Its almost comical how these old geezers take themselves so seriously! Man, I’m SO GLAD that I won’t be assaulted when I enter a courthouse! Heck, I wouldn’t even notice how hard the Supreme Court is working on our behalf, unless I read the news…imagine how much you could be harmed, if they had a plaque (with numbers from I to X)! So I guess some idiot judge in alabam will HAVE to remove his copy of the ten commandments…now its off to MORE IMPORTANT stuff, likemaking sure that cities don’t put up any Christmas decorations on city-owned land.
This is just so ludicrous…how much do we pay these morons,anyway? :smack:
Shouldn’t this be in the Pit? Also, what exactly should they be ruling on? They don’t start the cases, they just choose which ones to rule on.
So you don’t think that the practical issues of the separation between church and state are important enough to deserve close consideration by the nations highest court, just because some people and organizations perceive this separation is being encroached upon?
So where is that bright line for you where action would be warranted? It’s obviously not at 10 commandments statuary.
How about if the Judge has a copy of the 10 Commandments on the wall behind his chair on one side?
How about if he has a cross with Jesus on the wall?
How about if the Judge opens the proceedings with the Lord’s Prayer?
What if a Judge starts quoting scripture to justify a ruling?
What if the Judge lets all the Christians claiming repenstance attend a religious boot camp that only takes Christians. Everyone else goes directly to jail for the same offense.
Are we there yet? Where is your line?
Your honor, I motion to dismiss this case: that Number “10” on the wall has clouded your judgement! This is an endorsement of religion, which we cannot have!
Of course, there is a sculpture of the Greek goddes of wisdom holding scales…no problem with THAT religion! 
Because THAT religion is defunct. Doctors swear by Apollo, too, but I don’t think any of them (even Greek ones) seriously believes in the ancient Greek gods. Such references are cultural and historical, but not religious. On the other hand, I-X on the courthouse wall or Nativity scenes at city hall do refer to a living religion, and are inappropriate in official places. The Supremes were right on in these cases, IMNSHO.
And again, this really belongs in the Pit. It certainly is not mundain or pointless. But it has been argued to death in these boards.
I know that most Americans don’t give a damn about the Constitution and the Bill of Rights. I realize that many people feel that those documents simply don’t matter to their lives.
But it’s hard for me to take when the indifference or the ignorance of our most basic laws turns to ridicule. This doesn’t bode well for our country.
Well, Ralph, since we’re in MPSIMS I’ll just say that I must respectfully disagree with your proposition and leave it at that.
This has been debated to death already.
Someone here mentioned the idea of having the couthouse full of examples of historical law. Maybe a boulder with Hammurabi’s Law (?), and various other examples of traditional laws, perhaps all the ones that actually apply to our legal system (theft, perjury, stuff like that). It would make it feel a bit more like a ‘hall of justice’ but maybe I’m just having an idealistic fantasy about finding a way to make everyone happy
We are a very diverse group of people, but unfortunately the world around us is slow to adapt to that diversity. I know the concerns about separation of church and state.
Maybe they can just rub out the commandments that are no longer relevant to our legal system? Add in some legalspeak to the remaining ones to fill in all that extra space?
still pissed Moses lost that third tablet telling everyone not to act like smacktards
Ralph, in the interest of fighting (what appears to be massive) ignorance, I will point out that they only took the case because it was presented to them. The Supremes do not wander the countryside looking over law briefs and deciding, “hmmm. Let’s review this one.”
Now, since it has been brought to their attention, obviously by someone who shares your opinion (since people whose opinion you disdain have already won their case and had the little idol removed from the Court House), then it seems pretty funny to me to see you whining about the fact that the Supremes would accept that appeal, since it is only by their acceptance that you have any hope of imposing your opinion on the rest of the country.
Now, don’t you feel just a bit silly?
BTW, the OP probably refers to this:
Specifically, it’s taking on appeals from cases in Kentucky and Texas regarding such displays.
(BTW I would not read much into their refusal to help Moore; that is no longer a case about the commandments but about defying federal orders)
ralph, look: SCotUS either just got fed up with this going on every year, over and over, across the country, and have figured that taking on these two appeals will help them come out with some sort of ground rules that cuts down on this; or, thay saw something in these two cases that looks really unusual to them. They are not setting out of their own initiative to overturn jack. As a matter of fact, I make this prediction: the decision will have the net effect that the 10C’s can stay where they are in most cases. I dunno why are you upset they’re even bothering to consider it, if they didn’t then we would just keep having individual cases take up lower court dockets all over the land.
The guy in Alabama did not put the the 10 Commandments in the court house out of deep religious faith. He put it there to show boat and to get publicity for himself.
What a brave stand! I’m for Christianity!
Thinking that since it popular it can’t be wrong!
Oh and the constitution gives me freedom FROM religion. Specifically freedom FROM YOUR religion.
What’s the point of a carved stone slab that tells you not to make graven images? :dubious:
These arguments are fruitless as long as people refuse to understand the difference between laws, the strictures imposed by societies on themselves by common assent, and commandments, the dicta of some deity in which society or individuals may or may not believe. The Ten Commandments contain a few principles which are also codified in civil law pretty much everywhere (don’t kill, don’t steal, don’t testify falsely), a couple more which are accepted by most societies as guidelines (honor your parents, don’t screw somebody else’s wife), one thoughtcrime (don’t even think about wanting somebody else’s stuff), and four (count 'em – four) demands that you believe in a particular god ahead of any other, keep his sabbath, make no idols, and refrain from using his name profanely. A free people need laws. Only slaves accept commandments. Fortunately our Supreme Court has protected the laws from individuals and groups who would like to mold them to their own philosophy, and protected us from commandments. May it continue to do so.
Stop there.
Yes . . . yes it should.
Cajun Man
for the SDMB
They’re not completely defunct. However, they’ve become so iconic in Western society that all religious meaning has been stripped from them and they serve to represent an ideal to which to strive for, more than they do a particular religion.
It never ceases to amaze me how Christians will claim to be oppressed in this society, when they’re clearly not subject to the same kinds of persecutions people of various faiths in other lands have to endure simply because they don’t follow the state religion. Need I remind you that the punishment under the Taliban for preaching even a differing version of Islam than what the Taliban held were pretty fucking severe?
The Chief Justice makes $181,400 a year, associate Justices make $173,600 a year. And I don’t see the problem with the justices taking this case. The question, “Does a monument of the ten commandments on government propertyviolate the first amendment?”, whether you think it does or not, is a constitutional question, and therefore a fit subject for the Justices to rule on.
Thanks for the link. I sit corrected. Greek paganism is still funct. 
But, as you pointed out, the symbolism, at least in the US, has no religious significance. I hope your remarks about Christians were not directed to me. I haven’t been a Christian since I developed the faculty for critical reasoning. Nor any other religion for that matter.
Apollo? :dubious: Maybe you’re thinking of Asklepios?
Ralph: As Tom already noted, they’re only taking this case because some highly religious folks insist on putting their symbols in a prominent public place and are asking the SCotUS to affirm their actions. I’m gernerally supportive of the idea that the 1st amendment is not restrictive enough in its wording to ban religion from the public sphere. It does not mandate a complete seperation of Church and State, as much as people like to think that it does. But it does mandate that there be no law establishing a religion. The Ten Commandments, despite their historical significance, have AS THE VERY FIRST ITEM, a command to worship only the Hebrew/Christian God. That has no place in a court of law in the US. Sorry.