Louisiana: The Ten Commandments must be displayed in public classrooms under new law

[Hindsight was 2020]

I can understand how this could be a 1A issue, but the 10 commandments is a good guide to follow regardless of one's religious beliefs.

Some of them are. There's no secular reason to tell people to have no gods before God, or to keep the Sabbath holy.

On the first one, there is, but the pseudo religious have long misinterpreted it.

In context, it was clearly also meant to mean that humans should not worship other humans which is a very important secular message for all those in the cult who worship Trump or others who worship, for example, Elon Musk.

That interpretation is consistent with the passage 'No man is righteous, not even one.'

It was a message at the micro and macro level for humans to be humble. This is why I don't like statues of humans (except in contexts where the statue is specific like in a museum.)

This is also similar to the misinterpretation by the pseudo religious of the passage 'thou shall not take the name of the Lord in vain' as to mean 'don't say 'damn.'' When it clearly primarily means  'don't invoke the Lord to make a specious or self serving argument.'

However, in my case, I'm an exception. Lord, it's hard to be humble when you're perfect in every way.

I like the song

This is definitely a conversation meant more for the religious thread but in the actual Old Testament context the first commandment was explicitly about condemning paganism and affirming there is only one god (Yahweh/IAM). The reason God makes the commandments is some of the Jewish people were turning to the Egyptian Gods or others deity’s like the Golden Bull to worship as the God who delivered them out of Egypt so the 10 commandments was about God reaffirming his covenant with the Jewish people

[Hindsight was 2020]

Biden needs to ask Trump to condemn this in the debate. Associate Trump with these toxic religious zealots!

That would probably backfire. Biden should instead ask Trump whether he can name the ten commandments and follow them. Especially about truth telling.

Christ shed His Blood and died the Death of the Cross as a perfect sacrifice for OUR sins, and OUR inability to keep the Commandments.

There’s failing to always keep the Commandments via being a human and naturally flaw vs treating them as a personal dare like Trump does

[Hindsight was 2020]

How dare anyone suggest the Ten Commandments are largely irrelevant to modern life.  Children must be reminded every day that it is a sin to covet thy neighbor's slaves.

Covetousness, the desiring of something that is rightfully someone elses, is the root of all sorts of evil:

This is a movie, and the scene is about an extreme example, but covetousness keeps people from being happy and content in so many circumstances.

What is it with you Trump cultists and that movie recently?

Probably building up to using Buffalo Bill as a stand in for trans people

[Hindsight was 2020]

Pride Flags are not a symbol of basic human decency. They are a political statement that directly conflicts with the Scriptural religious beliefs of every "Christian denomination", Jews, and Muslims.

Yes, they are.

By your logic, you can use religion as a shield to uphold all kinds of abhorrent beliefs. If - hypothetically speaking - the Holy Bible, or a major religious text in whatever particular secular society we would be discussing, said "the black people beyond Egypt are subhuman. They are not actually "people" in God's eyes, and therefore you should not treat them as such. Do not marry them, do not break bread with them". If a major holy book in a secular country said that, then "black people are people too and they are equal", would not be, quote, "a symbol of basic human decency", because they contradict the book. It would be, quote, "a political statement".

So, in conclusion, please explain to us why "it says it in the book" is carte blanche to justify anything and everything, without providing any further reasoning that could hold up to any sort of scrutiny.

( edited for spelling, oop )

Religious teachings are protected under the 1st Amendment.  Religious PRACTICES are a different matter, but Religious Teaching is prohibited.

Public schools that actively contradict what God considers to be ordained marriage in conflict with what Scripture teaches, or what God-sanctioned sexuality is, are, indeed, moving into the religious thicket.  The Pride Flag IS a political statement and a statement that, unavoidably, contradicts teachings of all three (3) major religions on marriage.

Students wearing Pride Flag shirts, is protected speech, but so is a kid wearing a shirt saying "Jesus Saves".  What is prohibited is messaging from school figures that coerces students to affirm the Pride Flag and what it stands for.  To say "We don't discriminate on the basis of sexual orientation here!" is one thing, and that is a statement of policy that is protected.  But the Pride Flag is more than a statement of non-discrimination; it's a statement of affirming sexual practices that are not authorized by Scripture.  And NO person should ever be coerced to affirm "Pride", in whatever manner they are being coerced to affirm it in.  And no child should be so coerced; the Rightness or Wrongness of this matter is a matter for parents, and not for teachers.  If teachers can't accept that, they need to find a new job, or be fired if they can't stay within this boundary.

God never weighed in on marriage or sexuality. The people who also thought mixing dyes and eating shellfish was death penalty level blasphemy weighed in but neither God in the OT or Jesus in the NT talked about it. The closests God or Jesus touch on it either involves making bias assumptions about what was going on in Sodom and Gomorrah that upset God or extrapolating Jesus’ debate about marriage and divorce that the Pharisees towards a position on gay marriage

[Hindsight was 2020]

Pride Flags are not a symbol of basic human decency. They are a political statement that directly conflicts with the Scriptural religious beliefs of every "Christian denomination", Jews, and Muslims.

Yes, they are.

By your logic, you can use religion as a shield to uphold all kinds of abhorrent beliefs. If - hypothetically speaking - the Holy Bible, or a major religious text in whatever particular secular society we would be discussing, said "the black people beyond Egypt are subhuman. They are not actually "people" in God's eyes, and therefore you should not treat them as such. Do not marry them, do not break bread with them". If a major holy book in a secular country said that, then "black people are people too and they are equal", would not be, quote, "a symbol of basic human decency", because they contradict the book. It would be, quote, "a political statement".

So, in conclusion, please explain to us why "it says it in the book" is carte blanche to justify anything and everything, without providing any further reasoning that could hold up to any sort of scrutiny.

( edited for spelling, oop )

Religious teachings are protected under the 1st Amendment.  Religious PRACTICES are a different matter, but Religious Teaching is prohibited.

Public schools that actively contradict what God considers to be ordained marriage in conflict with what Scripture teaches, or what God-sanctioned sexuality is, are, indeed, moving into the religious thicket.  The Pride Flag IS a political statement and a statement that, unavoidably, contradicts teachings of all three (3) major religions on marriage.

Students wearing Pride Flag shirts, is protected speech, but so is a kid wearing a shirt saying "Jesus Saves".  What is prohibited is messaging from school figures that coerces students to affirm the Pride Flag and what it stands for.  To say "We don't discriminate on the basis of sexual orientation here!" is one thing, and that is a statement of policy that is protected.  But the Pride Flag is more than a statement of non-discrimination; it's a statement of affirming sexual practices that are not authorized by Scripture.  And NO person should ever be coerced to affirm "Pride", in whatever manner they are being coerced to affirm it in.  And no child should be so coerced; the Rightness or Wrongness of this matter is a matter for parents, and not for teachers.  If teachers can't accept that, they need to find a new job, or be fired if they can't stay within this boundary.

God never weighed in on marriage or sexuality. The people who also thought mixing dyes and eating shellfish was death penalty level blasphemy weighed in but neither God in the OT or Jesus in the NT talked about it. The closests God or Jesus touch on it either involves making bias assumptions about what was going on in Sodom and Gomorrah that upset God or extrapolating Jesus’ debate about marriage and divorce that the Pharisees towards a position on gay marriage

It's a slipperly slope though, because if what you're saying is true, then well, let's call into Question the Trinity, because the Bible doesn't neccsarily reference the Trinitarian doctrine.


Sola Scriptura folks.

That’s a bit of an apples and oranges comparison because the trinity and its nature are informed through Jesus’ actions not so much making assumptions on positions he never discussed. Plus Jesus saying “I and my Father are one” in John’s gospel is way closer to Jesus discussing the Trinity than anything he said that could be read into His position on homosexuality