[Damn True]

Yup, I know most people think of rows upon rows of crosses when they think of Arlington. As did I before I visited. I was really surprised.

Being honest...Hi Jesus!

Yeah, I did grab those photos from their website. First hit on Google. But I would not have known to look had I not been there less than a year ago and known that the place (Govt owned and operated National Cemetery & War Memorial) has crosses all over it.

Older sections? There is a religious graphic (cross, star etc) on 99/100 of the standardized headstones. Seems pretty much institutionalized to me.

 

[kidwoo]

Older sections? There is a religious graphic (cross, star etc) on 99/100 of the standardized headstones. Seems pretty much institutionalized to me.

So when you said pull out all the crosses, you meant the etchings and the non gi stuff and not the mass of white grave stones that take up most of the property?

Oh

 

[Silver]

Ok, but is there a 43 foot cross monument on high ground dedicated to a vague group on public land that has no historical value hanging around?

Surely you can see the difference between that and individual tombstones? You may have a point if a privately owned church happened to be on that hill, but that isn't the case.

And I'm still waiting for the other 74.something% that you claimed up front. Unless that was hyperbole and this is the only one you could find (and since it's hardly a trivial case, I'd say you didn't really have much of a point.)

 

[ohio]

Older sections? There is a religious graphic (cross, star etc) on 99/100 of the standardized headstones. Seems pretty much institutionalized to me.

Even Jesus wants you to drop this one. Even if the headstones were shaped like crosses, they would only be on the graves of Christian soldiers, as is the case with all American memorial graveyards. There is a huge difference between an individual's claim to religion and an institutional claim to religion. If you can't understand that, you really shouldn't even bother engaging in these arguments.

Maybe this is why you feel your religion is so under attack. You can't distinguish between institutional endorsement of religion and personal belief. If many individuals want to use government property on a day that happens to have religious significance to them (Easter), that's fine... if they want to force others to practice that religion on that day, not fine. If they want to exclude anyone from that space at that time, not fine. If they want to make claims that the US government officially endorses their religion, not fine.

As for the memorial to Mexican soldiers... uh, Mexico didn't have separation of church and state. In fact, they only have it now somewhat tenuously... they're essentially a Catholic nation. We are not.

Separation if church and state isn't about forbidding the display of religious symbols, it's about forbidding the official endorsement of a specific religion and its symbols by the government. This protects you as much as it does everyone else.

Now if you want to point out the few occasions where the US government DID actually endorse Christianity as the religion of the state or the religion of the people, you should realise that you're not pointing out precedent, you're pointing out violations of church and state, which the current government has a responsibility to replace with non-denominational memorials.

 

[ohio]

Older sections? There is a religious graphic (cross, star etc) on 99/100 of the standardized headstones. Seems pretty much institutionalized to me.

Ugh, had to address this again. There is a religious graphic on each headstone that is specific to each individual soldier that died. Try, oh please please try to explain how that is an institutional claim to religion. If it were institutional they would all be crosses, or they would be randomly assigned so that some christian soldiers got stars, and some got crosses.

That's like claiming that the ethnicities of the soldiers were institutionalized because their last names appear on the gravestones.

 

[blue]

You know, I keep reading all of DT's posts but all I keep seeing is blah blah blah Jesus blah blah blah Jesus blah blah blah blah blah Jesus blah blah blah blah blah blah ALLAH AKBAR!!!111@%^$!@(*#^!*@($^&!@!!!

 

[Old Man G Funk]

Not exactly without precedent....

Yeah, so what? So you can show a bunch of memorials from other countries? Does that make it right?

"One nation under god," is no more right than having "In god we trust" on our coins. Both of them are violations of our First Amendment rights, as would be a memorial for soldiers that displays overtly religious symbols.

 

[Old Man G Funk]

Even Jesus wants you to drop this one. Even if the headstones were shaped like crosses, they would only be on the graves of Christian soldiers, as is the case with all American memorial graveyards. There is a huge difference between an individual's claim to religion and an institutional claim to religion. If you can't understand that, you really shouldn't even bother engaging in these arguments.

Maybe this is why you feel your religion is so under attack. You can't distinguish between institutional endorsement of religion and personal belief. If many individuals want to use government property on a day that happens to have religious significance to them (Easter), that's fine... if they want to force others to practice that religion on that day, not fine. If they want to exclude anyone from that space at that time, not fine. If they want to make claims that the US government officially endorses their religion, not fine.

As for the memorial to Mexican soldiers... uh, Mexico didn't have separation of church and state. In fact, they only have it now somewhat tenuously... they're essentially a Catholic nation. We are not.

Separation if church and state isn't about forbidding the display of religious symbols, it's about forbidding the official endorsement of a specific religion and its symbols by the government. This protects you as much as it does everyone else.

Now if you want to point out the few occasions where the US government DID actually endorse Christianity as the religion of the state or the religion of the people, you should realise that you're not pointing out precedent, you're pointing out violations of church and state, which the current government has a responsibility to replace with non-denominational memorials.

Great post.

 

[fluff]

Our moderators are bad enough without congress.

Someone here needs to volunteer to be the next Terri Shiavo.

I can think of a few candidates that have similar intellectual capacity...

 

[MMike]

From crying out loud True, STAY DOWN! STAY DOWN!!

 

[Old Man G Funk]

From crying out loud True, STAY DOWN! STAY DOWN!!

He probably won't because his ego won't allow it, especially after his bluster towards me (for at least the second time) and towards everyone else.

 

[MMike]

He probably won't because his ego won't allow it, especially after his bluster towards me (for at least the second time) and towards everyone else.

Oh I know he won't...

 

[Damn True]

Yeah, so what? So you can show a bunch of memorials from other countries? Does that make it right?

"One nation under god," is no more right than having "In god we trust" on our coins. Both of them are violations of our First Amendment rights, as would be a memorial for soldiers that displays overtly religious symbols.

And a bunch of others from right here on our shores.

As for your separation argument....irrelevant. Go check out the Jefferson Memorial and save your breath. It'll never go away you might as well learn to live with it.

A democratic government and a majority of the populace that disagrees with you will ensure that.

 

[Damn True]

Oh I know he won't...

No need to. Guys like G funk, woo, silver and ohio are an increasingly marginalized minority fringe. Let them throw their little tantrums. Won't change anything. It's a country founded on Judeo-Christian values and principles and the majority of Americans want to keep it that way.

 

[Old Man G Funk]

And a bunch of others from right here on our shores.

As for your separation argument....irrelevant. Go check out the Jefferson Memorial and save your breath. It'll never go away you might as well learn to live with it.

A democratic government and a majority of the populace that disagrees with you will ensure that.

The separation argument is irrelevant? So, you think the First Amendment is irrelevant? Good to know.

 

[Old Man G Funk]

No need to. Guys like G funk, woo, silver and ohio are an increasingly marginalized minority fringe. Let them throw their little tantrums. Won't change anything. It's a country founded on Judeo-Christian values and principles and the majority of Americans want to keep it that way.

Judeo-Christian values? Do you know anything about the Founding Fathers, or do you get your information from sites like wallbuilders? Your last couple comments are cracking me up. You should have stayed down.

 

[Damn True]

Judeo-Christian values? Do you know anything about the Founding Fathers, or do you get your information from sites like wallbuilders? Your last couple comments are cracking me up. You should have stayed down.

Oh a little bit, yeah.

I have sworn upon the altar of God eternal hostility against every form of tyranny over the mind of man.

Taken from a letter to Dr. Benjamin Rush, September 23, 1800.

We hold these truths to be self-evident that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain inalienable rights, among these are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, that to secure these rights governments are instituted among men. We...solemnly publish and declare, that these colonies are and of right ought to be free and independent states...And for the support of this declaration, with a firm reliance on the protection of divine providence, we mutually pledge our lives, our fortunes, and our sacred honor.

Taken from the Declaration of Independence, 1776.

Almighty God hath created the mind free…All attempts to influence it by temporal punishments or burthens…are a departure from the plan of the Holy Author of our religion…No man shall be compelled to frequent or support any religious worship or ministry or shall otherwise suffer on account of his religious opinions or belief, but all men shall be free to profess and by argument to maintain, their opinions in matters of religion. I know but one code of morality for men whether acting singly or collectively.

Taken from A Bill for Establishing Religious Freedom, 1777. The last sentence is taken from a letter to James Madison, August 28, 1789.

God who gave us life gave us liberty. Can the liberties of a nation be secure when we have removed a conviction that these liberties are the gift of God? Indeed I tremble for my country when I reflect that God is just, that his justice cannot sleep forever. Commerce between master and slave is despotism. Nothing is more certainly written in the book of fate than these people are to be free. Establish the law for educating the common people. This it is the business of the state to effect and on a general plan.

 

[ohio]

As for your separation argument....irrelevant. Go check out the Jefferson Memorial and save your breath.

Thank you for again demonstrating your misunderstanding of individuals vs. institutions, even though I explained it.

It'll never go away you might as well learn to live with it.

While the Jefferson Memorial is a poor example for the reasons I've mentiond numerous times, I'll assume you're pointing the the numerous examples of institutional references to God. Rather than us 'learning to to live with it," I suggest you view these as the gifts that they are from a minority far more sensitive to your views than you are of theirs. These examples are non-denominational enough that it's just not worth making a stink about, and so we're willing to let you have these unconstitutional tidbits if only so we don't have to listen to your whining.

A democratic government and a majority of the populace that disagrees with you will ensure that.

Wait, I thought all you white Christian males were oppressed in this country. So which is it? An all powerful, ever-lasting majority than can impose their unconstitutional desires on everyone else, or a poor down-trodden last-bastion-of-morality that is evermore under-attack from heathen extremists?

 

[Damn True]

The separation argument is irrelevant? So, you think the First Amendment is irrelevant? Good to know.

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.

Geez, I keep reading it and reading it and I don't see the word "separation" anywhere.

The first is paramount. It's what allows you to spout non-sensical rubbish about a phrase or right in the constitution or bill of rights that does not exist.

 

[Damn True]

Wait, I thought all you white Christian males were oppressed in this country. So which is it? An all powerful, ever-lasting majority than can impose their unconstitutional desires on everyone else, or a poor down-trodden last-bastion-of-morality that is evermore under-attack from heathen extremists?

I don't feel the least bit oppressed. I'm just getting tired of a few shrill squeaking wheels.

 

[Old Man G Funk]

Oh a little bit, yeah....

Very little it seems.

A few examples of...what? The Declaration is NOT a binding document for the US. Plus, it was written by Thomas Jefferson who was a deist, as were most of the founding fathers. Jefferson only included references to god after the rest of the fathers felt that the rubes wouldn't go along with it without those references.

I'd suggest you stop getting your "facts" about the founding of this country from places like wallbuilders.

 

[Damn True]

Honestly dude. Never heard of wallbuilders.

 

[Old Man G Funk]

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.

Geez, I keep reading it and reading it and I don't see the word "separation" anywhere.

The first is paramount. It's what allows you to spout non-sensical rubbish about a phrase or right in the constitution or bill of rights that does not exist.

I should have known this argument would come out....

The separation clause came from a letter that Jefferson wrote to a clergyman. It was to allay fears that the US would adopt a specific religious stance. Madison (the writer of the Constitution) agreed with that stance.

Freedom of religion means that I am free to practice or not practice any religion of my choice without gov. interference. When the gov. starts putting overtly religious displays up, it infringes on my First Amendment right. If you doubt that, perhaps you should check out the Lemon case before you keep embarrassing yourself.

 

[Old Man G Funk]

Honestly dude. Never heard of wallbuilders.

It doesn't matter if you've gone to that specific site. The web is full of Christian apologetic sites that spout that nonsense.

 

[Damn True]

I should have known this argument would come out....

The separation clause came from a letter that Jefferson wrote to a clergyman. Hey no kidding. I went to High School too It was to allay fears that the US would adopt a specific religious stance. What do ya know, 230 years later...he's still right. We haven'tMadison (the writer of the Constitution) agreed with that stance.

Freedom of religion means that I am free to practice or not practice any religion of my choice without gov. interference. And you absolutely should be. When the gov. starts putting overtly religious displays up, it infringes on my First Amendment right. How? The first protects your right to express yourself, or not. It says nothing of protecting you from exposure to expression. There is no right of protection from annoyance or offense. If you doubt that, perhaps you should check out the Lemon case before you keep embarrassing yourself.

Why would I be embarrased. I'm stating my opinion. You are stating yours. I happen to think you are wrong. You happen to think I am wrong. Ain't America great?

 

[ohio]

No need to. Guys like G funk, woo, silver and ohio are an increasingly marginalized minority fringe. Let them throw their little tantrums. Won't change anything. It's a country founded on Judeo-Christian values and principles and the majority of Americans want to keep it that way.

Sigh... you don't get it, you never will.

Ignoring the fact that the two of us have VERY different interpretations of Judeo-Christian values and ignoring the fact that the term "Judeo-Christian" is being entirely mis-used in this context and ignoring that you somehow are claiming the right to speak for not only all Christians (a bold claim in itself) but also all Jews (hah!)...

I was raised within the context of a Judeo-Christian society. The morals and values I support are Judeo-Christian ones. Most (if not all) of us here were. Regardless of belief in a god, that is what will dictate our cultural and moral standards. It is, in fact, because of my Judeo-Christian moral convictions and a sense of ethics, that I demand absolute separation of church and state. Partly because I understand that the cultural standards and norms of the majority will always be represented in a democratic government by the people that make up the government so there is no need for an institutional tie to their religion when there is an inherent one, and partly because I understand the terrible danger of excluding minorities from a democratic government because of an institutional tie to a religion that is not their own.

 

[Old Man G Funk]

Why would I be embarrased. I'm stating my opinion. You are stating yours. I happen to think you are wrong. You happen to think I am wrong. Ain't America great?

Actually, the First Amendment IS about protecting me from exposure to expression when that expression is coming from the government. Once again, I suggest you look up the Lemon case. You might learn something about how we apply the First Amendment.

 

[ohio]

How? The first protects your right to express yourself, or not. It says nothing of protecting you from exposure to expression.

See, this is why you've got to STOP getting your news from conservative sources. None of this is about just exposure to religious views, and never has been. If you as an individual want to stand on the street corner and speak any religious views you want, you are free to. If you want to assemble a group of like-minded people to speak these views even more broadly, you are free to. You can spend your money to erect a friggin neon cross the size of the empire state building for all I care, even though that would be quite a bit of exposure to religious symbols... yet somehow that doesn't bother me.

So now think real hard about this.... c'mon keep thinking. Why, if I don't mind religious symbols appearing in public, would I be opposed to our government utilizing them as symbols of an institution whose role is to represent the entire population? Well, I sort of gave away the answer, but you need some leading it seems...

 

[MMike]

stay down!!!

 

[LordOpie]

stay down!!!

There's a joke about an impatient woman in there somewhere.

 

[Damn True]

 

[ohio]

Are suggesting we deface that building... a little extreme, no?

 

[Changleen]

It's just a dude in an armchair with really big arms.

 

[Damn True]

Are suggesting we deface that building... a little extreme, no?

You said: "symbols of an institution whose role is to represent the entire population"

So by that logic if the cross on Mt. Soledad has to go then dosen't Moses have to come off the Supreme Court Building?

 

[Changleen]

Dude. That's not Moses. That's some white guy.

 

[ohio]

You said: "symbols of an institution whose role is to represent the entire population"

So by that logic if the cross on Mt. Soledad has to go then dosen't Moses have to come off the Supreme Court Building?

Yes, he should come down. Which is why I told you to cherish these little gifts from a minority that is far more tolerant of your views than you are of theirs.

 

[Damn True]

The gift that should be cherished is the God given, and government enforced right to believe or not believe, practice or not practice a given religion. The symbols you see are honorific to the source of that ethos.
Judeo-Christianity.

 

[ohio]

The gift that should be cherished is the God given, and government enforced right to believe or not believe, practice or not practice a given religion.

Yes

The symbols you see are honorific to the source of that ethos.
Judeo-Christianity.

Errrrmmmm, nope. Judeo-Christianity is the source of many of the cultural norms we abide by. However, the source of democracy and representative government is Greek. I'm trying to remember if they believed in Moses and the 10 commandments... can you help me out with that one?

Additionally honoring a belief in freedom of religion by placing certain religions above others is a little odd, no? Here's a nice analogy. It would be like honoring a belief that all men are created equal with painting of a white man, because it was a bunch of European exiles that came up with the idea. No one claims we shouldn't be exposed to white people, just that the government shouldn't endorse white people as superior.

See DT, the thing about having moral or ethical standards is that you stick to them, even when it hurts you in the short term.

 

[kidwoo]

See DT, the thing about having moral or ethical standards is that you stick to them, even when it hurts you in the short term.

Unless it means giving some of your hard earned tax bux to poor blackies..even though your life is completely unaffected.

Then all bets are off and it is right to let them suffer,......no a moral obligation to make sure they suffer since it's their own laziness et al that got them there.

No need to. Guys like G funk, woo, silver and ohio are an increasingly marginalized minority fringe. Let them throw their little tantrums. Won't change anything. It's a country founded on Judeo-Christian values and principles and the majority of Americans want to keep it that way.

Oh man.....I've been lumped in with people with much more patience and articulation than myself......cept for silver on occasion maybe.

There must have been a misunderstanding somewhere. My problem is really with you personally. Lots of people feel the same way you do about a lot of things and I get along with lots of them, but you're just a much bigger prick about it.
And being a prick is fine, just don't play christian.
Just want to make that clear.

But sadly you are correct about the maginalized fringe. We secular warriors™ have suffered great losses. We thought we were advancing when macy's agreed with us to stop saying merry christmas since such causes are so vital to our mission. Unfortunately the VAST OVERWHELMING MAJORITY of you persecuted honkey christian types found in O'rielly, your call to arms, as well as a great leader. The power of bill has humbled us and we now know greatness, even in an enemy.

falafel

We have now retreated to our yurts in berkeley to smoke weed, violate the sanctity of marriage and lick our wounds. Hopefully, one day we will have that moses removed. I know I've lost countless hours of sleep over it. But these kinds of symbols are important to address.

Some may say our efforts may be better spent focusing on the fact that aids, stem cell and other relevant avenues of research have been neglected in favor of faith based initiatives that teach the wonderful world of abstinence to 15 year old horn balls and that our president listens to freaks like falwell on foreign policy issues. Or maybe the fact that families with brain dead relatives are told what they can and cannot do based on some whack job's biblical interpretation.......BUT NO.......IT'S the MOSES we care most about. The moses dammit!!!

I feel so lonely. It's cold here on the fringes...........

 

[blue]

Might I add that most of the founding fathers were Deists?

Judeo-Christian my ass. You want to know who's most like the people that started this Satan-worshipping hypocritical penisfest?












































THE MORMONS hock:

A bunch of opressed people with whackjob religious beliefs and strict adherance to them, along with veritable deity for church leaders...Sound like anyone who had anything to do with Massachusetts Bay?

The funny part is, they still stick to their Puritanical guns...

Therefore, if DT wants this to be a God-fearing Judeo-Christian nation, he should vote for Mitt Romney for president. Or become a Mormon.