G.o.d (((((((((athiest))))))))))

[ilw]

lol I like the jazz one

[Biggles]

Clocker

Thanks

I am not really sure I understand.

Why would a stone designed to give prominence to one specific religion be placed in a courtroom that would presumably deal with cases covering all religions? Surely this would breach the separation of state and religion? Would it be permissible for say a judge who is a Mormon to put up a stone with Mormom texts; and so on through the many religions of the US? I think the judge in question may have put the lid back on the can before the worms got out.

Curious one though.

[clocker]

Originally posted by Biggles@13 September 2003 - 17:56
Clocker

Thanks

I am not really sure I understand.

Why would a stone designed to give prominence to one specific religion be placed in a courtroom that would presumably deal with cases covering all religions? Surely this would breach the separation of state and religion? Would it be permissible for say a judge who is a Mormon to put up a stone with Mormom texts; and so on through the many religions of the US? I think the judge in question may have put the lid back on the can before the worms got out.

Curious one though.

You are not the only one who is confused, Biggles.

It was a judge who wanted to keep the stone there. In fact he's the one who commissioned/paid for it to begin with.

In the deep South this is a good way to get votes.

Now he gets to campaign on his platform of "keeping God in America" or some such bushwa.

We ARE an odd country...

[imnotanaddict]

Originally posted by Biggles@13 September 2003 - 23:40
Iamnotanaddict

Don't you think you are reading rather too much into the ruling of the judge?

What was the provenance of the stone and where was it situated?

If the primary feature of the stone was Christian text, was it placed in a Christian place of worship or was it in a public place designed to serve the needs of all creeds and colours?

If it was the latter has the judge not upheld your constitution by maintaining a separation of state and church - a primary feature of your political system?

I think rather than an article of faith in atheism it was possibly an attempt to prevent sectarianism - the scourge of many a state.

Perhaps if the stone is for a public place, it could be recarved with edicts of all faiths - from the Native Americans through the faiths of the Torah and on to Bhuddist, Hindu, New Age faiths and Humanism - thus showing that all faiths are equal under the constitution and the law.

However, if the stone was meant for a church then I concede perhaps you have a point.

Usually when I post something pertaining to a topic I also provide the link or address where I got it. This time, this article was sent to me by a friend that usually sends a lot of jokes. I should have mentioned this was not written by
me. Because this is a topic that has had some attention I posted it because its
semi-related. I don't mean to imply that I beleive in or even agree sometimes
with everything I post but think its good to have diversified views and opinions.
Or just something else to think about. I have many faults but plagiarism is not
one of them. oops.

[hobbes]

Originally posted by Biggles@14 September 2003 - 01:56
Clocker

Thanks

I am not really sure I understand.

Why would a stone designed to give prominence to one specific religion be placed in a courtroom that would presumably deal with cases covering all religions? Surely this would breach the separation of state and religion? Would it be permissible for say a judge who is a Mormon to put up a stone with Mormom texts; and so on through the many religions of the US? I think the judge in question may have put the lid back on the can before the worms got out.

Curious one though.

Biggles,

You have the name of a circus clown, but your posts are anything but silly. You have a very concise way of jumping through the hoops to the actual issue and explaining your view point without resorting to distortion, emotive language or personal insults.

As for your 2 posts on this thread, I would add:

"Yeah, what he said".




Clocker, I do not believe that judges are elected, but rather appointed. Judges are selected as favors to people who have supported a candidate. You don't even need a highschool diploma to be a judge, you simply need to go to "judge school" after your appointment.

Judges are not retained for quality of work, but rather if you buddy is re-elected . New party, new judges. There is no quality control in place and only the most aggregious are removed to save further embarassment.

Think about the next time you call that judge "your honor".

[hobbes]

I also wonder why we put our hand on the Bible when taking oath in a courtroom. If I do not abide by the Bible, am I obliged to tell the truth?

I personally think that we should all swear on our mothers' grave and if she is not dead, we should kill her, then swear on it, to show the court how seriously we take this honesty thing.

[clocker]

Hobbes,

I am amazed.
Of course judges are elected. At least in some states.

Bullsh*t link to prove point...

I agree with you on Mr. Biggles.

[hobbes]

Originally posted by clocker@14 September 2003 - 05:03
Hobbes,

I am amazed.
Of course judges are elected. At least in some states.

Bullsh*t link to prove point...

I agree with you on Mr. Biggles.

I guess my extrapolation was wrong. My information came to me from a friend who is an appointed Judge in the city of St. Louis.

I was a little stunned at her decription of the system. I am at least reassured that at higher levels of Judicial authority or in different states it is not such a back scratching experience.

But doesn't the President get to appoint people to the Supreme Court if a vacancy arises?

[Evil Gemini]

How can ppl believe in a religion when the bibles being changed all the time ? Like not long ago this gay preist decided that he will write his own version of the bible to suit him.

Imagine how much times this has happened to the bibles in different religions like WTF!!

The best religion to believe in is science because its all based on facts and thats the real truth.

If you asked me if i believe in a God i will have to say no but thats my opinion im not going to bash ppls beliefs.

If there is any hard core evidance then i might believe in god.

If there really is a god i am pissed of at him because of all the shit that is going on in the world. Like look at all this shit going on with the terrorists.

Why doesnt he come down and tell everyone whats the propper way to worship him and stop all this shit whats going on.

[clocker]

But doesn't the President get to appoint people to the Supreme Court if a vacancy arises?

Of course.

Not all judges are elected, in fact I think that this is more common at the lower levels.