Changes

Jump to navigation Jump to search
Line 171: Line 171:     
: The ten commandments were given as a ''standard'' by which to live.  This standard is applicable to everybody, for all time.  The punishments you list were specific to the particular culture to which they were given.  In other words, they are no longer applicable.  Sorry you wasted so much time on that.  [[User:Philip J. Rayment|Philip J. Rayment]] 07:28, 2 January 2008 (EST)
 
: The ten commandments were given as a ''standard'' by which to live.  This standard is applicable to everybody, for all time.  The punishments you list were specific to the particular culture to which they were given.  In other words, they are no longer applicable.  Sorry you wasted so much time on that.  [[User:Philip J. Rayment|Philip J. Rayment]] 07:28, 2 January 2008 (EST)
 +
 +
==A Better Question Would Be...==
 +
 +
"Should such displays be funded with taxpayer dollars?" 
 +
 +
Really, I don't think it's possible to debate the original question: manifestly, such displays are allowed.  I don't even think the question of whether "the government" should be allowed to do so is one for serious debate.
 +
 +
The question, it seems to me, should be whether or not such displays can be funded by state and federal taxes.  THERE, I think, we get into questions of Constitutionality, as it inevitably leads to a situation where some taxpayers are being required to pay for speech they don't support.  (And, yes, I realize that there are many issues of taxpayer dollars being misspent in this fashion; I personally believe that all of them are un-Constitutional.)
 +
 +
I believe that such displays on public property, if funded by private contributions specifically for that purpose, pass the muster of Constitutionality and should be permitted.
 +
 +
[[User:BenP|BenP]] 16:05, 2 May 2008 (EST)
Block, SkipCaptcha, Automoderated users, edit
1,253

edits

Navigation menu