March 15, 2005

• according to Nexis, in the past 60 days there've been 864 stories on the 10 commandments issue. that compares with more than 1,000 on jacko within the past week. thus, while jacko is indeed getting far more coverage, there has been plenty of the 10 commandments. the reporter next to me covers alabama and she's been writing about it a great deal.
• Why do these people always want to display the Ten Commandments? Wouldn't the Beatitudes make more sense for a Christian? (or don't they like all that 'Blessed are the meek and the peacemakers' liberal hogwash?) Anyway, when U.S. churches start displaying the Constitution (maybe right up front...stapled to the cross), then they can rightfully ask for public displays of scripture.
• I'm glad to hear there have been that many, but perhaps the issue is one of prominence, then? I get my news from a mix of television, radio and internet and can't seem to find much of substance, such as that which I posted.
• arch1: try SCOTUSblog, if you scroll down the page you will find quite a lot of links to news reports and opinion pieces.
• Wow, it's almost like the Christians don't realize that the 10 Commandments have been replaced by two... You know, by that guy named Jesus... Great article.
• Jesus Murphy! Hey linus let go of the beepin' blankent! I hate to be the one to kill the easter bunny, but what the beep? We got laws now, do we need public stonings, and crucifications do we? People goin' on about "god sayeth ye must be hot or cold, but never luke warm..." It's like, shut up it's the year 2004, why you gotta be stupid. Like theres a god, yeash!
• First of all, which 10 commandments? Somehow I think proponents of putting the 10 Commandments in courthouses or other government places don't mean the Jewish or Catholic versions. Also, most of our knowlege of Greek and Roman works was preserved in the Islamic world during the Middle Ages, and Islamic scienctific discoveries were a major contribution to the Renaissance. Given Islam's contributions to our intellectual history, surely no one would object to posting excerpts from the Qur'an in the Supreme Court, right? Marci Hamilton says, "The question is: Is the government violating the Establishment Clause by accepting the gift, and giving it a place among the other monuments?" Absolutely. In my opinion, there shouldn't be any religious icons/graven images in any governmental space, regardless of the source of the iconography. And Scalia should be impeached for violating his oath of office to defend the Constitution. Article VI says that "This Constitution,...and all Treaties made...shall be the supreme Law of the Land." Article 11 of the Treaty of Tripoli says, "the Government of the United States of America is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion." Also, his claim that government "derives its authority from God" contradicts the Declaration of Independence, which says that "Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just Powers from the consent of the governed."
• I believe Kokarachi is absolutley beepin' right.
• Lost in all of this is the fact that apparently many Commandments monuments started out as movie promotion (for the 1956 Cecil B. DeMille production "The Ten Commandments").
• See also: SNOPES Claim:   Religious symbols and references abound in U.S. capital buildings and the words of America's founders. Buildings in the U.S. capital and statements by America's founding fathers includes references to Judeo-Christian tradition:   True. The items included in the piece quoted below demonstrate a government endorsement of Judeo-Christian tradition:   False.
• which 10 commandments? kirkaracha: From my kansascity.com link (above): "The two men found Catholic, Jewish and Protestant scholars willing to come up with a version of the Commandments that incorporated all three traditions. (In different texts, the Commandments have different wordings, even different numberings.)" (I guess that might be a good way to tell if you have one of the movie promo versions (or deriviatives) in your town. The case before the Supreme Court from Texas is one of the movie promo pieces.)
• Scalia is, of course, only a strict constructionist when it suits. Or, to put it another way, a lying, hypocritical shitbag.
• I'm pleasantly surprised that they incorporated the three versions of the Commandments, but I'd still consider any version inappropriate and potentially offensive to people of other faiths, agnostics, or atheists. And they didn't "start out" as movie promotions. One of "the two men," E.J. Ruegemer,

  "was a juvenile court judge in Minnesota. He used to tell a story about a delinquent boy who came into his court and didn't know what the Ten Commandments were. Judge Ruegemer had an idea: print up copies for courtrooms and classrooms. His project, taken up by an organization called the Fraternal Order of Eagles, eventually got the attention of Cecil B. DeMille

  So it started out as an inappropriate attempt to put the Ten Commandments in courtrooms, and DeMille co-opted it to promote the movie. But I suppose if Yul Brynner said it's OK, I shouldn't object. By the way, the Friends of Eagles web site (sweet ironic URL) has a 1955 essay by DeMille on Why We Need the Ten Commandments.
• Dont' worry -- the fact that there has been relatively coverage of the SCOTUS case at this time doesn't mean much...the massive media coverage will occur when SCOTUS makes & releases their decision.
• I thought Scalia and those other dinosaurs were already dead. "Does this coverage imbalance bother anyone else?" Does this coverage imbalance surprise anyone?
• I'm pleasantly surprised that they incorporated the three versions of the Commandments, but I'd still consider any version inappropriate and potentially offensive to people of other faiths, agnostics, or atheists I have a hard time believing "Thou shalt not steal" or "Honour thy father and thy mother" would be offensive to anyone, except to thieves and anyone who hates their pare--- Oh, wait, nevermind, I see the problem... I say screw it, don't put anything in a house of law except the law of the United States. When we all die, we'll find out who is right, and who is dead...
• I have a hard time believing "Thou shalt not steal" or "Honour thy father and thy mother" would be offensive to anyone, except to thieves and anyone who hates their pare--- Oh, wait, nevermind, I see the problem... What a closed-minded load of crap.
• I say screw it, don't put anything in a house of law except the law of the United States. I think that's an excellent idea.
• Exodus 20: 2 I am the LORD thy God, which have brought thee out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of bondage. is the only one I might have a problem with.
• f8x - there are other commandments, about not worshipping other Gods. The commandments are not universal to all religions; they explicitly exclude pantheists, polytheists and worshippers of other gods and goddesses, for instance. Perhaps if it had been only the Golden Rule involved, there might not have been such debate. But then the atheists would probably have had something to say.

• When we all die, we'll find out who is right, and who is dead...

  umm, i think i can call that one for you already. when we all die, we will by definition all be dead
• 20:5 Thou shalt not bow down thyself unto them, nor serve them: for I the Lord thy God am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children unto the third and fourth generation of them that hate me I voted for the other guy.