The Need For Christian Symbolism on Government Property

[Profound Realization]

Because they violate the constitution according to the SCOTUS. They are endorsing Christianity, which violates the establishment clause.

In what ways do you perceive the following mentionings as endorsing “Christianity:”

1. Did you know there is a bible in the cornerstone of the Washington monument?

“Atheists,” and anyone are equal to read a “bible.” Not exclusive to “Christianity.”

2. That there is scripture in the capitol building?

“Atheists” and anyone are equal to read “scripture.” Not exclusive to “Christianity.”

3. Statue of Moses on the supreme court building?

“Moses” is Moses, and not exclusive to “Christianity.” “Atheists” can read or study on Moses. Not exclusive to “Christianity.”

4. That both the House and Senate chambers prominently display "In God we trust" in their chambers?

Not exclusive to “Christianity.”

5. The ten commandments can be found on over a half dozen public buildings in Washington?

Not exclusive to “Christianity.”

6. Scripture at the Lincoln memorial?

Not exclusive to “Christianity.”

7. 2 Huge bible's are on display at the library of congress?

Not exclusive to “Christianity.”

Of the others mentioned, like the “Christmas” tree is not exclusive to “Christianity.”

I believe that the nativity scene was also settled by Congress a while back establishing that its not an exclusive religious symbol but rather ceremonial deism, and does not mean anything exclusive.

 

[Profound Realization]

Hey, if you want to ask another question make your own thread. The question in this one is

Why do the religious, the vast majority being Christians, need these symbols of their faith on secular pieces of property?


Of course not, because you have no conception of Separation of Church and State.



In my best Gomer Pyle voice: "Surprise!" "Surprise!" "Surprise!"



If that's the context he appears in, with other law-givers, then I have no problem.



Hey, give him credit for at least quoting an American document.

.

Makes one wonder, doesn't it.

.​

Implying the word, “need” is misleading. Nobody “needs” symbols.

Symbols aren’t exclusive to “Christianity”

The Bible is the Bible and not exclusive to “Christianity.” Surely, you have read from it, no?

 

[Rational Agnostic]

The rich don't like Jesus anymore than the porn addicts....

Actually, studies indicate that religious men are more likely to compulsively view porn than atheists.

 

[Brickjectivity]

I guess Homer Simpson is in line for the next influential figure. "0)

Don't be surprised when that happens, and don't complain to me.

 

[leibowde84]

Take a look at all the violence was being done after the election's not one time did obama or Hillary or the DNC Condemn those actions. Which were against the Constitution to protest Peacefully.

What "violence" are you referring to specifically? And, what do you mean by "against the constitution to protest peacefully? That doesn't seem to make any sense, but it might just be a typo.

How's about letting Illegal immigrants come here, which was against the Constitution, They were to vetted before entering here.
But the democrates went right over the Constitution just to get their votes.

No one let any illegal immigrants come in. They sneak into the country, "illegally". If Obama let them in, they wouldn't be "illegal immigrants", now would they? And, Obama deported more illegal immigrants than any other President before him. So, the myth that he was "letting illegal immigrants come in and destroy the country", couldn't be more wrong. But, I'm open to evidence to the contrary.

You hear about all this collusion over Russia, but nothing said, how democrate Ted Kennedy went to Russia to try and get them involved in our elections back in 1983.
And what about bill clinton himself, went to Russia to Dodge the draft back 70's

Can you provide a source for this? I haven't heard of this, but it certainly could be true.

What about just last year while Obama was still president AG John Kerry went to Kenya Africa got involved in their elections.

Please provide a source/evidence to back up this claim.

What about Obama getting involved in Israel elections.

Evidence?

Which goes directly against our laws. That we are not to get involved in other countries elections.
But Obama did anyway.

There is no law that says we cannot get involved in other countries elections. Your claim here is false.

 

[leibowde84]

Show as to when in the Constitution where it is stated Separation of Church and State.

The Constitution has the Establishment Clause, and the Supreme Court has interpreted it to forbid endorsement or favoritism by government.

 

[Faithofchristian]

You may find this informative

Your video was block, for to much strong language and violence.

What "violence" are you referring to specifically? And, what do you mean by "against the constitution to protest peacefully? That doesn't seem to make any sense, but it might just be a typo.

No one let any illegal immigrants come in. They sneak into the country, "illegally". If Obama let them in, they wouldn't be "illegal immigrants", now would they? And, Obama deported more illegal immigrants than any other President before him. So, the myth that he was "letting illegal immigrants come in and destroy the country", couldn't be more wrong. But, I'm open to evidence to the contrary.

Can you provide a source for this? I haven't heard of this, but it certainly could be true.

Please provide a source/evidence to back up this claim.

Evidence?
There is no law that says we cannot get involved in other countries elections. Your claim here is false.

The Constitution guarantees the right to a peaceful assembly. But when people goes out Destroying other people's Property and hurting people that is not a peaceful assembly.
You say, there is no law that says we can not get involved in other countries elections.
But yet when they get involved in our elections, that's a different story Right.
Now where's the common sense in that at.

 

[Faithofchristian]

What "violence" are you referring to specifically? And, what do you mean by "against the constitution to protest peacefully? That doesn't seem to make any sense, but it might just be a typo.

No one let any illegal immigrants come in. They sneak into the country, "illegally". If Obama let them in, they wouldn't be "illegal immigrants", now would they? And, Obama deported more illegal immigrants than any other President before him. So, the myth that he was "letting illegal immigrants come in and destroy the country", couldn't be more wrong. But, I'm open to evidence to the contrary.

Can you provide a source for this? I haven't heard of this, but it certainly could be true.

Please provide a source/evidence to back up this claim.
Evidence?

There is no law that says we cannot get involved in other countries elections. Your claim here is false.[/QUOTE/]

Those Sanctuary cities were full of Illegal immigrants,

What "violence" are you referring to specifically? And, what do you mean by "against the constitution to protest peacefully? That doesn't seem to make any sense, but it might just be a typo.

No one let any illegal immigrants come in. They sneak into the country, "illegally". If Obama let them in, they wouldn't be "illegal immigrants", now would they? And, Obama deported more illegal immigrants than any other President before him. So, the myth that he was "letting illegal immigrants come in and destroy the country", couldn't be more wrong. But, I'm open to evidence to the contrary.

Can you provide a source for this? I haven't heard of this, but it certainly could be true.

Please provide a source/evidence to back up this claim.

Evidence?
There is no law that says we cannot get involved in other countries elections. Your claim here is false.

Ok, So in your book it's ok to get involved in other countries elections, But other countries can not get involved in ours.

Don't you think that's being a Two face hypocrite.

Back after the elections, there was so much violence protesting going on.

About the Illegal immigrants, guess you must have been watching the Fake News Media.which editing alot so that people didn't know what exactly was happening.

But yet democrates just can't seem to let it go. Still trying after 11 Months to Impeach Trump.

I am sure glad that I am not no longer a Democrate, after 45 years of being a supporter of democrates, I woke my act up to their Criminal of Corruption.

But it takes some people a little longer to realize just how Corrupted the mainstream fake news media and democrates really are.

Democrates are nothing but bunch of Spoiled brat kids. That can't get their way on things oh Wah,Wah.

 

[SkepticThinker]

Yeah, Your Right about that.
That's exactly what the democrates did for 8 years by Obama. Violated the Constitution in every way they could.
To try and bring about a Dictatorship Government.

Pardon?

 

[DavidFirth]

In another post the following questions were asked.

1. Did you know there is a bible in the cornerstone of the Washington monument?
2. That there is scripture in the capitol building?
3. Statue of Moses on the supreme court building?
4. That both the House and Senate chambers prominently display "In God we trust" in their chambers?
5. The ten commandments can be found on over a half dozen public buildings in Washington?
6. Scripture at the Lincoln memorial?
7. 2 Huge bible's are on display at the library of congress?​

(I didn't bother to check any of them, but assume they're true.)

Besides the above mentioned items, "In god we trust" also appears on all our currency.

At Christmas we have a U.S. Capitol Christmas Tree

Nativity scenes are frequently erected on public property

The Ten Commandments are allowed on some government properties

While it might surprise some RF members, I'm not concerned with the legality of any of these, although I do question it. What I'm more interested in is the "why." Why do the religious, the vast majority being Christians, need these symbols of their faith on secular pieces of property? Would they forget they trust in their god if the words didn't appear on our quarters, nickles, and dimes? Is it not enough that their church has a nativity scene during Christmas? Are there not enough Christmas trees standing around town and on private property that one needs to be erected on the Capitol lawn? And what purpose does the display of the Ten Commandments serve "on over a half dozen public buildings in Washington?"

I know Christians believe these displays of their faith are quite appropriate, but what is this incredible need for them?

Why is it necessary to include the words "In God We Trust" on all our currency?

Why is it necessary that representations of Christmas be erected on public property?

Why is it necessary that images from the Old Testament appear on our government buildings?

And if they're not necessary then why do we allow them? Aren't churches and the homes of their parishioners adequate?


And PLEASE, no This is a Christian nation or America was founded on Christian principles therefore . . . . . If these are your best replies then save yourself the effort and don't bother posting.

.

You could move to Iran or Pakistan. They don't have any of these "problems."

 

[ChristineM]

Your video was block, for to much strong language and violence.


The Constitution guarantees the right to a peaceful assembly. But when people goes out Destroying other people's Property and hurting people that is not a peaceful assembly.
You say, there is no law that says we can not get involved in other countries elections.
But yet when they get involved in our elections, that's a different story Right.
Now where's the common sense in that at.

No, not for too much strong language and violence, it's a clip from a prime time tv quiz program that requires intelegence. Seems a pity that you have to use an untruth in your opening statement. Makes me wonder about what else you wrote.

 

[SkepticThinker]

You could move to Iran or Pakistan. They don't have any of these "problems."

How would that help anything??

 

[DavidFirth]

How would that help anything??

I was making a point. Contrary to popular belief there is freedom of religion in THIS country. If you don't like it, MOVE.

 

[ImmortalFlame]

I was making a point. Contrary to popular belief there is freedom of religion in THIS country. If you don't like it, MOVE.

Do you know what the establishment clause is?

 

[DavidFirth]

Do you know what the establishment clause is?

Don't care.

 

[leibowde84]

Can you provide the sources I asked for in my previous post?

The Constitution guarantees the right to a peaceful assembly. But when people goes out Destroying other people's Property and hurting people that is not a peaceful assembly.

That's true. Obviously, there are bad actors from both the left and the right in this respect, so it would be unfair to blame this on liberals alone.

You say, there is no law that says we can not get involved in other countries elections.
But yet when they get involved in our elections, that's a different story Right.
Now where's the common sense in that at.

The difference is the means by which elections are affected. With the Russians, we now know that they used illegal means to meddle in the 2016 election in an effort to help Trump win. The U.S. should not use illegal means to influence elections in other countries either. So, there really is no double standard. The method is what separates criminality, not just generally trying to affect elections.

 

[Faithofchristian]

I was making a point. Contrary to popular belief there is freedom of religion in THIS country. If you don't like it, MOVE.

Your Right, people can not handle Freedom of Religion nor can people handle Freedom of Speech.

People will do whatever they can do to discredit the founding fathers on this.

No Matter how one views the founding fathers they were a Religious People.

The founding fathers put forth the
1st Amendment to the Constitution to guarantee Religious People have the Free Exercise thereof. To Express their Religious beliefs.

John Adams also wrote, which all the founding fathers agreed with.

John Adams wrote ---> The Constitution was written for a Moral and Religious people and is unfit for any other people.

 

[leibowde84]

Ok, So in your book it's ok to get involved in other countries elections, But other countries can not get involved in ours.

Don't you think that's being a Two face hypocrite.

I never suggested this. This is nothing but a straw man, where you have fraudulently put words in my mouth. It is not OK for any government to use illegal means to influence elections in other countries. Whether it is Russia or the U.S. that is guilty of using illegal means (like Wikileaks, for example), it is not OK.

But, you still haven't provided any evidence that the claims you made about the Obama Administration are true. Do you have any?

About the Illegal immigrants, guess you must have been watching the Fake News Media.which editing alot so that people didn't know what exactly was happening.

Nope, just going by the facts. The numbers are very easy to find. During the first 7 years of Obama's presidency over 2.7 million illegal immigrants were deported. That was the most in over a century. So, believe it or not, it is a cold hard fact that Obama was pretty tough on deportations. Trump just lied about it, as he lies about almost everything (even things as small as the number of floors his buildings have). He is probably the most dishonest politician I've seen in my lifetime.

But yet democrates just can't seem to let it go. Still trying after 11 Months to Impeach Trump.

I am sure glad that I am not no longer a Democrate, after 45 years of being a supporter of democrates, I woke my act up to their Criminal of Corruption.

But it takes some people a little longer to realize just how Corrupted the mainstream fake news media and democrates really are.

Democrates are nothing but bunch of Spoiled brat kids. That can't get their way on things oh Wah,Wah.

Actually, this sounds like you are the one whining about the media holding Trump accountable for his words, lack of ability to make deals, and his lack of legislative action (executive orders don't really accomplish much, as they will most likely be reversed by the next President).

 

[Faithofchristian]

Can you provide the sources I asked for in my previous post?


That's true. Obviously, there are bad actors from both the left and the right in this respect, so it would be unfair to blame this on liberals alone.

The difference is the means by which elections are affected. With the Russians, we now know that they used illegal means to meddle in the 2016 election in an effort to help Trump win. The U.S. should not use illegal means to influence elections in other countries either. So, there really is no double standard. The method is what separates criminality, not just generally trying to affect elections.

How do you figure conservatives with Liberal democrates.
When in fact it was Liberal democrates who were out violently protesting burning Destroying other people's Property.

Why would conservatives be out protesting, When they Voted for Trump.

It was Liberal democrates who were violently protesting against Trump.
Go Figure

 

[leibowde84]

Your Right, people can not handle Freedom of Religion nor can people handle Freedom of Speech.

People will do whatever they can do to discredit the founding fathers on this.

No Matter how one views the founding fathers they were a Religious People.

The founding fathers put forth the
1st Amendment to the Constitution to guarantee Religious People have the Free Exercise thereof. To Express their Religious beliefs.

John Adams also wrote, which all the founding fathers agreed with.

John Adams wrote ---> The Constitution was written for a Moral and Religious people and is unfit for any other people.

John Adams also wrote that "the United States is in no way a Christian Nation".