Lance Walnau: What Trump said after the press left the Evangelical leaders' dinner

[tulc]

(snip)The 10 commandments plaques are merely historical, and most have been in buildings for decades if not centuries.

This particular building has had it since April of this year.
https://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo...-new-ten-commandments-monument-at-its-capitol
So it's hardly historical in this particular case.

Why remove them now?

Why did they erect one in this case? Well...other then to play to this particular state Senators base of course. If he feels so strongly about this why not put it up in his back yard instead and invite his constituents to come visit it there any time they felt the need for a "10 Commandments" fix? Problem solved.

They no more establish a state religion now than they did when installed.

Then why have a problem when people want to install a Baphomet statue next to it?
tulc(is just wondering)

 

[ItIsFinished!]

Some Christian groups think they have more rights than other groups, such as Muslims, gays, or other groups.

Can you provide information as to what Christian groups think they have more rights then others?
I am interested in knowing.
It would only be appropriate to provide such information with said accusation.
Thank you.

 

[Yarddog]

Can you provide information as to what Christian groups think they have more rights then others?
I am interested in knowing.
It would only be appropriate to provide such information with said accusation.
Thank you.

Do you belong to a church which believes that their men and women have the right to marry while same sex couples shouldn't?

 

[jgarden]

1John 1:5-10

5 This then is the message which we have heard of him, and declare unto you, that God is light, and in him is no darkness at all.

6 If we say that we have fellowship with him, and walk in darkness, we lie, and do not the truth:

7 But if we walk in the light, as he is in the light, we have fellowship one with another, and the blood of Jesus Christ his Son cleanseth us from all sin.

8 If we say that we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us.

9 If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just to forgive us our sins, and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness.

10 If we say that we have not sinned, we make him a liar, and his word is not in us.
***************************************************************
Lance Walnau: What Trump said after the press left the Evangelical leaders' dinner

Surely evangelical leaders can find somebody far more deserving to receive their political endorsement than a President whose public pronouncements on the need to seek God's forgiveness from sin, makes Christ out to be a "liar" - according to 1 John 5:10!

 

[The Barbarian]

Surely evangelical leaders can find somebody far more deserving to receive their political endorsement than a President whose public pronouncements on the need to seek God's forgiveness from sin, makes Christ out to be a "liar" - according to 1 John 5:10!

How many evangelical leaders have claimed to be Christian, and at the same time, have lived scandalously immoral lives, which they attempted to hide from their followers?

Trump is their ideal.

 

[RestoreTheJoy]

This particular building has had it since April of this year.
https://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo...-new-ten-commandments-monument-at-its-capitol
So it's hardly historical in this particular case.


Why did they erect one in this case? Well...other then to play to this particular state Senators base of course. If he feels so strongly about this why not put it up in his back yard instead and invite his constituents to come visit it there any time they felt the need for a "10 Commandments" fix? Problem solved.


Then why have a problem when people want to install a Baphomet statue next to it?
tulc(is just wondering)

Sure, that particular one was replaced this year when some nut job decided to run over it because it offended him. But most of them have been longstanding.

From your article:
"Backers of the monument say it's meant to copy a Ten Commandments monument in Texas that stands on the grounds of the state Capitol — and that does not run afoul of the U.S. Constitution, the Supreme Court ruled in 2005.


The high court justices said the Texas monument depicted the commandments in a historical, not purely religious, context. In Arkansas, Rapert said he agrees.

"The Ten Commandments are displayed in the United States Supreme Court," Rapert said in a recent Facebook posting about the Arkansas monument. "We believe it's totally acceptable, and it's right and true to remind people about the historical and moral foundation of law."

 

[RestoreTheJoy]

Some Christian groups think they have more rights than other groups, such as Muslims, gays, or other groups.

What additional rights would those be?

 

[RestoreTheJoy]

True also of Buddhist, Muslim, etc. writings. All historical.



Because if you give a favor to one religion, the Bill of Rights requires you do it for all of them. Your particular religion has no preferred status.

This is why Roy Whatsisname lost his job as Chief Justice. He ran head-on into the Constitution.

The Roy Moore case would have gone the other way, had he not unilaterally decided to place a monument in a public building without permission.

Additionally, Moore acknowledged an explicit theistic intent in placing the monument, agreeing that the monument "reflects the sovereignty of God over the affairs of men" and "acknowledge God's overruling power over the affairs of men".

On November 18, 2002, District Court Judge Myron H. Thompson held the monument violated the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution:

If all Chief Justice Moore had done were to emphasize the Ten Commandments' historical and educational importance... or their importance as a model code for good citizenship ... this court would have a much different case before it. But the Chief Justice did not limit himself to this; he went far, far beyond. He installed a two-and-a-half ton monument in the most prominent place in a government building, managed with dollars from all state taxpayers, with the specific purpose and effect of establishing a permanent recognition of the 'sovereignty of God,' the Judeo-Christian God, over all citizens in this country, regardless of each taxpaying citizen's individual personal beliefs or lack thereof. To this, the Establishment Clause says no."[1]

From Wiki. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glassroth_v._Moore


The Ten Commandments have been in all sorts of buildings since the beginning. Our judicial system is created on Judeo-Christian heritage including the 10 Commandments, except the ones we have excised now, in our ever-so-sophisticated era (like that pesky Honoring God, Remembering the Sabbath, and eschewing adultery stuff).

There is no establishment of religion occurring in the mere existence of an historical monument. Let's say we are in Utah and there is a statue of Joseph Smith on some grounds used for the public (as there is, in the Joseph Smith Memorial Building in Salt Lake City). He is merely an important historical figure in the area. There is absolutely no establishment of religion by permitting his statue.

Now, if the government forces everyone in the area to be a Mormon, you have a case.

 

[Yarddog]

What additional rights would those be?

As I have said, some believe that only heterosexuals can marry while gays and lesbians cannot. Some believe minorities are not equals, etc...

 

[The Barbarian]

The Roy Moore case would have gone the other way, had he not unilaterally decided to place a monument in a public building without permission.

Doesn't seem like it.

Additionally, Moore acknowledged an explicit theistic intent in placing the monument, agreeing that the monument "reflects the sovereignty of God over the affairs of men" and "acknowledge God's overruling power over the affairs of men".

Like every other attempt to do this. Moore didn't lie very well, that's all.

 

[RestoreTheJoy]

As I have said, some believe that only heterosexuals can marry while gays and lesbians cannot. Some believe minorities are not equals, etc...

Anyone can and could always marry, biblically, given the age of consent, and sound mind - and not already married, of course. That's complete nonsense to say only certain people were permitted to marry - or to say, in an unrelated vein - that minorities are not equals.

All men and all women - so all humans - are equals. Period.

Marriage occurs only between a man and a woman though. If some choose not to marry, but have other relationships, no one stops them. No one ever prevented anyone from marrying an appropriate partner. You can't marry someone else's spouse, or someone underage, or someone who isn't mentally competent - nor (until now) someone who isn't the complementary gender.

That wasn't good enough but no law changes God's standards.

 

[RestoreTheJoy]

Doesn't seem like it.


Like every other attempt to do this. Moore didn't lie very well, that's all.

That's what the Court said. The basis he established wasn't historical.

 

[Yarddog]

Anyone can and could always marry, biblically, given the age of consent, and sound mind - and not already married, of course.

That is incorrect. Gay or Lesbians haven't been able to get legally married, in the US, until the past few years.

That's complete nonsense to say only certain people were permitted to marry

No, that was the law. Even after the laws against same sex marriage were struck down, a county clerk in Kyle refused to issue marriage licenses to gays.

- or to say, in an unrelated vein - that minorities are not equals.

I think that thinking like that is nonsense as well but it is also fact that some groups think that way.

All men and all women - so all humans - are equals. Period.

I agree and haven't said anything different.

No one ever prevented anyone from marrying an appropriate partner.

That wasn't good enough but no law changes God's standards.

The point wasn't God's standard. It was what is legal in the US. But thanks. You proved my point wasn't the nonsense that you claimed.

 

[Catholic Values Voter]

That is incorrect. Gay or Lesbians haven't been able to get legally married, in the US, until the past few years.


No, that was the law. Even after the laws against same sex marriage were struck down, a county clerk in Kyle refused to issue marriage licenses to gays.

I think that thinking like that is nonsense as well but it is also fact that some groups think that way.

I agree and haven't said anything different.



The point wasn't God's standard. It was what is legal in the US. But thanks. You proved my point wasn't the nonsense that you claimed.

Why are you arguing in favor of gay marriage? God clearly says that it is an "abomination." To take the side of unrepentant sinners is never a good thing.

 

[Yarddog]

Why are you arguing in favor of gay marriage?

I'm not arguing in favor of gay marriage and if certain people had been keeping up with the posts that would be clear.