A New and Improved Ten Commandments

  • Wanna Join? New users you can now register lightning fast using your Facebook or Twitter accounts.
May 8, 2002
4,729
0
0
48
#1
http://www.newsmax.com/archives/ic/2003/8/28/83743.shtml
Thursday Aug. 28, 2003; 8:31 a.m. EDT
A New and Improved Ten Commandments

Now that Alabama Chief Justice Roy Moore's Ten Commandments monument has been removed from public view at the state courthouse in Montgomery, the Rev. Austin Miles, who heads an interdenominational ministry in Northern California, has a suggestion.

The old commandments, Miles tells NewsMax, were "not only out of order but personally oppressive for politicians. Such antiquated laws are a threat to freedom and must go."

Why not have a more politically correct version of the classic scripture, he posits.

The Rev. Miles suggests the new and improved commandments read something like this:

• Thou shalt not allow a baby of inconvenience to be born


• Thou shalt not restrict your children's choice of association


• Thou shalt not discipline your children


• Thou shalt not interfere in your child's right to view porn at the library


• Thou shalt not teach Scriptures to your children


• Thou shalt not teach children that there is a right or wrong


• Thou shalt not require applicants to the priesthood to believe in God or the Bible


• Thou shalt not defend yourselves against Muslim terrorists


• Thou shalt not demonstrate patriotism or respect for America


• Thou shalt not allow the name Jesus to be uttered


Because these new commandments would undoubtedly pass muster with ACLU, they could be posted immediately in public buildings across the country without a peep of protest.
 
Jul 7, 2002
3,105
0
0
#2
what a fucken stupid post from the Idiot wing (mclean)

4 out of the 10 commandment are in law, the others are morals or dealing with religion....now why do we need that in front of some building? do u really think that is effective?

shit, get over it Mclean. you support the war, which engages in the killing of thousands of innocent ppl, with or without proof....what kind of religious beliefs do u have?

remember
"'You shall not murder.'
'You shall not murder.'
'You shall not murder.'
'You shall not murder.'
'You shall not murder.'
'You shall not murder.'
'You shall not murder.'
'You shall not murder.'
'You shall not murder.'
'You shall not murder.'
'You shall not murder.'
'You shall not murder.'
'You shall not murder.'
 
May 5, 2002
2,241
4
0
#4
I would like to find someone that can prove that this DOESN'T violate the establishment clause of the first amendment. Mclean your going against our constitution, you anti-american...
 
May 8, 2002
4,729
0
0
48
#6
nefar559 said:
now why do we need that in front of some building?

do u really think that is effective?
1. does it bother you???
2. does it matter???

2-0-Sixx said:
Horrible thread mcleanslut.

I would expect an article like that from NEWSMAX
it was a sarcastic article...i thought you guys would pick up on it, being that you guys are so smart
 
Jul 7, 2002
3,105
0
0
#7
Mcleanhatch said:
1. does it bother you???
2. does it matter???
1 seperationn of religion and state.

2. goto "1";

again if you didnt matter, why did the dude place them there? so i guess it matters.


Mcleanhatch said:

it was a sarcastic article...i thought you guys would pick up on it, being that you guys are so smart
we smart?...aaah thank you....lol...i did pick up on the sarcasism, but it was too ultra right to be funny
 
May 8, 2002
4,729
0
0
48
#9
2-0-Sixx said:
Hey Mclean, do you believe trees are polluting our air?
although this may be a trick question, i will take it as a sincere question and answer it.

no, i dont think that they are polluting the air. last i heard trees take in CO2 and give out 02, so to me trees are needed
 
May 13, 2002
49,944
47,801
113
44
Seattle
www.socialistworld.net
#11
Mcleanhatch said:
although this may be a trick question, i will take it as a sincere question and answer it.

no, i dont think that they are polluting the air. last i heard trees take in CO2 and give out 02, so to me trees are needed
Thats interesting, I believe the same thing. Its funny how the guy in your sig told everyone the exact opposite:confused:
 
May 5, 2002
2,241
4
0
#13
Mcleanhatch said:
where does the ten commandment violate our constitution?????
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion :dead:

Now are you gonna argue that the ten comandments arn't related to religion? ROFL, or posibly your gonna say that Congress isn't making a law that puts them their, so its not unconstitutional, right?

:dead:
 
May 8, 2002
4,729
0
0
48
#14
Snubnoze said:
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion :dead:
Article [I.] (See Note 13)
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof

or prohibiting the free exercise thereof
 
May 8, 2002
4,729
0
0
48
#15
Snubnoze said:
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion :dead:
also congress has made no law "respecting an establishment of religion" here right????? so where does what you quoted apply??

i would say that this is the only part that applies:or prohibiting the free exercise thereof;
 
May 5, 2002
2,241
4
0
#19
Mcdirtysnatch....

Have you studied the constitution at all? Look, there is an ESTABLISHMENT clause and a FREE EXERCISE clause. The establishment clause applies to the government, the free exercise clause applies to the people. A government courthouse is clearly under the establishment clause. Its a government body that is promoting a certain religion (christianity).

So you say that it doesn't apply because the conGRESS is not making a law that puts it there, but you are saying it violates the free exercise clause, but congress didn't pass a law to remove it did they? So if your outside in a peacefull protest, and the police prevent you from your right to free speach, under your logic that is OK because its the police that are doing it, not a congress law, right? I think you see my point. Thomas Jefferson even stated himself that there should be a seperation between church and state...
 
May 8, 2002
4,729
0
0
48
#20
Snubnoze said:
Its a government body that is promoting a certain religion (christianity).
really i thought they were a part of the jewish religion???

Snubnoze said:
Thomas Jefferson even stated himself that there should be a seperation between church and state...
but is the term "seperation between church and state" in the constitution????

is everything jefferson did right???? he did own slaves right????