APP - Homosexuality Now, Pedophilia Next

Damocles said:
Religious dogma in any form is religious dogma even if somebody makes them laws.



In the US we are not allowed to make laws based on your religious dogma.

You attempt to again distract from your lack of knowledge of the law. It is inane to say that the law is based on your bible verses. If such were the case Texas sodomy laws would never have been struck down.
Click to expand...

Building on your straw man will only make your argument weaker.
 
Southern Man said:
Building on your straw man will only make your argument weaker.
Click to expand...
Repeating weak distractions only underlines your lack of knowledge and lack of acceptance of the societal agreement we call the Constitution. It specifically points out your total lack of knowledge on how it has been applied in history, and what it means when the government cannot prefer "religion to irreligion" as decided by the SCOTUS.
 
WinterBorn said:
An article in the World Net Daily from a pastor claiming a conspiracy about the friezes at the SCOTUS building?

No, now why would I attack that. :rofl:

I don't have to attack that. It is ridiculous.
Click to expand...

Attack the actual evidence now, dummy:

courthandwriting%20(2).jpg


courthandwriting2%20(2).jpg
 
Southern Man said:
It figures you would repeat that lie. http://www.wnd.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=54221

No doubt you attack my source now. LOL
Click to expand...

But let me get this straight, the papers in the SCOTUS archives are fakes. And with the great conservatives presidents we have had, the conservative justices they have appointed, the large number of christians in so many branches of the federal gov't, you are going to believe this preacher discovered this huge conspiracy. And when he published it in Feb of 2007, no major news agency or conservative media figure has picked up the story??
 
Southern Man said:
It proves the architects original intentions: Ten Commandants, not ten amendments.
Click to expand...
What are you talking about? There were 12 Amendments offered in the Bill of rights, the last ratified May of 1992 was submitted along with the other 11 Amendments in the Bill of rights on September 25, 1789. Upon ratification it became the 27th Amendment, but it was one of the original Bill of Rights, it just took a "little" longer to get ratified. There is one still pending, the first offered...

Article the first... After the first enumeration required by the first article of the Constitution, there shall be one Representative for every thirty thousand, until the number shall amount to one hundred, after which the proportion shall be so regulated by Congress, that there shall be not less than one hundred Representatives, nor less than one Representative for every forty thousand persons, until the number of Representatives shall amount to two hundred; after which the proportion shall be so regulated by Congress, that there shall not be less than two hundred Representatives, nor more than one Representative for every fifty thousand persons.
Click to expand...
 
Damocles said:
What are you talking about? There were 12 Amendments offered in the Bill of rights, the last ratified May of 1992 was submitted along with the other 11 Amendments in the Bill of rights on September 25, 1789. Upon ratification it became the 27th Amendment, but it was one of the original Bill of Rights, it just took a "little" longer to get ratified. There is one still pending, the first offered...
Click to expand...
Apparently something much different than you are talking about. I'm talking about what the tablets on the pediment and doors of the US Supreme Court Building signify. According to the architect, they are the Ten Commandments.
:facepalm:
 
Damocles said:
What are you talking about? There were 12 Amendments offered in the Bill of rights, the last ratified May of 1992 was submitted along with the other 11 Amendments in the Bill of rights on September 25, 1789. Upon ratification it became the 27th Amendment, but it was one of the original Bill of Rights, it just took a "little" longer to get ratified. There is one still pending, the first offered...
Click to expand...

The original Bill of Rights was the first 10 amendments. And this is what the tablets on the doors of the SCOTUS are said to be referring to, not the 10 comandments.

A single preacher has printed an article saying there is a huge conspiracy to remove the 10 comandments from their place of importance as the basis for our laws.

The SCOTUS website, Snopes, and every other reference piece I can find says otherwise.
 
Southern Man said:
It proves the architects original intentions: Ten Commandants, not ten amendments.
Click to expand...

It proves nothing of the kind. If it were actual proof, the SCOTUS information site and Snopes would have changed their public information.
 
Southern Man said:
Apparently something much different than you are talking about. I'm talking about what the tablets on the pediment and doors of the US Supreme Court Building signify. According to the architect, they are the Ten Commandments.
Click to expand...
And they are there along with secular themed historical references to laws.

You mentioned Amendments, I assumed since you were talking about 10 of them you were under the mistaken impression that the Bill of Rights was offered as only 10 Amendments, it wasn't.

It doesn't really matter what frieze is on the side of a building, what matters is whether they are allowed to enact law based on your religious dogma, they aren't. They are in fact incapable of making laws that represent either your dogma or that of the "irreligious" based on previous SCOTUS rulings.
 
WinterBorn said:
It proves nothing of the kind. If it were actual proof, the SCOTUS information site and Snopes would have changed their public information.
Click to expand...

if he going off of the friezes as intent...then it appears we are bound under the quran and islamic law:

Muhammad (c. 570 - 632) The Prophet of Islam. He is depicted holding the Qur’an. The Qur’an provides the primary source of Islamic Law. Prophet Muhammad’s teachings explain and implement Qur’anic principles.
Click to expand...

http://www.supremecourtus.gov/about/north&southwalls.pdf
 
Damocles said:
And they are there along with secular themed historical references to laws.

You mentioned Amendments, I assumed since you were talking about 10 of them you were under the mistaken impression that the Bill of Rights was offered as only 10 Amendments, it wasn't.

It doesn't really matter what frieze is on the side of a building, what matters is whether they are allowed to enact law based on your religious dogma, they aren't. They are in fact incapable of making laws that represent either your dogma or that of the "irreligious" based on previous SCOTUS rulings.
Click to expand...

I was aware that two original amendments weren't ratified. Solitary claims that the tablets on the doors signify the Ten Amendments, which is ludicrous. Thanks for clearing that up.

You are digressing from the point, which is that morality is the basis of many of our laws, and morality is defined in the Bible. The Ten Commandments on the SC building pediment and doors signifies this.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top