You’ve made me wonder how Conservapedia is coming along with their rewriting of the Bible.
Do you think this is a purposeful attempt to sidestep the law? As in, “We get the ‘Ten Commandments’ cannot be in school but what we put in is different.”
I guess we’re well on the way to “Slavery was a historical fact in the early years of the republic, so therefore we should be able to keep slaves now.”
Yeah it’s been mentioned before, it’s sort of a genericized Protestant version apparently to not be attributed to one or another Bible translation.
Dont be ridiculous. But certainly schools can teach slavery was a thing- altho of course the Conservatives would rather it be forgotten.
There’s a direct slippery line from the Supreme Court’s bullshit decisions based on historical precedent and my hypothetical.
You can believe that there are folks (more than we’d like to imagine) who would welcome this scenario.
It’s still sectarian and biased in favor of Protestant Christianity. Conflict between Protestants and Catholics over which version of the Bible to use and which version of the Lords Prayer to say are a big part of why religion was removed in the first place. There were riots over this stuff in the 19th century. And of course the 10 Commandments are completely irrelevant to anyone outside the Abrahamic faiths.
Thanks!
I like how the Louisiana politicians’ version allows you to work on the Sabbath.
We can’t let God’s word stand in the way of Business, after all.
Depends on what you mean by this. Obviously, commandments like “Thou shalt not steal” aren’t irrelevant in the sense that nobody outside the Abrahamic faiths has a problem with stealing.
What is irrelevant is that prohibition’s special status as part of The Ten Commandments.
But then, it’s not clear to me why that list of ten should be so special to Christians (and Jews). It’s not as though we’d all be perfectly fine with stealing if The Ten Commandments didn’t tell us not to. It seems to me that it’s possible to be a good Christian or Jew without ascribing any special significance to the Ten Commandments as such.
In fact, from a strictly Christian point of view, it would make more sense to post “Love your neighbor as yourself” than to post the Ten Commandments.
Can we get Hobby Lobby to file an Amicus brief??
Deuteronomy 5: 13-14:
13 Six days thou shalt labour, and do all thy work:
14 But the seventh day is the sabbath of the Lord thy God: in it thou shalt not do any work, thou, nor thy son, nor thy daughter, nor thy manservant, nor thy maidservant, nor thine ox, nor thine ass, nor any of thy cattle, nor thy stranger that is within thy gates; that thy manservant and thy maidservant may rest as well as thou.
Why do Louisiana Republicans hate the bible? It clearly says that on the seventh day, being the Sabbath, Thou shalt not do any work.
Clear.
As.
Day.
It’s almost like they want to be able to pick and choose which parts of the Bible to believe, and which of the Ten Commandments to obey.
The way I understand the Sabbath commandment, it also prohibits requiring others to work on the Sabbath, which you’d arguably be doing if you go shopping, out to eat, etc.
Little known fact: Yahweh was the first Wobbly.
The bigger issue is that conservative logic is often like that of football fans who think that all you need to do to score is to throw deep on every play. They only apply the most surface logic.
If we force the Ten Commandments and prayer and Bibles on everyone, they will become more Christian.
The concept of indirect consequences or blowback never occurs to them. It’s like parents who ban their daughter from dating a certain guy, then are baffled when she in fact likes him even more now that it’s forbidden love.
Not sure if it has been linked to yet, but here is the text of the Louisiana law.
It’s a bit hilarious the effort they went into to justify this new religious requirement, obfuscating the supposed historical significance of the Ten Commandments with that of the Mayflower Compact, Declaration of Independence, and the Northwest Ordinance. This is followed by a requirement to display the Ten Commandments, and almost as an afterthought adding that schools may display the other documents along with the required Ten Commandments.
They also make a point of specifying the exact text of the Ten Commandments, but make no effort to do the same with the other documents. The text they used was from a random stone monument placed on the grounds of the state capitol building in Texas that the Supreme Court ruled in a narrow 5-4 decision did not violate the establishment clause in a 2005 case. Of course the Supreme Court was ruling on whether or not the monument could permissibly be there or not, not on the text itself, but I’m sure that nuance escaped the Louisiana legislators.
So apparently the version that is going to get posted all over Louisiana is the version that a random stonecutter could fit on his monument. You can’t make this sh*t up.
I love that. The bill says nothing about accompanying text. Here’s the full bill:.
The meat of the bill is as follows:
Each public school governing authority and the governing authority of each nonpublic school that receives state funds shall display the Ten Commandments in each building it uses and classroom in each school under its jurisdiction. The nature of the display shall be determined by each governing authority with a minimum requirement that the Ten Commandments shall be displayed on a poster or framed document that is at least eleven inches by fourteen inches. The text of the Ten Commandments shall be the central focus of the poster or framed document and shall be printed in a large, easily readable font.
There’s nothing that says it must be prominently displayed. It just needs to meet the 11x14 minimum size and have ambiguously large easily readable font. I think other states that tried this stunt specified that it must be in English, but that’s not the case here. So although it must be displayed, I don’t see anything that says it can’t be hung on the wall behind the coat rack or a potted plant.
Actually, you linked to the older “engrossed” version. The version that was sent to the governor was the final “enrolled” version that I linked to in my earlier post:
Is there any difference in the relevant text?