearly all of us have family that have served or we ourselves have served. You dishonor them and all of those who have died with your desire for an xian theocracy and your desire to trash the Constitution. Once again please notice your use of the term minority as the justification when you try to tell me to shut up. The protection of the freedoms of the minority against the tyranny of the majority is an important concept.

Who said anything about Theocracy? All you people are thinking on a national level. This is a local issue. It deserves a local ruling. Damn federalists.

The Constitution is the law of the land. It applies to states and to local governments as well. The Amendments were adopted and ratified the war was fought and the Constitution survived and remained the law of the land.
 
2006-08-30 03:05:22 PM  
Why should there be seperation? The United States was founded as a Christian nation.
 
2006-08-30 03:07:04 PM  
Who said anything about Theocracy? All you people are thinking on a national level. This is a local issue. It deserves a local ruling. Damn federalists.

Rights aren't just a "Federal issue". Mob rule is a very bad way to do things as it will disenfranchise a large portion of the community. Sad thing is the sort of people that support this are the sorts of people that biatch and whine about evolution being taught in science class and women being allowed to do what they want with their own bodies. Where's the "majority rules" crowd in that regard?
 
2006-08-30 03:08:18 PM  
SkinnyHead:

The lawsuit in this case was brought by atheist of the year Kay Staley, who "...testified that she is offended by the Bible display in the monument because it advances Christianity and it sends a message to her and to non-Christians that, because they do not share the Christian faith, they are not full members of the Houston political community."

Once again it is about a government supporting an unconstitutional law or doing an unconstitutional action. What the fark is wrong with leaving religion to the churches and private individuals? As soon as government gets its fingers in the church shiat gets all farked up from both sides. Want a religious memorial or monument fine, put it on private property and pay for it with private funds, done deal.
 
2006-08-30 03:09:08 PM  
the_only_right_way

Why should there be seperation? The United States was founded as a Christian nation.

Please open a history book or three, you'll find out quite quickly that isn't the case at all.
 
2006-08-30 03:09:44 PM  
A bible on display in a government building doesn't bother me so long as texts and symbols from other religions can be displayed too. A shiatload of viewpoints seems more American to me than just one.

But minority chatter boxes who by the age of 25 have figured out a better way for everyone to live need to be sent to timeout.

American + voting age = the only thing that matters. (Here in the US anyway.) We're all on the same ground, like it or not.
 
2006-08-30 03:14:05 PM  
SkinnyHead: The lawsuit in this case was brought by atheist of the year Kay Staley, who "...testified that she is offended by the Bible display in the monument because it advances Christianity and it sends a message to her and to non-Christians that, because they do not share the Christian faith, they are not full members of the Houston political community."

Did you actually read the whole decision? The bible was originally part of a monument erected by Star of Hope, a Christian charity, and was maintained by Star of Hope from 1956 to 1995. In 1988, some atheists complained about the bible, and asked that it be removed, and Star of Hope apparently complied (that is to say, the same Christian organization who placed the monument had no problem removing the bible).

In 1995, a man named John Devine campaigned to be elected judge on a platform of "putting Christianity back into government." He was elected, solicited donations to refurbish the monument, and re-introduced the bible to the monument, adding red neon lights around the bible itself.

So, in short:
1) Christian organization installs monument
2) Upon request of atheists, bible is removed, stays removed for 7 years
3) Judge campaigns on platform of "putting Christianity back in government"
4) Subsequent to his election, Judge puts bible back on display, with bright neon lights calling attention to said bible

How can you argue that this isn't suspect? Given the context (Judge Devine's campaign pledge, for instance), the display of the bible is clearly meant to promote Christianity. Government can't do that, sorry.
 
2006-08-30 03:14:07 PM  
If you live in a predominantly christian community, and you choose to be atheist or non christian in general, then yes you should expect to not be able to get someone with your beliefs in the election process. It goes beyond religion though. You folks are scared of the religious bogeyman, and I'm talking about local representation and how that is being subverted to federal level.

Once again, if I lived in a predominantly islamic community, I would expect islamic traditions and customs. If I lived in mormon town, i would expect to see a mormon flavor over the town. As i stated previously, the biatching and moaning minority will do more to subvert this country than OBL could possibly do.

I understand the rights of man, and everyone has the opportunity to believe in what they want or not. All people should get the chance to be happy, healthy, and secure. If a person chooses to march to the beat of a different drummer, they shouldn't expect the symphony to change their tune to accomdate them.
 
2006-08-30 03:15:11 PM  
Murkanen

Yes it was.

MisterRPG

We're not on the same ground. America is Christian.
 
2006-08-30 03:16:11 PM  
SkinnyHead: The lawsuit in this case was brought by atheist of the year Kay Staley, who "...testified that she is offended by the Bible display in the monument because it advances Christianity and it sends a message to her and to non-Christians that, because they do not share the Christian faith, they are not full members of the Houston political community."

Oh, and lose the ad hominem crap. Look at the case based on the merits, not the parties involved.
 
2006-08-30 03:19:59 PM  
monster87: I understand the rights of man, and everyone has the opportunity to believe in what they want or not. All people should get the chance to be happy, healthy, and secure. If a person chooses to march to the beat of a different drummer, they shouldn't expect the symphony to change their tune to accomdate them.

No one is asking anyone to change their tune. No one is saying that the people of the town/state/country don't have the right to practice their religion, and no one is saying that society as a whole (or of any particular town) can't, or doesn't have a religious "flavor."

All anyone is saying, and all anyone has ever said in cases such as these, is that the apparatus of the state should remain neutral, and should not be used to promote one religion over another.

People expressing religion = fine
Government expressing religion = notsomuch
 
Displayed 50 of 135 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Last | Show all



This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
Advertisement
On Twitter






In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report