Last Updated:April 15 @ 02:17 pm

Judge Suggests Chopping 10 Commandments Down to 6

By Bobby Eberle

The 10 Commandments are again on trial. This time the setting is Giles County in Virginia, where a law suit has been filed against displaying the 10 Commandments at Narrows High School. Should they stay or should they go? Apparently it's not as clear cut as that. The judge in the case had a recommendation that leaves everyone wondering what is going on in this country!

As reported in the Roanoke Times, the controversy has been brewing for quite a while. First, the school board voted to remove the display of the 10 Commandments from the high school. Public reaction was intense, and the school board voted 3-2 to put the display back in place.

Then, a student filed a lawsuit against the display. That's where the judge came in.

Could the Ten Commandments be reduced to six, a federal judge asked Monday.

Would that neutralize the religious overtones of a commandments display that has the Giles County School Board in legal hot water?

That unorthodox suggestion was made by Judge Michael Urbanski during oral arguments over whether the display amounts to a governmental endorsement of religion, as alleged in a lawsuit filed by a student at Narrows High School.

After raising many pointed questions about whether the commandments pass legal muster, the judge referred the case to mediation - with a suggestion:

Remove the first four commandments, which are clearly religious in nature, and leave the remaining six, which make more secular commands, such as do not kill or steal.

Wow! Are you serious? The 6 Commandments? Who exactly is helped by this idea? No one. The 10 Commandments are the 10 Commandments. Period.

Of course, the legal debate on either side is intense:

There is no federal case allowing the commandments in a school, said Rebecca Glenberg of the American Civil Liberties Union, which represents the student. While Urbanski agreed, he called the details of the Giles County dispute "very nuanced."

Because the commandments appear with other historical documents, and because they are mentioned in the curriculum of Giles County schools, there's reason to find the board had a secular mission when it approved the display, argued Mathew Staver of Liberty Counsel, a Christian-based law group that is defending the county.

I personally don't care if the 10 Commandments are surrounded by the Bill of Rights, Constitution, or any other document. It is what it is, and it forms the basis for a civil society not just in America, but around the whole world. The more we chop away at the 10 Commandments, the more we chop away at our history and our compass.

VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
Rate this post:
Rating: 9.3/10 (236 votes cast)
Judge Suggests Chopping 10 Commandments Down to 6, 9.3 out of 10 based on 236 ratings





Don't leave yet! Add a comment below or check out these other great stories:

134 Comments

  1. Pingback: Judge Suggests Chopping 10 Commandments Down to 6

  2. texasfarmerComment by texasfarmer
    May 11, 2012 @ 1:28 pm

    The Lord has given me these 15 Commandments. Crash. The Lord has given me these 10 Commandments.
    Sorry, it just popped into my head.

    VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
    Rate this comment:
    Rating: 4.2/5 (26 votes cast)
    • pistol packing mamaComment by txgoatlady
      May 11, 2012 @ 1:45 pm

      That’s okay. I am similarly afflicted. The kids had “Secret Circle” on last night and were talking about them burning witches. I found myself quoting the witch scene from “Holy Grail.”

      VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
      Rate this comment:
      Rating: 4.7/5 (13 votes cast)
    • MaryComment by Mary
      May 11, 2012 @ 2:53 pm

      Denying that God exists with your mouth doesn’t change anything. You can deny Him all you want, but He’s still there. Trying to chop the Ten Commandments down to 6 is simply insane.

      VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
      Rate this comment:
      Rating: 4.8/5 (50 votes cast)
    • Oregon JeffComment by Oregon Jeff
      May 11, 2012 @ 3:54 pm

      Mary, quite conversely, claiming god exists with your mouth doesn’t change anything either. You can make the claim all you want, but it doesn’t make him real.

      I agree that trying to chop it down to 6 is insane. Far better to just get rid of them entirely.

      VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
      Rate this comment:
      Rating: 1.5/5 (39 votes cast)
    • inluminatuoComment by inluminatuo
      May 13, 2012 @ 12:11 pm

      More like it is time to chop our Supreme Court from 8 down to the five or six conservatives left who still know how to read, interpret, protect and defend the Constitution and laws of the land as written

      VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
      Rate this comment:
      Rating: 5.0/5 (8 votes cast)
    • Oregon JeffComment by Oregon Jeff
      May 14, 2012 @ 9:57 am

      Yes, inluminatuo, because the conservatives on the court have done *such* a good job so far.

      VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
      Rate this comment:
      Rating: 1.0/5 (4 votes cast)
  3. Jack TComment by Jack T
    May 11, 2012 @ 1:38 pm

    I’m reminded of the book title from Hal Lindsey – “Satan Is Alive and Well on Planet Earth.” I find it amusing that those who don’t believe in God have such vitriol toward that which they claim doesn’t exist!

    VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
    Rate this comment:
    Rating: 4.9/5 (71 votes cast)
    • Oregon JeffComment by Oregon Jeff
      May 11, 2012 @ 2:06 pm

      Perhaps because those that are religious try to use this god they say exists to take away others’ rights?

      VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
      Rate this comment:
      Rating: 1.4/5 (57 votes cast)
    • Bill from MiddletownComment by Bill from Middletown
      May 11, 2012 @ 2:15 pm

      Just which rights being taken away, are you referring to, Jeff?

      VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
      Rate this comment:
      Rating: 4.9/5 (46 votes cast)
    • godsgirlComment by godsgirl
      May 11, 2012 @ 2:26 pm

      I find it funny that the 10 Commandments cause an uproar at all – you can disregard the first two if you don’t believe in God. There is no national religion, so if you are agnostic or atheistic, or worship Allah or any other God, well, that is legal. We are admonished to love our neighbor as we love ourselves. We are told to not covet, commit adultery, steal, or murder. Those seem like sound instructions for successful living to me, and controversy free!

      VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
      Rate this comment:
      Rating: 4.8/5 (44 votes cast)
    • Bill from MiddletownComment by Bill from Middletown
      May 11, 2012 @ 2:41 pm

      Denial of God’s existence defies all reason. It is impossible for the complex order of the universe, not to mention the human mind and body, to evolve out of nothingness and chaos without purposeful and intelligent design. Our very existence is proof thereof.

      Thomas Jefferson wrote that “Man is endowed by his Creator with certain unalienable rights . . .” (Declaration of Independence) If our Rights are not given us by God, then they are no rights at all, but merely “permissions” granted or taken away by the whims of those in power at the moment.

      Power on Earth shifts from time to time and varies from location to location. The powers that rule in despotic regimes such as Cuba, China and Uganda exercise authoritarianism that denies the rights bestowed by God. The one constant in the Universe is the Word of God. I think I would rather trust in Him than put my faith into the hands and whims of despots.

      VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
      Rate this comment:
      Rating: 4.8/5 (59 votes cast)
    • Bill from MiddletownComment by Bill from Middletown
      May 11, 2012 @ 2:43 pm

      Another question for you, Jeff; Where do rights come from, if NOT from God?

      VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
      Rate this comment:
      Rating: 5.0/5 (25 votes cast)
    • MaryComment by Mary
      May 11, 2012 @ 2:56 pm

      Yeah, I read that book several years ago. He also wrote a fascinating one called “There’s a New World Coming.”which I also read. It deals with the book of Revelations in the Bible. I challenge anyone to read these books.

      VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
      Rate this comment:
      Rating: 4.5/5 (10 votes cast)
    • bjpurgComment by bjpurg
      May 11, 2012 @ 3:05 pm

      Hey Jeff…you have yet to answer either question. I would be curious to hear the answer. Maybe you should ask yourself as well why you feel so hell-bent on hating Christians and the word of God. All God ever felt for you is LOVE!

      VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
      Rate this comment:
      Rating: 4.7/5 (28 votes cast)
    • genesalComment by genesal
      May 11, 2012 @ 3:18 pm

      Yeah, Jeff, nothing like biting the Hand that created you!

      VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
      Rate this comment:
      Rating: 4.8/5 (20 votes cast)
    • Oregon JeffComment by Oregon Jeff
      May 11, 2012 @ 3:33 pm

      Bill, the right for couples of the same sex to be married, for one.

      godsgirl, the first *four* talk about religion, not just the first two. The remaining six didn’t originate with the Bible. They are well-documented parts of cultures and societies that significantly pre-date the Bible. Also, nothing in the Ten Commandments says anything about loving your neighbor. That is from the New Testament. Also, in case you’re not aware, “neightbor” in that context doesn’t mean the person that lives next door, but, rather, means the other members of your tribe.

      Jefferson’s original work on the Declaration of Independence did not reference a creator. That was added later by one of the other members of the group of five that were charged with authoring that document. Jefferson expressed concern about numerous edits that were made to his original rough draft. More importantly, even if he *had* used that phrasing, it wouldn’t mean what you think it means. Jefferson was a deist. He didn’t believe in a personal god like you apparently do. He believed in a creative force that was uninvolved with any of our daily lives once the act of creating something was done. He believed we are self-determinated and not influenced by any kind of divine intervention. He, therefore, would not have thought that our rights came from god, but are of our own making.

      I don’t hate Christians or the word of god. I merely see the Bible for what it is — ancient stories with little to no truth in them, used by the church and by governments to subjugate people.

      And, no, if you’d read your Bible, you’d know that god isn’t all about god. Yahweh, the god of the Old Testament is a monster. Jesus in the New Testament said he came to bring not peace, but the sword and he sought to turn brothers against brothers, families against families, and so on. Seriously, you should actually read your holy book. It’s insane!

      VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
      Rate this comment:
      Rating: 1.5/5 (40 votes cast)
    • genesalComment by genesal
      May 11, 2012 @ 3:51 pm

      First of all it’s the ‘final version’ of the Declaration of Independence THAT COUNTS!

      Second of all, all 10 originate in the Old Testament (Exodus 20)

      Just the facts, Jeff, just the facts, as Joe Friday would say.

      VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
      Rate this comment:
      Rating: 4.7/5 (25 votes cast)
    • Oregon JeffComment by Oregon Jeff
      May 11, 2012 @ 4:11 pm

      No, genesal, it’s not just the final version that counts. You claimed Jefferson said that. He did not. You’ve also conveniently ignored the other things I mentioned about Jefferson. Are you aware of the Jefferson Bible? You really should google it.

      Also, yes, all 10 of the commandments originate in the Old Testament. However, there are multiple versions of them.

      The first, the one you reference in Exodus 20, Moses cast down and broke. The second, given by god, is in Exodus 34. That’s the version you’re probably not familiar with. However, that’s also the version that god instructed Moses to put in the ark of the covenant.

      Yes, just the facts. You’d do well to learn some.

      VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
      Rate this comment:
      Rating: 1.9/5 (27 votes cast)
    • Bill from MiddletownComment by Bill from Middletown
      May 11, 2012 @ 4:19 pm

      First of all, Jeff, you are perverting the word of God and will someday answer for it if you do not repent. Time will tell.

      Second, where do your rights come from, if not God? Who says there is a “right” to marry someone of the same gender, or anyone at all? Where in human history has such a “right” or practice every existed? You don’t have an answer to that, do you?

      Third, “Well aware that the opinions and belief of men depend not on their own will but follow involuntarily the evidence proposed to their minds; that Almighty God hath created the mind free; and manifested His Supreme Will that free it shall remain. . . ” Virginia Statute for Religious Freedom, Thomas Jefferson 16 Jan 1786

      and,

      “I reciprocate your kind prayers for the protection and blessing of the common Father and Creator of man, and tender you for yourselves and your religious association, assurances of my high respect and esteem.” Thomas Jefferson, Letter to the Danbury Baptists Association 1 Jan 1802

      and finally, in his own words

      “…on the faces of the Obelisk the following inscription, & not a word more:

      Here was buried
      Thomas Jefferson
      Author of the Declaration of American Independence
      of the Statute of Virginia for religious freedom
      Father of the University of Virginia

      “because by these,” he explained, “as testimonials that I have lived, I wish most to be remembered.”

      Doesn’t sound like a “deist” to me.

      VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
      Rate this comment:
      Rating: 4.4/5 (22 votes cast)
    • Bill from MiddletownComment by Bill from Middletown
      May 11, 2012 @ 4:25 pm

      The Jefferson Bible is a condensed version wherein Jefferson picked what he thought were the most relevant passages in an effort to convert the native American Indians to Christianity.

      VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
      Rate this comment:
      Rating: 4.8/5 (18 votes cast)
    • genesalComment by genesal
      May 11, 2012 @ 4:25 pm

      Jeff you are not worth the words. Legally and binding are the final documents of any transaction in the world. You aren’t making any sense and show a real lack of logic. You can’t see the truth, in fact, YOU CAN’T HANDLE THE TRUTH!

      You say the first version of the Ten Commandments doesn’t count and yet you say the first version of the Declaration of Independence is what counts. Shows no logic what so ever. You want it both ways. I hope you read these again so you may realize that your denying the truth, lack of logic and wanting it both ways makes you look and sound foolish. God Bless You!

      VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
      Rate this comment:
      Rating: 4.3/5 (16 votes cast)
    • Oregon JeffComment by Oregon Jeff
      May 11, 2012 @ 5:03 pm

      Bill, how am I perverting the word of god? It’s in the book of Matthew. Read it for yourself.

      Who says there *isn’t* a right to marry someone of the same gender? Until a century or so ago, the church was more than happy to marry people of the same gender. There are even illustrations of two male saints being married. Who says rights have to be granted to us? Who said you have a right to breathe? Your god didn’t say you have that right, yet I bet you’d argue til you were blue in the face to convince me you have that right.

      I don’t disagree that Jefferson said the things you say he said. However, there are additional writings of his where he pretty clearly explains himself. In that same Virginia Statute for Religious Freedom, he says,

      “No man [should] be compelled to frequent or support any religious worship, place, or ministry whatsoever, nor [should he] be enforced, restrained, molested, or burthened in his body or goods, nor … otherwise suffer on account of his religious opinions or belief … All men [should] be free to profess and by argument to maintain their opinions in matters of religion, and … the same [should] in no wise diminish, enlarge, or affect their civil capacities.”

      Your claims about Jefferson’s Bible are laughable. He clearly intended to remove any questions about Jesus’ divinity. That’s why his version removed all supernatural elements, all miracles, and ended with Jesus being crucified and laid to rest in the tomb. In Jefferson’s work, Jesus isn’t resurrected. The lie that it was for the Native Americans is a myth pushed by David Barton and completely without fact.

      Now, as to the Declaration of Independence, I make mention that it’s the original draft that matters because you attributed those words to Jefferson. However, the final version was not just Jefferson’s words, but edits from others as well. So, while the final version is what we ended with for historical purposes, the original draft are Jefferson’s actual words. Therefore your claim that he referenced a creator is bogus.

      Then, speaking of the Ten Commandments, you ignore the fact that the Bible is the one that makes note of both sets. Read Exodus 20 and 34 for yourself. You’ll see that the ones you commonly refer to as the Ten Commandments are the ones that Moses dropped and broke. The second set are the ones that went into the Ark of the Covenant by order of god. Which ones do you think god thinks are more important?

      You, sir, are the one failing at logic.

      VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
      Rate this comment:
      Rating: 2.3/5 (19 votes cast)
    • genesalComment by genesal
      May 11, 2012 @ 5:08 pm

      Yes and the Constitution and Bill of Rights are for Historical purposes also. I’ll be back after I put my high boots on. This is getting downright hilarious!

      VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
      Rate this comment:
      Rating: 4.5/5 (11 votes cast)
    • Oregon JeffComment by Oregon Jeff
      May 11, 2012 @ 5:19 pm

      The Ten Commandments weren’t for historical purposes, however.

      Don’t bother with the boots, they’ll just taste bad when you put your foot in your mouth again.

      VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
      Rate this comment:
      Rating: 1.7/5 (12 votes cast)
    • prairelivingComment by praireliving
      May 11, 2012 @ 6:32 pm

      Jeff, What church was OK with marrying two people of the same gender until about a century ago? You used the term “the church” which most often suggests the Roman Catholic church and that would not be accurate to claim they were marrying same sex couples at any time.

      And while you are at it, please give specifics as to which saints were depicted as in a homosexual marriage. I have a fairly strong knowledge of Catholic saints and this interpretation seems entirely off.

      VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
      Rate this comment:
      Rating: 4.8/5 (16 votes cast)
    • genesalComment by genesal
      May 11, 2012 @ 6:59 pm

      Wrong again Jeff

      We have the Ten Commandments of Exodus 20 and you say they don’t count because of Exodus 34 – WRONG

      Exodus 34
      And the Lord said unto Moses, Hew thee two tables of stone like unto the first: and I will write upon these tables the words that were in the first tables, which thou brakest.

      The words that were in the first tables – that’s ditto!

      VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
      Rate this comment:
      Rating: 4.9/5 (13 votes cast)
    • lorrelComment by lorrel
      May 12, 2012 @ 6:42 am

      Jeff, you stated “Jefferson’s original work on the Declaration of Independence did not reference a creator”

      You are incorrect. Here is the origianl draft:
      “We hold these truths to be sacred & undeniable; that all men are created equal & independant, that from that equal creation they derive rights inherent & inalienable, among which are the preservation of life, & liberty, & the pursuit of happiness”
      The key words are Created and Ceation.

      The phrase “sacred & undeniable” was changed to “self-evident” before Adams made his copy. This change has been attributed to Franklin, but the opinion rests on no conclusive evidence, and there seems to be even stronger evidence that the change was made by Thomas Jefferson or at least that it is in his handwriting (Boyd, Declaration of Independence, 1945, p. 22-3).

      VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
      Rate this comment:
      Rating: 5.0/5 (7 votes cast)
    • Oregon JeffComment by Oregon Jeff
      May 14, 2012 @ 10:04 am

      No, genesal, clearly you didn’t actually read your Bible. The commandments written on the tablets in Exodus 34 are nothing like the words written on them in Exodus 20. Please go read your Bible.

      The inclusion, lorrel, of the words creation and created do not actually reference a “Creator”. As such, they could just as easily reference something else entirely. In fact, when we look at Jefferson’s work as a whole, it’s clear he wouldn’t have been talking about a creator in the modern, Christian, personal Jesus sense, but in a deistic sense. So, no, when I said he didn’t reference a creator in his original, I am absolutely correct.

      VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
      Rate this comment:
      Rating: 2.7/5 (3 votes cast)
  4. pistol packing mamaComment by txgoatlady
    May 11, 2012 @ 1:43 pm

    “You shall not add to the word which I am commanding you, nor take away from it, that you may keep the commandments of the LORD your God which I command you” Deuteronomy 4:2

    Hmmmm……seems as if this issue was addressed a long time ago.

    VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
    Rate this comment:
    Rating: 4.8/5 (49 votes cast)
    • kodiakComment by kodiak
      May 12, 2012 @ 3:53 am

      Kodiak,I fully agree with your quoting Deut 4:2, & that we should keep the 10 Commandments in all the public places, & especially in our schools. However, even though almost all Christian organizations, & Jewish ones for that matter do not keep the First 4 Commandments. Most Christian Churches do not keep the 4th Commandment, Sunday is not the Sabbath that was commanded by the Heavenly Father. Almost all Christian organizations and Jewish ones do not use the Name of the Heavenly Father gave to mankind to Remember him by, but use titles, Lord, God, Adonai etc adding to the orginal word in the Hebrew Scriptures, thus adding to and taking away from His Word. In the original Hebrew Scritures, His Name was spelled out as a Tetragrammaton, that according to Josephus, a Jewish Priest who fought the Romans in the first Jewish revolt aganist them, was written on the High Priest Turban in all vowels, which the ‘Greek Fathers’ wrote as IAUE, which can be pronounced as Yahueh, Yah-oo-eh’ . The substitution of His Name was started by the Jews while they were in captivity in Babylon, as they heard His Name cursed, blasphymed every day, and the jewish people were starting to do so themselves, so the Priesthood, started the tradition of substituting the pagan names that the babylions used to replace His Name, and to disquise his Name so that it would not be blasphemed, and even made it a death sentence to even pronounce the Name, but this breaks the 3rd Commandment, which is carried on today by all religions. That is was done for a good reason, by man’s thinking, but it still kept His Name from being praised, and proclaimed through out the world as we are commanded to do, and again for sure breaks the commandment given in Deut 4:2! Also the 2nd Commandment, not to make any images of any images, carved or otherwise of any thing in the heavens, or on the earth, nor bow down to them etc. So even though Christians fight to keep the 10 Commandments up, they for the most part do not follow them, especially the first 4. All the commmandments are based on ‘Love’, love of our Heavenly Father, and love of our fellow man/woman. Yahushua said if you love him, you will keep my commandments, which are of my Father.

      VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
      Rate this comment:
      Rating: 2.3/5 (6 votes cast)
  5. Dustin W. TauntonComment by Dustin W. Taunton
    May 11, 2012 @ 1:55 pm

    The **** just never ends.

    VA:F [1.9.6_1107]
    Rate this comment:
    Rating: 4.8/5 (16 votes cast)
    • TRUTHTELLERComment by TRUTHTELLER
      May 11, 2012 @ 4:14 pm

      You’re right, Dustin,

      The s**t never stops coming from the ACLU. Whenever you have a group, that endavors to obstruct the functioning of our Western society, you will find the ACLU at the bottom of it.

      Whether it is trying to stamp out G-d, freeing murderers from prison, or putting girls in the Boy Scouts, the filing of these obstructive and in most cases, frivilous lawsuits, contribute greatly to the reduction in the quality of our lives.

      The ACLU is a Communist organization, founded by two card carrying Communists, whose original purpose was to aid in fighting unionist battles and at the same time, living up to their Communist manefesto rules, of creating Kayos in our Capitalist society.

      The only way to control these Communist lawyers is to reform our tort laws, to institute a “looser pay” system. This would severely curtail the filing of these frivilous and costly lawsuits.

      The ACLU troublemakers will think twice before filing lawsuits that they most likely will have to eat the costs of, if they loose. I think ten, instead of six Commandments will then, look much better to them.

      VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
      Rate this comment:
      Rating: 4.7/5 (17 votes cast)
    • Oregon JeffComment by Oregon Jeff
      May 11, 2012 @ 5:08 pm

      How, “truth”teller can you make such ridiculous statements about the ACLU? You are *obviously* not aware of all the cases they’ve been involved in. How do you explain the numerous cases available here?

      http://www.aclufightsforchristians.com/

      VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
      Rate this comment:
      Rating: 1.6/5 (13 votes cast)
  6. genesalComment by genesal
    May 11, 2012 @ 1:58 pm

    If it’s good enough for the Supreme Court, then it’s good enough for school (and me).

    VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
    Rate this comment:
    Rating: 4.7/5 (25 votes cast)
    • MaryComment by Mary
      May 11, 2012 @ 2:58 pm

      Aren’t the Ten Commandments still displayed in the Supreme Court?

      VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
      Rate this comment:
      Rating: 4.8/5 (17 votes cast)
    • genesalComment by genesal
      May 11, 2012 @ 3:07 pm

      Yes, and Moses is holding them! Inside the building and on the outside of the building multiple times.

      http://americanvision.org/1473/ten-commandments-supreme-court/

      VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
      Rate this comment:
      Rating: 5.0/5 (16 votes cast)
    • Oregon JeffComment by Oregon Jeff
      May 11, 2012 @ 3:43 pm

      No, you’re thinking of the Capitol Building, not the Supreme Court. And, yes, while Moses is depicted on the Capitol Building in multiple sculptures, so are a multitude of other figures from numerous other cultures, spiritual backgrounds, etc. Moses receives no amount of significant display over any other.

      VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
      Rate this comment:
      Rating: 1.5/5 (15 votes cast)
    • genesalComment by genesal
      May 11, 2012 @ 4:00 pm

      No I’m not thinking of the Capitol Building, but you bring up a good point. The Ten Commandments are Everywhere. But no need to lie about the known facts, Jeff, shows lack of morals.

      http://morallaw.org/blog/2006/08/the-ten-commandments-in-the-supreme-court-building/

      VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
      Rate this comment:
      Rating: 4.7/5 (14 votes cast)
    • Oregon JeffComment by Oregon Jeff
      May 11, 2012 @ 4:19 pm

      My intent was not to lie. I was merely not adequately informed on the matter. After a bit more research, I see they are indeed on the Supreme Court building too. Again, like the Capitol Building, I doubt they were put there for the reasons you think.

      Quite ironically, not all ten are visible. Only commandments six through ten, usually considered the more secular commands, are visible. Moses isn’t depicted alone either, but with Muhammad, Confucious, and numerous others great ancients.

      VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
      Rate this comment:
      Rating: 1.4/5 (10 votes cast)
    • genesalComment by genesal
      May 11, 2012 @ 4:32 pm

      I was merely not adequately informed on the matter.

      We figured that out hours ago!

      VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
      Rate this comment:
      Rating: 4.8/5 (17 votes cast)
    • Oregon JeffComment by Oregon Jeff
      May 11, 2012 @ 5:08 pm

      And so you resort to an ad hominem. Excellent way to make your point.

      VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
      Rate this comment:
      Rating: 1.5/5 (8 votes cast)
    • genesalComment by genesal
      May 11, 2012 @ 5:14 pm

      Yeah, the Constitution, don’t you just love it? That’s the cue for you to go get some ‘facts’ so that you might be more adequately informed!

      jeff yeah?

      I was merely not adequately informed on the matter.
      I’m plenty well informed.
      Well, which is it?

      VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
      Rate this comment:
      Rating: 4.0/5 (8 votes cast)
    • Oregon JeffComment by Oregon Jeff
      May 11, 2012 @ 5:19 pm

      I’m plenty well informed, genesal.

      VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
      Rate this comment:
      Rating: 1.3/5 (13 votes cast)
    • LenaComment by Mona
      May 11, 2012 @ 5:31 pm

      The 10 Commandments and/or Moses are displayed multiple times in the Supreme Court building.

      Moses with Two Tablets on the East Face

      Moses on the West Exterior Facade

      Ten Commandments on Front Bronze Doors

      Moses & Ten Commandments in Great Hall (8 times)

      Ten Commandments on Wooden Interior Courtroom Doors

      Ten Commandments* in Frieze Above Bench

      Despite his over confidence, Jeff is no more informed on God than he is the location of the 10 Commandments and Moses in the Supreme Court building. It’s a pity. I pray that God will open Jeff’s eyes before he meets him face to face..

      VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
      Rate this comment:
      Rating: 4.7/5 (14 votes cast)
    • Oregon JeffComment by Oregon Jeff
      May 11, 2012 @ 5:39 pm

      Mona, why do you neglect to mention that Zeus, Muhammad, Confucious, and numerous other things are also displayed in the sculptures in the Supreme Court facade? Why do you cherry pick?

      VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
      Rate this comment:
      Rating: 1.4/5 (10 votes cast)
    • genesalComment by genesal
      May 11, 2012 @ 5:48 pm

      You already admitted that you were uninformed and now you’re still arguing, I mean DEFLECTING the real point. In one place Zeus etc are depicted. The other 11 or 12 times only the Ten Commandments. Good try, though.

      VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
      Rate this comment:
      Rating: 5.0/5 (10 votes cast)
    • Oregon JeffComment by Oregon Jeff
      May 11, 2012 @ 5:58 pm

      You misquote me. I didn’t say I was uninformed. I said I was not adequately informed.

      No, Zeus is depicted 8 times. Again, good try for you. You pretend there’s significance to Moses or the 10 Commandments being displayed when there is not.

      VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
      Rate this comment:
      Rating: 1.4/5 (10 votes cast)
    • LenaComment by Mona
      May 11, 2012 @ 9:32 pm

      Mona, why do you neglect to mention that Zeus, Muhammad, Confucious, and numerous other things are also displayed in the sculptures in the Supreme Court facade? Why do you cherry pick?

      Why? Because the topic is the 10 Commandments.

      That’s what we’re talking about here, remember?

      VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
      Rate this comment:
      Rating: 4.6/5 (9 votes cast)
    • Oregon JeffComment by Oregon Jeff
      May 14, 2012 @ 10:06 am

      Yes, but you attempt to claim an elevation of the 10 Commandments and of Moses that simply doesn’t exist. By choosing to not talk about the other figures in the sculptures of the Supreme Court and other buildings, you falsely claim preference for Christianity.

      VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
      Rate this comment:
      Rating: 1.0/5 (1 vote cast)
  7. pistol packing mamaComment by txgoatlady
    May 11, 2012 @ 2:04 pm

    Isn’t this similar to what Eric Holder is doing at the DOJ? He only enforces the laws he agrees with.

    VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
    Rate this comment:
    Rating: 4.9/5 (34 votes cast)
    • TRUTHTELLERComment by TRUTHTELLER
      May 11, 2012 @ 9:36 pm

      Goatlady, geneseal, mona and the rest of you, please try not to feed the trolls. They take up room on the site and waste our time. If you don’t pay any attention to the troll, he/she will go back to the move on.org site whense he came, and leave us to more important business.

      VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
      Rate this comment:
      Rating: 4.6/5 (9 votes cast)
    • Oregon JeffComment by Oregon Jeff
      May 14, 2012 @ 10:08 am

      So, “truth”teller, you think I came from moveon.org? How truly uninformed you really are.

      So, cherry picking the Bible and attempting to subvert the Constitution is “more important business”? Please, you’re commenting on an ultra-Right wing blog post. There could be nothing less important you could possibly do with your lives.

      VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
      Rate this comment:
      Rating: 1.0/5 (1 vote cast)
  8. Oregon JeffComment by Oregon Jeff
    May 11, 2012 @ 2:07 pm

    You’re right, chopping it down to just 6 is silly. In fact, the entire thing is silly. Do the right thing and remove them entirely.

    VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
    Rate this comment:
    Rating: 1.4/5 (36 votes cast)
    • godsgirlComment by godsgirl
      May 11, 2012 @ 2:23 pm

      In America, you have the right to worship any God you want – there is no state religion – there is a seperation of church of state. Do you want to hate your neighbor, covet what is his, commit adultery, steal, and murder? In fact, is it silly to prohibit crime? Are those the rights you are trying to attain for all Americans?

      VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
      Rate this comment:
      Rating: 4.6/5 (21 votes cast)
    • texasfarmerComment by texasfarmer
      May 11, 2012 @ 3:10 pm

      There is to be no state establishment of religion. That is what was meant with the separation of the two.
      That does not mean the state hasn’t, isn’t and shouldn’t be influenced by religion. Everyone has a religion, even atheists thought they won’t admit it.

      VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
      Rate this comment:
      Rating: 5.0/5 (15 votes cast)
    • Oregon JeffComment by Oregon Jeff
      May 11, 2012 @ 3:46 pm

      godsgirl, no I have no intention of coveting, stealing, murdering, committing adultery, or any other crime. I don’t need the ten commandments (you do know there are actually multiple versions of these, right?), the Bible, or any god to be good.

      texasfarmer, actually, it very much does mean the state shouldn’t be influenced by religion. You cannot have freedom *of* religion without freedom *from* religion. Your idea that atheists have a religion is very clearly wrong. You obviously don’t understand what it means to be an atheist.

      VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
      Rate this comment:
      Rating: 1.8/5 (16 votes cast)
    • genesalComment by genesal
      May 11, 2012 @ 4:04 pm

      Jeff
      You have the only protection ‘from’ religion that the Constitution allows – No State Church, period.

      VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
      Rate this comment:
      Rating: 5.0/5 (9 votes cast)
    • Oregon JeffComment by Oregon Jeff
      May 11, 2012 @ 4:21 pm

      Yes, genesal, no state church, which means the state cannot act on matters from religious influence, the state cannot endorse, support, or promote religion because doing so would elevate a particular religion over others and give the illusion of preference. I’m well-versed on the issues surrounding the Establishment Clause, the founders intent, and case law that pertains to it. It very much involves freedom *from* religion (of all kinds) as well.

      VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
      Rate this comment:
      Rating: 1.5/5 (8 votes cast)
    • Bill from MiddletownComment by Bill from Middletown
      May 11, 2012 @ 4:35 pm

      What an empty, meaningless life it must be to believe that once you die, there is nothing more. What a shock it will be when you learn otherwise.

      VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
      Rate this comment:
      Rating: 4.7/5 (14 votes cast)
    • genesalComment by genesal
      May 11, 2012 @ 4:44 pm

      SO, Jeff, What State Church were you thinking about. Got names?

      There is NO freedom from religion other than no State Church, especially in the Constitution. If you know of any they are from perverted judges who feel that they have the right to make law, not adjudicate it, which IS unconstitutional.

      VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
      Rate this comment:
      Rating: 5.0/5 (7 votes cast)
    • Oregon JeffComment by Oregon Jeff
      May 11, 2012 @ 5:11 pm

      Bill, I live a very meaningful, full, and satisfying life. Knowing that it’s over when I die makes my time here even more precious and meaningful. I would think that believing you’ll end up in a heaven or hell would make the wait to find out which unbearable.

      I wasn’t thinking of any specific state church, genesal. You clearly don’t grasp the concept that it’s impossible to have freedom *of* religion without freedom *from* religion. You also don’t want to understand the concept either.

      VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
      Rate this comment:
      Rating: 1.7/5 (6 votes cast)
    • genesalComment by genesal
      May 11, 2012 @ 5:19 pm

      You keep espousing freedom from – where’s the source? All I hear is freedom from ‘facts’.

      VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
      Rate this comment:
      Rating: 4.4/5 (7 votes cast)
    • Oregon JeffComment by Oregon Jeff
      May 11, 2012 @ 5:29 pm

      Logic dictates that “freedom *of* religion” requires that there also be “freedom *from* religion”. If we did not have “freedom *from* religion” than any religion would be free to insert their religious artifacts into being funded with public dollars, displayed in public buildings, etc. By extension, they’d be able to suggest public policy decisions be influenced by their religion.

      Consider how you’d feel if a public school here in the US that had a predominantly Muslim student body decided to display a copy of the Quran in the school. This would obviously bother the Christian students that attended and their families. You’d hear people demanding that it be removed. Why would you hear it? You’d hear it because, to the Christian students and their families, the Quran was receiving preferential treatment and giving the false impression that it was endorsed, promoted, or supported by the government.

      Additionally, without freedom *from* religion, you can’t be allowed to practice Christianity without being free *from* practicing Islam, Buddhism, Hinduism, or any other religion. In other words, freedom *of* religion cannot exist without freedom *from* religion.

      VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
      Rate this comment:
      Rating: 2.3/5 (9 votes cast)
    • genesalComment by genesal
      May 11, 2012 @ 5:37 pm

      If logic dictates it then where is it written down? You keep saying it, that does not make it so. The Constitution only says NO CHURCH STATE, but also we have the right of free exercise of religion (not freedom from religion) and we choose to exercise our freedom of religion the same ways our founding and fore fathers did, by displaying in public and public buildings. It certainly wasn’t prohibited in the Constitution and has been done since the inception of our Country.

      VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
      Rate this comment:
      Rating: 4.4/5 (7 votes cast)
    • Oregon JeffComment by Oregon Jeff
      May 11, 2012 @ 5:48 pm

      Well, if you want to play the “it’s not written down” game, you will lose because it doesn’t say anything about “freedom of religion” in those exact words either. It says,

      “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.”

      See, it doesn’t even say “no church state” as you say eloquently put.

      Anyway, I get that you can’t understand the concept that you can’t be free to practice your particular version of Christianity without being free from having to practice all other forms of Christianity and any other religion that happens to exist.

      Your recollection as to the displaying of religious symbols and icons is foggy. Yes, there are instances where the government, through coercion from religious groups, has caved and displayed such things, including perverting our Pledge of Allegiance by adding the phrase “under god”, our currency with “in god we trust”, etc. That doesn’t mean these aren’t a violation of the Establishment Clause.

      If you believe these things are allowed by the Constitution, then you’ll have no issue with me wanting to have my local courthouse switch to using a Quran for swearing in witnesses, right?

      VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
      Rate this comment:
      Rating: 2.7/5 (7 votes cast)
    • genesalComment by genesal
      May 11, 2012 @ 5:51 pm

      Ok, you have a hard time with “or prohibiting the free exercise thereof”, that hardly surprises me!

      VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
      Rate this comment:
      Rating: 4.3/5 (6 votes cast)
    • Oregon JeffComment by Oregon Jeff
      May 11, 2012 @ 5:56 pm

      No, genesal, I don’t have a hard time with the Free Exercise Clause. You’re welcome to practice your religion all you like. However, it’s not allowed to be promoted, endorsed, or supported by the government.

      VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
      Rate this comment:
      Rating: 2.3/5 (6 votes cast)
    • genesalComment by genesal
      May 11, 2012 @ 6:00 pm

      Ah now the truth comes out. You keep mentioning that book calling for people to be slaves of a Moon God. Conversation over.

      VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
      Rate this comment:
      Rating: 3.3/5 (7 votes cast)
    • Oregon JeffComment by Oregon Jeff
      May 11, 2012 @ 6:06 pm

      I keep mentioning it, not because I wish to have it elevated by the government, but because I know everyone here will object to it getting the very same preferential treatment you’d like to be given to Christianity.

      How about Scientology then? Shall we display a copy of L. Ron Hubbard’s work in the Supreme Court? How about the book of the Flying Spaghetti Monster?

      VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
      Rate this comment:
      Rating: 2.7/5 (7 votes cast)
    • OR - PatriotComment by Jeff
      May 11, 2012 @ 8:56 pm

      If you’re going to discuss the 1st Amendment, you might want to take a look at it first:

      Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof;

      No where in there do I see a freedom “from” religion OR a freedom “of” religion. Anything beyond the words quoted above are opinion NOT fact!

      You can argue until Christ returns, it won’t change anything!

      VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
      Rate this comment:
      Rating: 4.3/5 (6 votes cast)
    • inluminatuoComment by inluminatuo
      May 13, 2012 @ 12:27 pm

      Who and what you turn to in times of crisis defines who and what you worship,,,Since Liberal Oregon Jeff turns to Obama and his Man-God government in times of crisis from whom all his blessings will flow, I hope he is enjoying his well earned bankrupt life where covetness and redistribution of honest wealth replaces hard earned personal property that sooner or later runs out based on a premise of unearned entitlement. As for me I’ll take the 10 commandments and their merit where merit and honestly prevail over success and prosperity given and blessed by an omnipotent, infallable omniscient God. He can worship and depend on that impotent self proclaimed poster Boy secular God that resides in the Whitehouse, who is just a reflection of his fallable self. Hope you enjoy your live of well earned failure. Too bad you only go around once in your two dimensional life of body and mind where the three dimension people of the body, mind AND SPIRIT run circles around you.

      VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
      Rate this comment:
      Rating: 5.0/5 (1 vote cast)
    • Oregon JeffComment by Oregon Jeff
      May 14, 2012 @ 10:23 am

      I’m well-versed in the language of the 1st Amendment and in the centuries of precedent in court rulings. Indeed, it *does* mean both “freedom *of* religion” and “freedom *from* religion”. Without those concepts, it simply doesn’t work. Yes, it may be opinion that those are part of what makes up the Establishment Clause of the 1st Amendment, but those are opinions of the court which is all that really matters. You don’t even have court opinion on your side.

      You couldn’t be more wrong, inluminatuo. I don’t worship Obama or “his man-god government” (whatever that’s supposed to mean). In fact, I don’t worship anything.

      You say you’ll take the 10 Commandments, yet you don’t specify which ones? Are you going to go with the first set that was smashed by Moses or the second set that god commanded Moses to make safe in the Ark of the Covenant?

      If your god is so infallable, how come he couldn’t accurately determine the value of Pi when he inspired the writing of the Bible? How come he couldn’t even get as close as scholars in other cultures had come around the same time that portion was written? Why did numerous prophecy’s not only fail to come true, but played out exactly the opposite way in some cases? Why are there two creation accounts with different a different order of events? (Look it up, it’s Genesis 1 and Genesis 2)

      If you really think your god is omnipotent (he fully admits he is not), infallible (he makes numerous mistakes), or omniscient (he fully admits he is not), then you clearly haven’t read your Bible.

      By the way, you *do* realize that Obama is a Christian, right?

      VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
      Rate this comment:
      Rating: 1.0/5 (1 vote cast)
  9. Ewald LieskeComment by Ewald Lieske
    May 11, 2012 @ 2:20 pm

    Isn’t communism atheism (no god )? How does that work?

    VA:F [1.9.6_1107]
    Rate this comment:
    Rating: 4.7/5 (13 votes cast)
    • Bill from MiddletownComment by Bill from Middletown
      May 11, 2012 @ 2:47 pm

      In Communism, the state is god.

      VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
      Rate this comment:
      Rating: 4.6/5 (11 votes cast)
    • Oregon JeffComment by Oregon Jeff
      May 11, 2012 @ 3:47 pm

      Ewald, no atheism and communism have no connection whatsoever.

      Bill, communism isn’t a belief system. Therefore the state can’t be god, like you claim. Have certain communist regimes tried to make religious mandates? Yes, absolutely. That’s where any connection ends, however.

      VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
      Rate this comment:
      Rating: 1.8/5 (10 votes cast)
    • Bill from MiddletownComment by Bill from Middletown
      May 11, 2012 @ 4:30 pm

      Communism is not a belief system??? Ha! Ha! Ha! ROTFLMAOFF!

      Like it or not, we all worship a god, whether that god be the True God, the god of state, or the god of one’s self.

      VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
      Rate this comment:
      Rating: 4.2/5 (9 votes cast)
    • Oregon JeffComment by Oregon Jeff
      May 11, 2012 @ 5:14 pm

      Bill, communism is a political and economic system. It isn’t a belief system like you would think of in the context of religion.

      I don’t worship any gods — whether you like that or not.

      VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
      Rate this comment:
      Rating: 2.0/5 (8 votes cast)
  10. jenerseaComment by jenersea
    May 11, 2012 @ 2:57 pm

    With no fear of GOD anymore in Washington, what do you expect. All the freak show stuff will start coming out of the woodwork.

    VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
    Rate this comment:
    Rating: 4.8/5 (17 votes cast)
  11. bippybellitoComment by bippybellito
    May 11, 2012 @ 3:07 pm

    Maybe we should consider reducing the Quran to just one page. The End

    VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
    Rate this comment:
    Rating: 5.0/5 (14 votes cast)
  12. CalComment by Cal
    May 11, 2012 @ 3:15 pm

    Because of the 10 commandments contents, as a sound way to live one’s life don’t they really transcends any religious meaning or religion? Also does the Koran, and other holy books of other non Judo-Christian religions have similar passage in their books?

    VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
    Rate this comment:
    Rating: 5.0/5 (5 votes cast)
    • genesalComment by genesal
      May 11, 2012 @ 3:24 pm

      Yes, even the Judge is admitting that the majority of the Commandments would be necessary even with religion.

      VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
      Rate this comment:
      Rating: 5.0/5 (6 votes cast)
    • Oregon JeffComment by Oregon Jeff
      May 11, 2012 @ 4:22 pm

      No, genesal, he’s baiting the lawyer to accidentally reveal that they were put back because of religion. In doing so, the case will be shut and they’ll have to be permanently removed.

      VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
      Rate this comment:
      Rating: 1.5/5 (8 votes cast)
    • genesalComment by genesal
      May 11, 2012 @ 4:27 pm

      Your interpretation period.

      VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
      Rate this comment:
      Rating: 4.0/5 (4 votes cast)
    • Oregon JeffComment by Oregon Jeff
      May 11, 2012 @ 5:15 pm

      No, genesal, if you’d read the judge’s remarks, he stated that that’s exactly what he’s doing.

      VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
      Rate this comment:
      Rating: 2.0/5 (4 votes cast)
  13. Tony EsolenComment by Tony Esolen
    May 11, 2012 @ 3:58 pm

    The idea that communism has nothing to do with atheism is historical nonsense.

    The Bible elevates marriage to the status of a sacrament; but marriage is a natural “society” that exists before any government or any set of laws. It is founded in nature, in biology. The Bible does not forbid what cannot possibly exist: a man cannot marry a man, because the two cannot mate; they cannot perform the act that gives rise to marriage in the first place. That is simple biology. The Bible does condemn unnatural sexual practices — by both sexes, too.

    As for people being able to lead moral lives without religion: hmm, give it a generation or so. You are not aware of how deeply dependent you are upon religious roots you will not acknowledge. But the open sewer that our culture has become is easy to find; just open your eyes. Or your nasal passages.

    VA:F [1.9.6_1107]
    Rate this comment:
    Rating: 4.7/5 (12 votes cast)
    • Oregon JeffComment by Oregon Jeff
      May 11, 2012 @ 5:15 pm

      The idea that communism has anything to do with atheism is an absurd claim, no matter how you look at history.

      Plenty of people for plenty of generations have led moral lives without gods of any kind. You employ a slippery slope fallacy because your argument is weak.

      I am in no way dependent on anything religious, any make believe daddy in the clouds, or any roots that resulted from man’s fascination with using stories of the supernatural to explain that which was unexplainable. When it was believed the earth was flat, scholars believed there were monsters at the end of the world. We know that to be nonsense now. Ancient cultures had systems of belief with entire casts of gods and demigods. Today you call gods like Zeus, Thor, and Mithra just myths. The irony is you do this while claiming your own god is not a myth. Give it a while and your god will be classified as a myth by society too.

      VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
      Rate this comment:
      Rating: 1.8/5 (5 votes cast)
  14. Oregon JeffComment by Oregon Jeff
    May 11, 2012 @ 4:28 pm

    The idea that communism has anything to do with atheism is an absurd claim, no matter how you look at history.

    Plenty of people for plenty of generations have led moral lives without gods of any kind. You employ a slippery slope fallacy because your argument is weak.

    I am in no way dependent on anything religious, any make believe daddy in the clouds, or any roots that resulted from man’s fascination with using stories of the supernatural to explain that which was unexplainable. When it was believed the earth was flat, scholars believed there were monsters at the end of the world. We know that to be nonsense now. Ancient cultures had systems of belief with entire casts of gods and demigods. Today you call gods like Zeus, Thor, and Mithra just myths. The irony is you do this while claiming your own god is not a myth. Give it a while and your god will be classified as a myth by society too.

    VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
    Rate this comment:
    Rating: 1.7/5 (6 votes cast)
  15. memawComment by memaw
    May 11, 2012 @ 4:34 pm

    I fail to see how displaying anything takes away anyone’s rights. Everyone is entitled to ignore it if he wishes. We all have the right to freedom of religion (or from religion) and freedom to worship (or not to worship). What’s the big deal? No one is forced to bow down and worship the ten commandments or anything or anyone else.

    VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
    Rate this comment:
    Rating: 4.5/5 (8 votes cast)
    • Oregon JeffComment by Oregon Jeff
      May 11, 2012 @ 5:17 pm

      Displaying it in a public school that’s run by the government and funded with taxpayer dollars gives the illusion that it’s endorsed, promoted, and endorsed by the government. It’s the illusion of preference that violates the Establishment Clause.

      VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
      Rate this comment:
      Rating: 2.3/5 (6 votes cast)
    • genesalComment by genesal
      May 11, 2012 @ 5:23 pm

      Now we’re dealing in Illusions, how quaint.

      VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
      Rate this comment:
      Rating: 4.3/5 (6 votes cast)
    • Oregon JeffComment by Oregon Jeff
      May 11, 2012 @ 5:30 pm

      Ok, genesal, it makes it appear that the state prefers one religion over another. It makes it look to some people as though the state supports one religion over another. So you don’t like my use of the word “illusion”, at least try to keep up with what’s being said.

      VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
      Rate this comment:
      Rating: 2.3/5 (6 votes cast)
    • genesalComment by genesal
      May 11, 2012 @ 5:43 pm

      So that’s a nonPoint. Illusions, appearances and voodoo are not even mentioned in the Constitution. And thus mean squat. It doesn’t even matter what it makes something look like, appear as, as in illusion if it’s not prohibited in the Constitution and for the 20th time the Constitutions prohibits a CONCRETE STATE RUN STATE CHURCH, PERIOD.

      VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
      Rate this comment:
      Rating: 4.2/5 (5 votes cast)
    • Oregon JeffComment by Oregon Jeff
      May 11, 2012 @ 5:53 pm

      Actually, genesal, it’s not a nonpoint. The 1st Amendment says that “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion…”. This is widely understood by the courts and legal scholars through precedent and the writings of the founding fathers to mean that not only can the government not setup a state church, it can’t even do anything that could be seen as steps toward the government setting up a state church. In other words, in all things the government does, it can’t even look like they’re headed in that direction or it’s in violation of the Establishment Clause.

      It does more than prohibiting a “concrete state run state church”, no matter if you think so or not. The facts and precedent set by many, many court cases do not agree with your narrow view of the subject.

      VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
      Rate this comment:
      Rating: 1.8/5 (5 votes cast)
  16. skepticaleyeComment by skepticaleye
    May 11, 2012 @ 6:36 pm

    Oregon Jeff, I’m coming into this late so I’m starting from the top and working down.

    You said above, ” Also, nothing in the Ten Commandments says anything about loving your neighbor. That is from the New Testament.” This is only half-true. In Matthew 22:39 Jesus said, ” … You shall love your neighbor as yourself.” He was quoting the Old Testament, Leviticus 19:18: ” … you shall love your neighbor as yourself.”

    This discussion is swirling around people’s often not completely correct memories of sources of information, and also some definite snips of things taken out of context. I’d like to suggest that anyone quoting a historical person, source or a picture of something put a note to that source in their point.

    VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
    Rate this comment:
    Rating: 5.0/5 (5 votes cast)
    • Oregon JeffComment by Oregon Jeff
      May 11, 2012 @ 6:49 pm

      Yes, but the command in Leviticus isn’t part of the Ten Commandments, as asserted by the person I was responding to. Good eye catching that he was merely quoting from previous scripture.

      VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
      Rate this comment:
      Rating: 2.3/5 (6 votes cast)
  17. skepticaleyeComment by skepticaleye
    May 11, 2012 @ 6:45 pm

    Oregon Jeff, you said:

    “Jefferson’s original work on the Declaration of Independence did not reference a creator. That was added later by one of the other members of the group of five ….”

    You then go on to state Jefferson’s own perspective. The strength of the Declaration was that while Jefferson was the primary author, that others amended it; and so in co-editing it became a document that represented what a budding nation would stand behind. Did any one contributor agree with every single word? Probably not. But all recognized the virtue of it, that it was the will of those who would have to fight for it, and so it became what it is.

    VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
    Rate this comment:
    Rating: 5.0/5 (6 votes cast)
    • Oregon JeffComment by Oregon Jeff
      May 11, 2012 @ 7:11 pm

      Yes, it’s the perspective of the group of five. The specific wording was attributed to Jefferson, however, which is incorrect.

      That said, the reference to a creator in no way means a personal god like contemporary Christianity subscribes to.

      VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
      Rate this comment:
      Rating: 1.8/5 (5 votes cast)
    • genesalComment by genesal
      May 11, 2012 @ 7:27 pm

      You twist things so devilishly. Jefferson’s original Declaration of Independence says quote
      “When in the course of human events it becomes necessary for a people to advance from that subordination in which they have hitherto remained, & to assume among the powers of the earth the equal & independant station to which the laws of nature & of nature’s god entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the change.” Natures GOD! Our God!
      It continues:
      “We hold these truths to be sacred & undeniable;[2] that all men are created equal & independant, that from that equal creation they derive rights[3] inherent & inalienable…”

      Without God there is no SACRED. All men are Created. Without a God there would be no Creator or Createe (man).

      Wrong on all accounts!

      VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
      Rate this comment:
      Rating: 3.9/5 (7 votes cast)
    • Oregon JeffComment by Oregon Jeff
      May 14, 2012 @ 10:30 am

      Well, genesal, at least you can quote correctly. However, you want *so* badly for Jefferson to support your views that you ignore what he meant by “nature’s god”. He wasn’t speaking about the Christian god. He was speaking of, what at the time, was believed to be the creative force behind things — an impersonal god that created the universe and then detached from things going forward. Jefferson was a deist. He was not a theist — like you. In fact, he very directly rejected the theist beliefs with his creation of the Jefferson Bible where he removed all manner of supernatural claims/events from it.

      Your idea about something not being able to be sacred without god is incorrect. One of the definitions is “regarded with reverence”.

      Again, you’re the one that twists things to suit your own agenda.

      VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
      Rate this comment:
      Rating: 1.0/5 (1 vote cast)
  18. Antiquityart.comComment by 10commandments
    May 11, 2012 @ 7:08 pm

    Last Sunday I was showing an ‘artistic replication’ of the Decalog at a showing of my art near my home. A very nice lady offered: “You know, they really should have this in our public buildings. They’re just taking them down everywhere.” I politely answered: “Mam, if we had had them in our homes the last five decades they would never have been able to remove them.” It seems, What our children see us respecting or disrespecting matters. What we honor, we elevate to greater importance. What we honor we try to emulate. Placing art that reverently approaches the sacred, in our homes, our schools, and our work places, broadens our cultural horizons and profoundly affects both our priorities and the practice of our values.

    VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
    Rate this comment:
    Rating: 5.0/5 (8 votes cast)
    • Oregon JeffComment by Oregon Jeff
      May 14, 2012 @ 10:31 am

      Which 10 Commandments do you do art of, 10commandments? Do you work with the ones in Exodus 20 or Exodus 34?

      VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
      Rate this comment:
      Rating: 1.0/5 (1 vote cast)
    • Antiquityart.comComment by Antiquityart.com
      May 16, 2012 @ 11:54 pm

      Exodus 20:2-17 If your curious to know more about the art, I’m open to polite rational discourse; or you can click on my profile picture and that will lead to our home page; click products; The Ten Commandments. I will listen to your beliefs and try to tell mine; if your interested. I’m pretty easy going, although solidly fixed in my Catechism of Faith. Good will to you, jeff. Hal

      VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
      Rate this comment:
      Rating: 0.0/5 (0 votes cast)
  19. middlegroundComment by middleground
    May 11, 2012 @ 7:11 pm

    The term that seems appropriate is: “keep it simple stupid” and a trip to any modern law library will show you the brilliance of Moses when you view the masses of laws, directives, opinions and outright confusion originated from our bloated bureaucracy. Just the rulings of a minor department like the DOE will take up an entire wall. Poor President Clinton will be remembered by future historians for saying: “It depends on how you define sex” when he said oral sex wasn’t real sex. President Obama’s seizure of GM and Chrysler has carried this Clinton-type redefinition one step farther when he says it isn’t a political payoff and corruption to give 39% of GM to his UAW campaign contributors. As Moses might have written: “Thou shalt not steal a private company and give it to your political supporters.” I think everyone can appreciate simple honest actions and no amount of blarney should be able to cover up theft. And I’m not one of those GM bondholders who would have received payment under a normal bankruptcy court action rather than a dictator seizing and dispensing a gift to supporters.

    The question every American should ask themselves is can we afford a dictator who ignores the restraints on power in the Constitution and isn’t that what we fought a Revolution and wrote a Contitution to prevent?

    VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
    Rate this comment:
    Rating: 5.0/5 (9 votes cast)
    • gimmesometruthComment by gimmesometruth
      May 11, 2012 @ 9:32 pm

      On Nov. 7th, Obama can become an out-of-the-closet HOMO.

      VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
      Rate this comment:
      Rating: 4.0/5 (5 votes cast)
  20. KathleenComment by Kathleen
    May 11, 2012 @ 7:21 pm

    Judge Urbanski is no Solomon. What a foolish suggestion. Let’s maim the Ten Commandments. Or how about if we make them the Ten Suggestions? Ten Possibilities? Ten Considerations.

    When judges suggest hair-brained ideas like this one, we’re in trouble.

    As a last thought, I despise the ACLU. They are largely responsible for the shape our country is in. They have made our God and our faith a target to be removed, as if both are dangerous, or illegal. They are doing everything they can to erase our Lord from the public sphere.

    VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
    Rate this comment:
    Rating: 5.0/5 (10 votes cast)
  21. skepticaleyeComment by skepticaleye
    May 11, 2012 @ 7:26 pm

    Oregon Jeff, you said,

    “Who says there *isn’t* a right to marry someone of the same gender? Until a century or so ago, the church was more than happy to marry people of the same gender. There are even illustrations of two male saints being married. Who says rights have to be granted to us? Who said you have a right to breathe? Your god didn’t say you have that right, yet I bet you’d argue til you were blue in the face to convince me you have that right.”

    Others challenged you, but you chose not to answer. I very much doubt that you can come up with a single example of a same sex marriage a century ago in any relatively conservative church of that time: Catholic or Protestant. You need to provide specific examples, because this argument is just fluff.

    Same sex marriage logically first would need to be based on God accepting homosexuality. A century ago the legitimacy of homosexuality was rarely, if ever even debated in Christian circles. The average Christian took passages like Romans 1:24-27 for what it says, without trying to limit it’s meaning to the times when it was written. That the Bible teaches this is very clear.

    Even the average homosexual who calls themselves a Christian believes this; how they get around it is by calling every Biblical passage–and there are a number more than this–limited in applicability to the time period of when they were written.

    But more fundamentally you begin to argue a point about rights by going from something philosophical to something inborn (breathing). That doesn’t logically follow. I think the basic point, here, is that one either lives by morals granted to them, or by morals one grants oneself. You appear to choose the latter, and that is a basic tenet of atheism.

    But what appears to be atheism’s freedom is also one of it’s great flaws. Because no one lives by themselves; we all live interactively with others. And for that reason there must be rules that define that interaction. True atheism would not recognize that any law could not be changed for whatever convenience of the time or moment.

    You said more than once, ” … atheism and communism have no connection whatsoever”. This is absurd, and I think you know that. Maybe you are hoping to take advantage of gullible and uninformed readers?

    Governmental structures are based on the belief systems of their founders. This was true in the USA and true in the USSR. Christians and Jews, those who would not conform to the dramatic restrictions handed down by the state were systematically hunted down, persecuted, jailed and killed in the USSR. Unregulated religion was a psychological ailment that had to be cleansed. It was common for the state to put spies in churches to enforce this. I suggest you read books by Richard Wurmbrand such as:

    http://www.amazon.com/Tortured-Christ-Richard-Wurmbrand/dp/0340863684/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1336782140&sr=1-1

    VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
    Rate this comment:
    Rating: 4.4/5 (7 votes cast)
  22. skepticaleyeComment by skepticaleye
    May 11, 2012 @ 7:37 pm

    Oregon Jeff, you said,

    “How, “truth”teller can you make such ridiculous statements about the ACLU? You are *obviously* not aware of all the cases they’ve been involved in. How do you explain the numerous cases available here?

    http://www.aclufightsforchristians.com/

    Again, this argument is specious. No one has to visit this web site (but go ahead) to know that regarding the large, large majority of cases that the ACLU prosecutes, the average Christian would be very much against the side taken by the ACLU. Whenever a Christian organization finds themselves on the side of the ACLU they do a triple-take, because all the planets have to line up for that to happen.

    VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
    Rate this comment:
    Rating: 5.0/5 (6 votes cast)
  23. William WolfsbergerComment by William Wolfsberger
    May 11, 2012 @ 7:53 pm

    To even suggest to remove 4 Commandments from the 10 Commandments is pure blasphemy. They are the 10 Commandments, not the 10 suggestions and they are not open for debate. This judge needs to be removed from the bench immediately.

    VA:F [1.9.6_1107]
    Rate this comment:
    Rating: 5.0/5 (5 votes cast)
  24. skepticaleyeComment by skepticaleye
    May 11, 2012 @ 7:55 pm

    Oregon Jeff, I’m going to leave off with a a few comments about atheism.

    First, it’s been my observation regarding atheism that most people are not atheists for philosophical reasons, but rather for moral reasons. You hint at that above when you said, ” …the right for couples of the same sex to be married, for one.” It’s been my experience that many atheists don’t want to be told what they can and can’t do, and then they embrace atheism as the logical philosophy of that approach; not the other way around. Bertrand Russell is a good example of this, a fellow who lived with an “open marriage” so that he could sleep around, and then believed around his morals.

    But I also believe that atheism is philosophically bankrupt. It’s simple, really. The foundation of atheism is that there is no God. The problem is: How does one really know? The only way one can really KNOW that is to be omniscient! Otherwise you cannot KNOW that there is no God. One would have to BE God to know, which is quite a contradiction all by itself.

    An honest & humble atheist would really be an agnostic, a person who says they don’t know.

    Where does that leave the agnostic? I’ve heard the following described as Pascal’s box, but I have yet to verify that. I wish I could draw a picture, but I’ll have to describe it.

    Think of a square, bisected equally by two lines into four equal squares. For column headers for the two rows there is “God” and “no God”. For the two row labels on the left there is “Believe” and “Don’t Believe”. Now work out what happens for each box, taking the four possible outcomes.

    If one chooses, “Believe” and “no God”, one does not win or lose. One lives a moral life. Neutral conclusion.

    If one choose, “Don’t Believe” and “no God”, one is simply buried at the end of life, the end. Neutral conclusion.

    If one chooses, “Believe” and “God”, one wins!

    But if one chooses, “Don’t Believe” and “God”, one loses.

    There are only four choices and only one losing proposition on the board. I would suggest that all agnostics (and atheists!) consider this carefully.

    VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
    Rate this comment:
    Rating: 4.4/5 (7 votes cast)
    • Bill from MiddletownComment by Bill from Middletown
      May 11, 2012 @ 10:13 pm

      VERY interesting!

      VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
      Rate this comment:
      Rating: 5.0/5 (4 votes cast)
  25. Doc SmithComment by Doc Smith
    May 11, 2012 @ 9:20 pm

    So, some idiot wants to chop the 10 commandments down to 6. Take into consideration that the 10 commandments are set into stone, those who wish to “chop” it can themselves expect to be chopped.

    VA:F [1.9.6_1107]
    Rate this comment:
    Rating: 5.0/5 (5 votes cast)
  26. memawComment by memaw
    May 11, 2012 @ 9:25 pm

    You may as well give it up, guys. There are such things as casting pearls before swine. What all of us have been spouting is facts and none of them will take the place of faith.

    VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
    Rate this comment:
    Rating: 3.0/5 (6 votes cast)
  27. vegaslarry2000Comment by vegaslarry2000
    May 11, 2012 @ 10:06 pm

    Note to the judge: You have 2 arms,eyes,ears,hands,legs,feet. How bout cutting off a few to consolidate yourself. You only have one brain, but it appears it’s malfunctioning. Before you make any more stupid decisions, you should have it examined. There may still be hope for you. If,per chance, your brain functions cannot be restored then abdicate and go live out your days in an asylum in a padded room. IDIOT!

    VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
    Rate this comment:
    Rating: 4.6/5 (5 votes cast)
  28. Bill from MiddletownComment by Bill from Middletown
    May 11, 2012 @ 10:23 pm

    Bottom line is . . .

    Question: “If your rights do not come from God, then where do they come from?”

    Answer: If they do not come from God, they are arbitrary and can be revoked at the will of those in power.

    VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
    Rate this comment:
    Rating: 5.0/5 (6 votes cast)
  29. barfaulknerComment by barfaulkner
    May 12, 2012 @ 6:39 am

    In all that posted here there has been nothing said about the majority vs the minority. It is apparent that the people lose their way when they collectively allow that which they disagree to become infiltrated into their lives: e.g. vulgarity used on television without any other purpose than shock. Vulgarity has no harm in reality but it does demoralize the masses. The commandments have no issue to those who do not agree from whence they came but without them there would be demoralization of the majority. If we all took issue with the word freedom (who is really free?), and we wish for it to be removed because we really aren’t free then what would happen to society then? Your freedom ends at the tip of my nose and vise-versa. So lets remove all this “freedom” stuff from all historic documents, etc. etc. This is ludicrous. So is removing all reference to God. (no non-capitalization for shocking Oregon Jeff). Thomas Jefferson beliefs in God are none of my concern and whether he agreed with, if any, the rewrites is unknown to any of us. And to debate one’s beliefs is insane. However, I would like to inject here that the debate of a master plan would probably need a master creator and to paraphrase the Discovery Channel’s describing the human embryo’s beginning would only confirm that cells multiplying at an excessive rate without any difference only to give way to a “master plan” defining what each cell should become. Therein lies the existance of the master planner. They didn’t call that planner God but they were stuck with master planner. If we allow the minority to rule the majority, then we have given up our own government’s idea of self rule. Self rule means that majority, however unfavorable to the minority, rules! If this concept is unwanted by you, MOVE! Everyone says we need to take back our society and they move in strange directions to achieve this….. only one direction needs to be taken: the majority rules! And one screaming headline in any newspaper does NOT make the majority. If the majority would take a stand lets say on the sex/violence/vulgarity on television and they then throw that tv out into the front yard for the trash man, then television would change but until then expect more vulgarity, more sex, more violence. If the majority puts the Ten Commandments on a legal sized sign in their front yard, who cares what one student goes to court over. IS the MAJORITY, ready to take up the task of taking back this great nation? If not, we are doomed by the vocal minority.

    VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
    Rate this comment:
    Rating: 5.0/5 (1 vote cast)
    • Bill from MiddletownComment by Bill from Middletown
      May 12, 2012 @ 8:05 am

      There is some truth to what you say, barfaulkner, but when you have majority rule, true democracy, you end up with tyranny. In our representative republic, the minority is protected from the whims of the majority.

      People continually refer to the US as a democracy when that word appears nowhere in the Constitution, but Art. 1, Sec 4 reads “The United States shall guarantee to every State in this Union a Republican Form of Government”.

      The only thing democratic about the US is the manner in which our representatives are chosen.

      VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
      Rate this comment:
      Rating: 5.0/5 (2 votes cast)
  30. barfaulknerComment by barfaulkner
    May 12, 2012 @ 9:15 am

    There is no true democracy as there is no true communism and I do not believe that you end with tyranny from democracy. You cannot satisfy all the people all the time. You can only satisfy most of the people all the time. Tyranny would only be allowed if most of the people all the time agreed to this which they will not. When our forefathers came together with this gift from the Algonquin Indians, they did not agree all the time but the majority ruled in the end. Giving up the majority rule, you have chaos which we have today. All people have a solution and what the problem is IS that the majority fails to vote because………. why? They see it to be a bothersome to stay knowledgeable and they give their power to others to rule them. Sad… but very, very true. And if you chose to become knowledgeable, who would you believe for that knowledge? The truth fails us because we do not seek it with a whole heart. We are calloused, we are tired, we allow. Paul Newmann’s Verdict speech to the jury says it all but when we say enough and admonish those who lie to us what happens then? The discouragement that runs in this country is beyond belief… just count those that vote. Let others decide for me, it’s easier and I don’t have a say anyway is the motto of the country. If we stand for something, it is only until that stand comes between us and something we want. Our type of government takes work and we failed it. If you ask your children to not lie, to honor the truth, but we lie what message does that send? If we tell them not to use bad words, but watch tv with the horrible language and even sometimes we laugh, what does that teach? We have chaos because we brought it upon ourselves. We buy newspapers, listen to reporters, read books but yet we do not know these people. We have never even set at a table and had a cup of coffee. Yet, we listen to them. We even believe them before we believe the people who are around us. We have given nothing back to the honor, courage, envision of our forefathers even though some gave their lives for us. We stand with politicians because of party not because they really are representing the majority. It is all slipping away… and who is to stop it? Oh my.. I got carried away. I did payroll for my life’s work and I loved it. I did not put pieces of paper stating my political choices in the employees checks. How is it then, that we have a nation who allows our entertainers, people who we hire to entertain us, to use that platform for their choices? How is it that they feel that they have that right without reprisals? I guess what I actually am getting to is that we do not demand truth from reporters of news, honor from our entertainers, accountability from our politicians, and the list goes on. Truth will set you free is not just a saying from the Bible. It will indeed set us free as soon as we stop all the lies. My son told my daughter once.. all your troubles will be gone if you stop lying to mom. We as a nation can and will fix all this stuff that is going on ONCE we are given the truth. It is that simple. WE as a nation will fix the economy, will fix the unemployment, will fix the crime rate, will fix it all if the truth is allowed to shine. Who knows how much we owe really? Who knows how many illegals? Who knows what is going on in congress? We are imploding because we don’t know. How can we even give to a charity when charities aren’t what they are said to be? We expect our government to fix all this for us? Yep.. it’s easier.. there ought to be a law! When all we need is the truth and we will stop giving! What would happen… I’m for real here.. what would happen if those in the public’s eye told one lie and it was found out.. that we (all the people) would abandon with fever this individual.. yikes!

    VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
    Rate this comment:
    Rating: 2.3/5 (3 votes cast)
    • Bill from MiddletownComment by Bill from Middletown
      May 12, 2012 @ 10:05 am

      You forget, perhaps, that Hitler and Naziism came to power through the democratic process.

      VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
      Rate this comment:
      Rating: 5.0/5 (2 votes cast)
    • barfaulknerComment by barfaulkner
      May 13, 2012 @ 1:04 am

      You forget that the Germans were pressed into action due to the wisdom of the Allies. A country that was told many lies to cure the ills brought about by the loss of WWI. They gave their power away by not voting. Infiltration was brought into the schools and was brought up with children. I do not believe that the majority held with Hitler. I know that the majority of the Italians did not hold with Mussolini but most did nothing about it.
      If driven to hate, how do most vote? It took four feverish years for the compiled hatred for GWBush. And when asking common everyday people (regardless of party) the reason for their hatred of Bush, most had no answer.
      Germany as I understand it was being punished for WWI. The trading was disallowed and the people were impoverished. The hatred of the Jews drove that same truck as with Bush.
      We are not yet impoverished, but won’t hatred drive the people to their own destruction?
      I have yet to understand the depths of hatred over the depths of love. No man with true love would ever go to the depths that hatred can go. It is worrisome when any man uses hatred to obtain his goals.

      VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
      Rate this comment:
      Rating: 3.0/5 (3 votes cast)
    • Bill from MiddletownComment by Bill from Middletown
      May 13, 2012 @ 3:15 pm

      “You forget that the Germans were pressed into action due to the wisdom of the Allies.” I have no idea what you mean by that.

      But I have read Churchill’s account of the war, including “The Gathering Storm”. It matters not whether the majority held with Hitler, he was elected with a majority of the votes cast in a democratically held election, as was Mussolini, Castro, Chavez, Ortega and any number of other dictators around the world.

      Nor do I know what you mean by “The trading was disallowed and the people were impoverished. The hatred of the Jews drove that same truck as with Bush.”

      I don’t have time to give everyone a history lesson, but you can educate yourselves starting with “The Gathering Storm”. It is well worth the time to read. Churchill was brilliant.

      VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
      Rate this comment:
      Rating: 0.0/5 (0 votes cast)
    • barfaulknerComment by barfaulkner
      May 13, 2012 @ 4:25 pm

      The Blockade of Germany, or the Blockade of Europe, occurred from 1914-1919 and was a prolonged naval operation conducted by the Allied Powers during and after World War I in an effort to restrict the maritime supply of raw materials and foodstuffs to the Central Powers, which included Germany, Austria-Hungary and Turkey. It is considered one of the key elements in the eventual allied victory in the war. The blockade continued even after the Armistice of 11 November 1918, in order to force Germany to sign the controversial Treaty of Versailles in June 1919. The German Empire claimed that 763,000 German civilians died from starvation caused by the blockade during and after the War.[1]

      Both the German Empire and Great Britain relied heavily on imports to feed their population and supply their war industry. Imports of foodstuffs and war material of all European belligerents came primarily from the Americas and had to be shipped across the Atlantic Ocean, thus Britain and Germany both aimed to blockade each other. The British had the Royal Navy which was superior in numbers and could operate throughout the British Empire, while the German Kaiserliche Marine surface fleet was mainly restricted to the German Bight, and used commerce raiders and unrestricted submarine warfare to operate elsewhere.

      In 1928 a German academic study sponsored by the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace provided a thorough analysis of the German civilian deaths during the war. The study estimated 424,000 war related deaths of civilians over age 1 in Germany, not including Alsace-Lorraine, the authors attributed these civilian deaths over the pre war level primarily to food and fuel shortages in 1917-1918. The study also estimated an additional 209,000 Spanish flu deaths in 1918[14] A study sponsored by the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace in 1940 estimated the German civilian death toll at over 600,000. Based on the above mentioned German study of 1928 they maintained that “A thorough inquiry has led to the conclusion that the number of “civilian” deaths traceable to the war was 424,000, to which number must be added about 200,000 deaths caused by the influenza epidemic” [9]
      Not included in the figure of 763,000 famine deaths are additional civilian deaths during the blockade of Germany after the armistice from November 1918 until June 1919. Dr. Max Rubner in an April 1919 article claimed that 100,000 German civilians had died due to the continuation blockade of Germany after the armistice.[15] In the UK a Labour Party anti-war activist Robert Smillie issued a statement in June 1919 condeming the continuation blockade in which he also claimed that 100,000 German civilians had died.[16][17]

      The blockade was maintained for eight months after the Armistice in November 1918, into the following year of 1919, in order to force Germany to sign the controversial Treaty of Versailles in June 1919. For the German people, these were the most devastating months of the blockade. With the German fleet interned at Scapa Flow, Germany was powerless to challenge the blockade at sea. On land, the main German Army was compelled to withdraw to east of the River Rhine, and by renouncing the Treaty of Brest-Litovsk the Germans had lost access to the grain-growing resources of Poland and the Ukraine.

      Inflation was horrible during this time.

      The Germans were then sold a bill of goods by Hitler and he promised relief from the inflation and starvation. He promised green pastures.

      Now where have we heard this before?

      The next war caused their country to be divided amongst the winners. That will teach them how to vote, right?
      But will it teach us?

      VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
      Rate this comment:
      Rating: 0.0/5 (0 votes cast)
  31. foxrepublicanComment by foxrepublican
    May 12, 2012 @ 11:20 am

    I’m really surprised. Both sides are presenting resonable arguments here. Not a lot of name calling and insults. Impressive!

    VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
    Rate this comment:
    Rating: 0.0/5 (0 votes cast)
    • Bill from MiddletownComment by Bill from Middletown
      May 12, 2012 @ 11:42 am

      This has been one of the most vigorous and interesting debates I’ve seen posted in this forum. Amazing, the passion stirred by religious debate!

      VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
      Rate this comment:
      Rating: 0.0/5 (0 votes cast)
  32. AlwaysRIGHTComment by AlwaysRIGHT
    May 12, 2012 @ 3:09 pm

    What do you think would happen if our govt suggested dropping a few of the Muslim tenets of their faith? All chaos would ensue. Riots in the streets. Fatwas and jihads and just general mayhem. And the ACLU would side with the Muslims, and so would Obama, Holder, Jackson, Sharpton and the whole gang of libtard fools!

    Personally, maybe we/I should suggest dropping the Muslim tenet about killing all infidels. That’s a nice one, isn’t it? Do you invite guests into your home who profess to wanting in their heart of hearts to kill you, your family, your spouse, your children? But in America, the dumbass liberals and RINOs not only let them in, they put them in positions of power in our HOmeland Security Department! I’m not making this up. Two devout Muslims recently appointed to top positions there, compliments of Oblama Hussein. Go figure.

    VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
    Rate this comment:
    Rating: 5.0/5 (2 votes cast)
    • barfaulknerComment by barfaulkner
      May 13, 2012 @ 1:08 am

      Could possibly a man who was raised in the Muslim school have any loyalty, understanding and love for that teaching? What has been told to us by persons who have first hand knowledge, dissent from these teachings is NOT allowed. Therein lies your answer. There is NO thinking outside that box!

      VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
      Rate this comment:
      Rating: 0.0/5 (0 votes cast)
  33. Bill from MiddletownComment by Bill from Middletown
    May 12, 2012 @ 5:26 pm

    Speaking of 10 commandments,here is another interesting view: http://godfatherpolitics.com/5167/are-we-property-of-the-state-or-free-souls-under-god/

    VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
    Rate this comment:
    Rating: 0.0/5 (0 votes cast)
  34. siquijorislandComment by siquijorisland
    May 13, 2012 @ 12:32 am

    Denial of God’s existence defies all the science that more than ever indicates the existence of a supreme intelligence not of this earth. As scientific knowledge increases so does the evidence for purposeful intelligent design.

    VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
    Rate this comment:
    Rating: 5.0/5 (1 vote cast)
  35. Bill from MiddletownComment by Bill from Middletown
    May 13, 2012 @ 3:18 pm

    Please folks, I don’t object to the casual use of pot or alcohol, but for heaven’s sake put down the pipe/glass before posting!

    VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
    Rate this comment:
    Rating: 1.0/5 (1 vote cast)
  36. Chris AllenComment by Chris Allen
    May 13, 2012 @ 4:17 pm

    Ironic isn’t it that the Idiot Judge and the ACLU spokesperson are both Jewish Atheists when God gave the Ten Commandments to the Jews.

    VA:F [1.9.6_1107]
    Rate this comment:
    Rating: 0.0/5 (0 votes cast)
  37. barfaulknerComment by barfaulkner
    May 13, 2012 @ 4:32 pm

    What could possibly exist outside of God? If so, who made it? I loved it when the enlightenment of (paraphased) All things reside in Him and He resides in all things.

    VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
    Rate this comment:
    Rating: 0.0/5 (0 votes cast)
  38. Bill from MiddletownComment by Bill from Middletown
    May 14, 2012 @ 11:03 am

    Time for me to move on, folks.

    VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
    Rate this comment:
    Rating: 0.0/5 (0 votes cast)
  39. bigdtootallComment by bigdtootall
    May 14, 2012 @ 7:02 pm

    If it has not happened already, eventually teaching The Golden Rule will be outlawed. Our Bill of Rights protects freedom of religion not freedom from religion. If we support freedom from religion then everything good will be bad. Let’s start with shutting down church soup kitchens and food pantries. Our mother government is far more capable to provide for the least of these. Just ask the Indians!

    VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
    Rate this comment:
    Rating: 2.0/5 (1 vote cast)
  40. Pingback: The American Civil Liberties Union has been one of those organizations at the forefront of limiting biblical exposure to the general public.

  41. jimkComment by jimk
    May 15, 2012 @ 3:04 pm

    Interesting how there are many religions in this world and most all insist they are the one true path. These are the philosophies of emerging man. Often containing a lot of good and sometimes as much bad, including Christianity. Hang onto your treasured beliefs, but don’t pester me with them. Why do you feel so threatened if everyone else doesn’t believe what you do?

    VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
    Rate this comment:
    Rating: 5.0/5 (1 vote cast)
  42. dragonlord67Comment by dragonlord67
    May 16, 2012 @ 9:52 pm

    Oregon Jeff – You said the following early on: “I merely see the Bible for what it is — ancient stories with little to no truth in them, used by the church and by governments to subjugate people.”

    Ancient stories with little or no truth? Really? Are you sure? Or just inadequately informed?

    Not once has an archeologist ever been able to prove anything written in the Bible wrong, or less than truthful. Every time they try, it just enforces the authority of the Bible as the greatest history book ever written. Although it is far more than that.

    Your claim that the moral codes as listed in the 10 Commandments are from earlier writings than the Bible is irrelevant. If God created man, then ALL men would have that same moral code in their hearts, regardless of what they believed.
    If God didn’t create man, then where did that moral code come from? Not the monkeys that we supposedly evolved from.
    How can a higher moral code such as banning murder just be created out of nothing? Even the most primitive societies on the planet have the same moral code about murder. But the chimpanzees have no such code.

    In case you’re wondering the commandment is NOT:
    Thou shalt not kill. It is: Thou shalt not murder.

    VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
    Rate this comment:
    Rating: 5.0/5 (2 votes cast)

Leave a Comment





The Loft Archives

  • April 2014
  • 2014
  • 2013
  • 2012
  • 2011
  • 2010
  • Reference Pages

  • About
  • Network-wide options by YD - Freelance Wordpress Developer