11
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 171:
Line 171: + +
Debate:Should public displays of the 10 Commandments be allowed under the constitution? (view source)
Revision as of 15:30, January 18, 2010
, 15:30, January 18, 2010→The Constitution DOES allow the public display of the 10 Commandments
: 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 In other words, they are no longer applicable.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 In other words, they are no longer applicable.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)
In what ways are the commandments that call specifically for a exclusive focus on god and his sabbath irrelevant "standards" to expect everybody to live by? The concept itself is a violation of the principle that we have an inclusive system, which errodes the often lauded terminology included in the clause celebrated by theistic, constitutional revisionists. If such an issue is to be made out of the prohibition of the free exercise thereof, then how do we interpret the context in which a list of "rules" to live by can be publicly displayed when some of those "rules" call for unilateral Christianity? -JBall
==A Better Question Would Be...==
==A Better Question Would Be...==