Louisiana Requires All Public Classrooms to Display Ten Commandments

An 11 X 14 inch poster is not going to damage anyone...
So why not put up posters depicting a gay pride march, a performer at a drag show, a mixed-race couple holding hands (extra points if they are the same sex), pagans celebrating Halloween around a bonfire, Muslims on their prayer rugs, people dancing at a Diwali festival?

You know the answer. You're only playing contrarian here because 1) it's what you do for attention, and 2) it's YOUR alleged religion being promoted.
 
Agreed. It's favoritism toward one religion unless all religions are offered the same access.

Would it be okay to teach a "Religions of the world" class? Of course. Just as long as all religions are treated and covered equally.
There’s not enough school year to teach all religions.
 
Both Stalin and Mao tried to stamp out religion and replace it with the State. China still does try to stamp out religions they don't like.
I think the inspiration probably goes back to Karl Marx, who believed a society could be designed on the principles of scientific materialism, and that religious belief and practice was poisonous to the collective welfare of the proletariat .
 
Agreed. It's favoritism toward one religion unless all religions are offered the same access.

Would it be okay to teach a "Religions of the world" class? Of course. Just as long as all religions are treated and covered equally.
If the real goal of posting a particular religion's list of rules in the classroom is to instill moral behavior, why not try this instead? Most religions have some version of the Golden Rule. Why not post these versions with an attribute after each showing where it came from?

OTOH if the purpose of posting one religion's set of rules is to promote that religion, which this seems to be, it is clearly a grandstanding stunt meant to generate controversy, donations to the party promulgating it, and is clearly unconstitutional.
 
I think the inspiration probably goes back to Karl Marx, who believed a society could be designed on the principles of scientific materialism, and that religious belief and practice was poisonous to the collective welfare of the proletariat .
Strong churches posed a threat to their power. It was that simple. It wasn’t about their strong atheistic beliefs at all.
 
There’s not enough school year to teach all religions.
Our h.s. offered a World Religions semester course. I didn't take it but a couple friends did. They covered the world's major faiths, mostly as a history course that touched on the tenets of the various beliefs as well as how they began and how they're practiced today. Always regretted not taking that course. Our pastor though taught it in confirmation class, along with the Lutheran dogma.
 
Our h.s. offered a World Religions semester course. I didn't take it but a couple friends did. They covered the world's major faiths, mostly as a history course that touched on the tenets of the various beliefs as well as how they began and how they're practiced today. Always regretted not taking that course. Our pastor though taught it in confirmation class, along with the Lutheran dogma.
We were required to take two semesters of theology in college. Enjoyed them a lot. I pretty much do some study on religion, especially Christianity, daily.

Amazing, the difference between what we were taught versus reality.
 
We were required to take two semesters of theology in college. Enjoyed them a lot. I pretty much do some study on religion, especially Christianity, daily.

Amazing, the difference between what we were taught versus reality.
Did you attend a Christian college? What was covered in a theology class?
 
Did you attend a Christian college? What was covered in a theology class?
Notre Dame. So yeah, pretty fucking Catholic. Although, in the 70s, pretty liberal.

I took an Old Testament class and another that was entitled “Theology As Biography”. We studied various people and their theological beliefs through their biographies. I recall reading Malcom X, maybe Gandhi. The others I have forgotten.
 

Moral moron 💩


moral-moron-v0-52ehgcb5t38d1.jpeg
 
Strong churches posed a threat to their power. It was that simple. It wasn’t about their strong atheistic beliefs at all.
I don't know why that is such a key distinction. The Catholic Church also persecuted heretical moments, Protestants, and pagans because they were viewed as threats to the authority of church

The Bolsheviks were not just eliminating political rivals while remaining ideologically ambivalent and neutral about religious belief. They could easily believe two different and non-contradictory things at the same time: that the Church was both a rival source of authority, and they also thought that religious belief/mysticism were dangerous to the welfare of the masses and to the proper development of a scientific atheistic communist society.
 
Freedom of Speech. As long as all are allowed the same rights, it's not a problem.

That said, since the state/county pay 92% of the bills, it's up to them to decide yea or nay on allowing the content as long as it fits under the Constitution.
A high school football coach leading a prayer in the locker room, or a history teacher posting the ten commandments is not the hill I'm going to stake my flag to die on.

But I think this is really a stealth strategy to promote Christian doctrine, not some innocuous matter of protected free speech
 
Our h.s. offered a World Religions semester course. I didn't take it but a couple friends did. They covered the world's major faiths, mostly as a history course that touched on the tenets of the various beliefs as well as how they began and how they're practiced today. Always regretted not taking that course. Our pastor though taught it in confirmation class, along with the Lutheran dogma.
I don't remember a class like that in high school, but it is probably offered universally in universities.
 
If the real goal of posting a particular religion's list of rules in the classroom is to instill moral behavior, why not try this instead? Most religions have some version of the Golden Rule. Why not post these versions with an attribute after each showing where it came from?

OTOH if the purpose of posting one religion's set of rules is to promote that religion, which this seems to be, it is clearly a grandstanding stunt meant to generate controversy, donations to the party promulgating it, and is clearly unconstitutional.
You're absolutely right. MAGA morons would never post the eightfold path of the Bhudda, or the five vows of Jainism alongside the Decalogue because this is not an effort to promote universal standards of morality, it's intent is to provoke a court case in the hope conservative justices will privilege Christianity
 
We were required to take two semesters of theology in college. Enjoyed them a lot. I pretty much do some study on religion, especially Christianity, daily.

Amazing, the difference between what we were taught versus reality.
(y) I decided years ago that I couldn't really understand history, culture, philosophy, ethics, anthropology, even art and literature to some extent, without having a grasp of world religions.
 
(y) I decided years ago that I couldn't really understand history, culture, philosophy, ethics, anthropology, even art and literature to some extent, without having a grasp of world religions.
Because you only care about religion.
 
While the Commandments are religious, they have an undeniable historical meaning. Simply having religious content or promoting a message consistent with a religious doctrine does not run afoul of the Establishment Clause. See, e.g., Lynch v. Donnelly, supra, at 680, 687.

Residents and others challenged the inclusion of the creche as a violation of the First Amendment's Establishment Clause. In a 5-4 decision, the Supreme Court rejected the challenge—ruling that the religious display on public property didn't violate the Constitution because the display also served a secular purpose
Where did you plagiarize this post from?
 
Back
Top