77% of Americans disagree with removal of commandments

Discussion in 'Politics, Religion, Social Issues' started by Backtothemac, Aug 27, 2003.

  1. macrumors 601

    Backtothemac

    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2002
    Location:
    San Destin Florida
    #1
    http://www.cnn.com/2003/LAW/08/27/ten.commandments/index.html

    Wow. That is impressive. See, that is the point that has been made. A minority of the people dictating to the majority through a bogus interpretation of the law.

    If a Muslim judge had put up a statue of the Khoran, I would say kudos to that judge. And, I would probably go out and read a copy of it to learn more.

    Sad that the voice of the majority is falling on deaf ears.
     
  2. macrumors 68000

    Sayhey

    Joined:
    May 22, 2003
    Location:
    San Francisco
    #2
    Re: 77% of Americans disagree with removal of commandments

    B2TM,

    You keep saying this is some distortion or "bogus" interpretation of the law, but what is your source for that? The doctrine of Seperation of Church and State has a very long history and is grounded in the First Amendment. The latest decisions about these types of displays in public buildings is quite clear. In short, these federal judges who told Moore to remove the monument have all the legal precedent in the world on their side and Moore has none. If you think it is wrong, that of course is your right, but unconstitutional? Not hardly.

    Lastly, we don't want judges to make decisions based on polls. Many Americans, if asked to identify the words of the Declaration of Independance or the preamble to the Constitution, could not do so. Does that mean we should ignore them? I realize the deep seated feelings of many people concerning the value of their religion, but that only reinforces the need to safeguard rights of the few from the views of the many.
     
  3. macrumors member

    Joined:
    Jun 30, 2003
    #3
    The problem is, a few people make a huge deal of it.

    A large majority of the public would see it and probably wouldn't think twice. Only a small amount would be offended.

    The Constitution is also very flimsy. A lot of "constitutional rights" are actually not in the consitution at all, like the right to privacy.

    The statue is perfectly acceptable according to the first amendment, but judges throughout the years and decided that there needs to be a separation of church and state. Part of the debate is that no one is forcing anyone to practice the religion, or even look at the statue and it complies completely with the first amendment but is still church related.
     
  4. macrumors 68040

    mactastic

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2003
    Location:
    Colly-fornia
    #4
    Sucks that the majority had to push it to the point that they got smacked down by the courts. Being the majority doesn't automatically make you right.
     
  5. macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Mar 19, 2003
    Location:
    New Zealand
    #5
    Re: 77% of Americans disagree with removal of commandments


    Like the majority that voted for Gore for President?

    Or the bogus interpretation (going against previous precedents) that saw the partisan Supreme Court uphold the Florida election results?

    BTTM, remove the log from your own eye before pointing out the speck in others.
     
  6. macrumors 68000

    3rdpath

    Joined:
    Jan 7, 2002
    Location:
    2nd star on the right and straight till morning
    #6
    Re: 77% of Americans disagree with removal of commandments

    so are you equally willing to condemn the election of 2000?

    or is it only bogus when you disagree?

    the irony is quite humorous, don't you think?
     
  7. macrumors 68040

    pseudobrit

    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2002
    Location:
    Jobs' Spare Liver Jar
    #7
    A majority of Americans voted for Al Gore.

    Sounds just like "a minority of the people dictating to the majority through a bogus interpretation of the law" to me.
     
  8. macrumors 601

    zimv20

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2002
    Location:
    chicago
    #8
    77%, eh? no wonder so many people don't mind that ashcroft's religious beliefs dictate his policy.

    at some point, "freedom of religion" became "freedom to persecute under the ruling powers' religion."
     
  9. Ugg
    macrumors 68000

    Ugg

    Joined:
    Apr 7, 2003
    Location:
    Penryn
    #9
    77% of 1009 Americans polled......

    Polls have been notorious lately for not reflecting the true American opinion as has been discussed elsewhere.

    I wonder what the response to that question would have been if the people polled were told about the details of the monument's installation. "Under dark of night and with video rights sold to a right wing Christian organization, Judge Roy Moore installed a monument in the Rotunda of the Alabama Supreme Court, without prior authorization from ANYONE else." What would the response be then? My bet is that 40% would approve with the remainder disapproving.

    Okay, so I'm biased but it does make me wonder about the future. Some people think it's a flash in the pan and the era of Tammy Faye Baker was the watershed point of American religious fundamentalism. Others have posited that religion has taken firm root in America and that it is a direct result of the 60's and 70's everything goes attitude.

    The pendulum swings. Or is it the guillotine?
     
  10. macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Feb 26, 2003
    Location:
    Somewhere too cold
    #10
    Couple quick comments.

    First off, the whole purpose of the Constitution was to protect the most sacred rights of the minority from the flag-waving mob. I thank (insert favorite diety/object of obsession) that this is true, otherwise we would likely have a very curtailed version of civil rights.

    Second, I don't quite get how the establishing of the list of moral rules of one religion on state grounds by a state actor is not seen as a form of establishing or encouraging religion. If you want to claim historical basis, then put up a second monument which describes the history of the 10 commandments and its effect on american jurisprudence. Also, I personally have nothing but rancor for any religion which needs or has state support. I find that in the end, they generally co-opt and corrupt each other.

    Third, most people should be thankful the courts don't require an explicit listing of something in the Constitution for it to be protected. While the term privacy itself is never mentioned; the concept is implicit in the freedom from unreasonable searches.
     
  11. thread starter macrumors 601

    Backtothemac

    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2002
    Location:
    San Destin Florida
    #11
    Why is it that everytime a conservative has an issue with a ruling, you guys bring up the 2000 election? 1st off, the same court that you claim is so conservative has recently overturned one of the greatest injustices of our lifetime, and that is the banning of sodomy. Thus, making homosexuality legal, and it will not be long before ALL Americans are treated to equal rights under the law.

    BUT that same court ruled that a State Court had violated the Constitution becuase it was legislating from the bench. That is it. Had Gore, from day one, requested a manual recount in the ENTIRE state, no one would have had a complaint at all. However, he ONLY wanted the counties that he thought he could make up a difference in because they were going to rely on HUMAN interpretation of a bunch ballot. Can you not see how rediculous that is?

    Furthermore, I personally, as a historian, feel that judges have overstepped their interpretation of the Constitution. It is clear. It bans a federal religion. Congress cannot pass a law creating a federal religion. God was not removed from the society. They did not ban anyone from showing their faith. MEN have since decided the INTENT of what the founding fathers though. No different than I have. I personally believe, as have other justicies, and clearly the American people, that the 10 commandments in a state building does not violate the so called seperation of church and state. That phrase is not in the constitution. If that was what they meant. They damn sure did not say it. Curious don't you think, since the other parts of the document are very clear!

    No religion should ever be forced on anyone, nowhere, not just by the government. However, NOONE was forced to attend a church, or even read the monument.

    What happened to the 9th ammendment? What happened to the rule of law! I will tell you. It has been bastardized for quite a while.
     
  12. macrumors 6502a

    simX

    Joined:
    May 28, 2002
    Location:
    Bay Area, CA
    #12
    Give me a break. 1,009 Americans does not the American people make. Polls can be skewed, and FOX and CNN have repeatedly done so in the past few years. I'd like to see the methodology of such a survey before I can reliably agree that that statistic is correct.

    As Ugg pointed out, if the question was prefaced with "Under dark of night and with video rights sold to a right wing Christian organization, Judge Roy Moore installed a monument in the Rotunda of the Alabama Supreme Court, without prior authorization from ANYONE else," I doubt many Americans would have agreed with it.
     
  13. macrumors 68040

    pseudobrit

    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2002
    Location:
    Jobs' Spare Liver Jar
    #13
    Ah, hell, I'm done fighting it.

    Let's just give in and let the Christians usurp the power of the state to fulfil their agendas. Then we'd no longer have politicians and democracy calling the shots but preachers and theocracy instead.

    Family values and holy men would rule the day and all would be well. Morality would be law.

    Just like Taliban Afghanistan. Of course the reason their theocracy was evil was because it had that terrorist-worshipping religion at its core. :rolleyes:
     
  14. thread starter macrumors 601

    Backtothemac

    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2002
    Location:
    San Destin Florida
    #14
    What the margin of error? +/- 3%

    That is standard statistics.
     
  15. thread starter macrumors 601

    Backtothemac

    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2002
    Location:
    San Destin Florida
    #15
    No, you missed the entire point. It doesn't authorize a religion, how in the name of all that is right can you compare this country with the Taliban. How can you compare the state of Alabama, and Roy Moore's convictions to the taliban? That is absurd man, and you know it!

    What if there was a statue of every major religion in the rotundra? I would have no problem with that.
     
  16. macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2002
    #16
    There are 250 - 300 MILLION people, and the interviewed were a bit over 1000. A bit small sample, and no way to verify how it's composed. If you ask 1000 christians, a few disagree. But if you consider USA is a free country and NOT EVERYONE is Christian, it's more fair. We have Hindus, Buddhists, Muslems etc here. Put the 10 comandments to a Church; a Justice something should respect the laws of the country, not the laws of a religious group, any of them.

    I do approve the removal. Statistically I am Catholic, in practise it is only statistics.
     
  17. macrumors 6502a

    simX

    Joined:
    May 28, 2002
    Location:
    Bay Area, CA
    #17
    The margin of error has nothing to do with it. The margin of error does not take into account biased methodology. As I said before, the way that you phrase the question can have a STARTLING effect on the responses, by appealing to the emotions of humans. Quoting a single statistic is highly dubious unless you can show me the exact methodology of how it was conducted.
     
  18. macrumors 68040

    pseudobrit

    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2002
    Location:
    Jobs' Spare Liver Jar
    #18
    But they did ban GOVERNMENT from adopting and showing a faith.

    So government putting up religious symbols is not government adopting a faith?

    Again, were people exempt from attending Moore's court because of the monument?
     
  19. thread starter macrumors 601

    Backtothemac

    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2002
    Location:
    San Destin Florida
    #19
    13. Do you approve or disapprove of a federal court decision ordering an Alabama court to remove a monument to the Ten Commandments from public display in its building?

    BASED ON –495—NATIONAL ADULTS IN FORM B

    Approve Disapprove No opinion
    2003 Aug 25-26 19 77 4

    That is not a biased question. Not leading at all, and statistically sound.

    Results are based on telephone interviews with -1,009-National Adults, aged 18+, conducted August 25-26, 2003. For results based on the total sample of National Adults, one can say with 95% confidence that the margin of sampling error is ±3 percentage points.
     
  20. macrumors 68040

    pseudobrit

    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2002
    Location:
    Jobs' Spare Liver Jar
    #20
    I suppose I'd be less opposed to such a monument. But then the irony would be that many religions bar the use of statues or symbols.
     
  21. macrumors 601

    zimv20

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2002
    Location:
    chicago
    #21
    if i were in the deep south, on trial, and i walked into the courthouse and saw a such a monument, i would be scared s***less.

    "if the court finds out i'm atheist, would i even get a fair trial?" i would wonder.
     
  22. macrumors 601

    zimv20

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2002
    Location:
    chicago
    #22
    i'd be equally opposed.
     
  23. thread starter macrumors 601

    Backtothemac

    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2002
    Location:
    San Destin Florida
    #23
    UGGG, the monument wasn't in the courtroom, but in the lobby of the building. No, they banned GOVERNMENT from creating, and enforcing a national religion. That is it, and no, government putting up religious symbols is not adopting a faith. ON the same building that the monument was in, there are deptictions of greek gods on the front of the building. Should they tear it down because of their religious overtones?

    Should they burn the declaration of independence because it is signed "The year of Our Lord, 1776"?
     
  24. thread starter macrumors 601

    Backtothemac

    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2002
    Location:
    San Destin Florida
    #24
    Yea, you would. No one has ever said that Justice Moore was anything but fair, and good. He is an elected judge of the people of this state. If we don't believe his job is being done well, then WE remove him.
     
  25. macrumors 601

    zimv20

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2002
    Location:
    chicago
    #25
    no, but only because of its importance.

    the monument went up 2 years ago. they should have known better.

    i don't like the In God We Trust on the money. that should be removed, imo.
     

Share This Page