Quote:
Originally posted by Chato:
When the President is sworn to office, he swares on the bible in front of the entire country
Which is a personal preference of the incoming president. It is not part of the oath of office, as defined in the Constitution. He doesn't have to use a bible, and he doesn't have to swear - he can affirm (the are not the same thing). Does anyone honestly think that Lieberman, if he were to win, would use a bible? You're kidding yourself if you think he would.

Quote:
when we are called to testify under oath, we sware to God we'll tell the truth
Depends on where you are, apparently - someone said Maryland does not require that.

Quote:
on every American legal tender, "In God We Trust" is written on it
Which came about in the 1950s, not when the country was being started.

Quote:
and almost every single government office is closed for Christmas and many for Good Friday.
What government office closes on Good Friday? No federal offices do.

Quote:
For the most part, most everyone would agree with a majority of the 10 Commandments, regardless of their religious beliefs. Who does not believe we should not murder, or steal, or commit adultry for instance. Our laws are based on those beliefs. What part of the 10 Commandments do most people not agree with? Misusing the name of the Lord? Honoring your father and mother (any of you have children)? Give false testimony? Making yourself an idol? Coveting your neighbors house, or wife, or belongings?
What is really horrible about those? What is it about those that offend so many (or so few) people? Do you have any idea what our country would be like if those were not in place?
Commandments 1-3 have absolutely NO place in government. Commandment 4 is a personal issue. Commandments 5-8 affect other's lives. They are the ONLY ones you could argue any laws are based on. Commandments 9-10 could never be enacted into law in a capitalist society. (Going by the Catholic version)

Nothing is wrong with them, but what about people who do not believe these commandments - that is, people who are of another religion? Non-Christians, non-Jews. What about Hindus? Buddhists? Would anyone have a problem if some words from Buddhism were put in the court?

Quote:
Now thinking though, a person celebrating Christmas, who does not believe in Jesus Christ, is like a Communist celebrating July 4th.
That doesn't jibe. July 4th isn't a holiday for capitalism and democracy. It's a holiday commemorating Independence. Now, if you had said, "is like a Klan member celebrating MLK day"...

Quote:
But the thing is, we try too dang hard not to offend anyone. We seem to try so hard to especially not offend the 2% of the population, that we end up offending the vast majority. A few people are upset with the Pledge of Allegiance, so to satisfy those few people, we remove it from school, some people don't get hired because of their race, so affirmative action is implemented, which specifically is designed to be used as a quota, which causes more descrimination (but because it descriminates against a larger population, it's okay).
It's not a matter of people being offended. It's a matter of how the government and religion should not interact. Would the 10 Commandments in there offend me? Nope. But I know it shouldn't be in there, because it gives the implicit notion that Christianity is held higher in this country than other religions, which goes completely against one of the major reasons this country was founded.

I asked this before, and nobody answered...

If you owned a business, and your manager put a Wiccan monument in the lobby, what would you do? Even a crucifix on the wall - it may not be what everyone in the office believes, but it sure makes it look like it does.
_________________________
"Nature has constituted utility to man the standard and test of virtue. Men living in different countries, under different circumstances, different habits and regimens, may have different utilities; the same act, therefore, may be useful and consequently virtuous in one country which is injurious and vicious in another differently circumstanced" - Thomas Jefferson, moral relativist