If they let the 10 C’s in they have to let anything that comes along. Go Summums!
And what is this blather about other gods and idols. The being that’s supposed to have created this whole incredible universe, amazing beyond our (present, anyway) understanding, is supposed to be afraid of competition and tin gods? It’s almost like this “God” was just another god of just another tribe way back when that had been transported into the modern era.
And punishing children for the iniquity of parents?? Who would do that? Anyone who did would be rightly shunned or worse.
And the prohibitions against using “the Lord’s” name in vain and not working on sabbaths is working well.
And what’s this about slaves? Does this god condone owning slaves? Any park is better without these “commandments”.

“…this “God” was just another god of just another tribe way back when that had been transported into the modern era.
And punishing children for the iniquity of parents?? Who would do that?”
Funny thing that is- religious tradition is always looked at as non-changing, therefore giving eternal security.
Yet the whole ‘punish the children b/c of the parents’ thing goes back to when people didnt believe in an afterlife like believers of today and way back then satan was still just another angel serving god… folks who aspired to the revelations of yahweh believed you lived on thru your offspring(be fruitful and multiply), thats why there are so many curses in the OT.

Okay, no offensive to Nnmns and Mystery Poster, but your generalized disparages against the majority of humanity belief systems don’t really have anything to do with this article.
It seems to me that if secular monuments count as free speech, there is no logical reason religious ones should not. That being said, the merits of a monument should have something to do with relevance. Ten Commandments in a courthouse makes a degree of sense. If there’s some sort of connection between these Seven Aphorisms and something to do with that park or community, then the monument has some logic behind it.
God bless.

Actually, giving Mystery Poster a closer read, I can’t tell if that was meant to be disparaging…sorry if I read that too quickly before. God bless (again).

And you think I was trying to be disparaging?
What are the merits of a monument that shouts the insecurities of a god, or at least people’s idea of the insecurities of a god not to mention countenancing punishing children and grandchildren for what an ancestor did and countenancing owning slaves.
Joey, I wonder how much “the majority of humanity” (actually the largest one family of religions but far from half of humanity) actually thinks about the 10 C’s. And of those who do, how many shudder. I hope it’s few and lots respectively. It is, of course, the zealots who wouldn’t shudder who try to intrude their particular religion into public space.
But the 10 C’s are clearly relevant here because it’s their presence in public places which makes those public places available for whatever monuments any and all other religious groups care to place there. Take the 10 C’s to a place of honor on someone’s private land and the issue goes away. Of course that will be too simple for some religious zealots.
|, thanks for your analysis of the punish the children bit. That sounds reasonable to me. Of course it implies if these were inspired by a god that god hadn’t gotten the memo about eternal life and Satan.

Consider these five cultural artifacts:
- The 10 Commandments
- The Magna Carta
- The Declaration of Independence
- Martin Luther King’s “I have a dream” speech
- The Seven Aphorisms of Summum
Four of them have had an indelible, positive impact on American culture, if not the whole of western civ, if not all of humanity.
Four of these artifacts are part of our cultural heritage. They are our “roots”.
Four of them make explicit reference and indeed are founded upon the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob.
Four of them actually _deserve_ to be memorialized.
So, thank you, Mr. Rabid Anti-Religionist, for doing your best to destroy what took thousands of years to build. You will be remembered for having using the very freedoms this culture granted you to inject a poison back into it.

I agree, nnmns, if they have had the 10 Big C’s sitting in their park for 47 years, how can they say that the other groups 7 rules or whatever they are can’t go there too?

“So, thank you, Mr. Rabid Anti-Religionist, for doing your best to destroy what took thousands of years to build. You will be remembered for having using the very freedoms this culture granted you to inject a poison back into it.”
Kaffinator it seems you can’t contradict what I say so you resort to slandering it. If you can defend the 10 C’s as having positive value, do so. We probably agree honoring our parents is good (assuming they deserve honor; some parents are vile) and that murder and adultery and theft are bad (but what about the person who steals because it’s the only way he can feed his family) and lying is almost always bad (I’d say it’s sometimes acceptable to lie to protect a person but it often doesn’t work; if you lie to support an idea or a religion that shows only the falsity of what you are protecting or your inability to debate. Keep that in mind, Kaffinator.)
But what positive impact on American culture is a purported quote from a tribal god telling its worshipers to cleave only unto it? And of all the things they or we could be warned about what’s the big deal about taking its name in vain? And while a day of rest a week is very good, two days are better and labor unions have come close to getting that.
And the slavery bit and punishing kids and grandkids for what their parents did are immoral.
Now let’s talk about “what took thousands of years to build”. Just what did you mean by that? Not America, it’s newer than that and I love America anyway. Is it Christianity you are worried about? If so, show what’s wrong with my argument, don’t claim I’m wrong to make it because this is America and we can argue for anything we like. Rejoice in that.

I rarely, if ever, agree with you, nnmns, but I usually respect you. This in spite of the fact your anti-religious prejudices are quite obvious. You have a knack for turning every issue discussed here into an anti-religion tirade, seldom supported by fact, always the expression of your opinion. And that’s okay. Opinions are fine. I have lots of them, too.
But I have to wonder just why you want to bother with all of us brainless religious nuts here. Why not just pass us off as hopelessly stupid people and go on your way? You know you are never going to change our minds, and I doubt we will change yours. Isn’t there a website for atheists to get together and encourage each other in their own set of superstitions, just as you claim we do? Why bother with us?
Just wondering.

WC, I care about you. And I also care about what our governments allow to be in public places as though they endorse them. I think it would make the US and its local governments look bad if they seem to endorse something like the 10 C’s and more importantly I’m a big fan of separation of church and state. I worry about the state; you should worry about both.
And I see a lot of smart people here. I respect you, too but not everything you say. I like to think I’ve got a few friends here. Kaffinator and I got off to a bad start; don’t think I view you as I do him.
But I view some parts of Christianity as very dangerous to our country and I’m also here to point out why Christianity is not something to take as seriously as those people do.

The only ones we are missing now are Murphy’s Law and Sturgeon’s Law (90 percent of everything is “cr*p”). Of course, someone will misspell “Murphy’s” and the “monument” with Sturgeon’s Law will be made of plastic.

nnmns – Um actually I wasn’t referring specifically to you when I wrote to “Mr Rabid Anti-religionist” but … if the label suits you, be my guest
Look, we could argue all day about whether the ten commandments make any sense. (I would start by asking which rules you are using to evaluate the ten commandments by, and where you got THOSE rules, and why THEY make sense.) But fortunately, that argument is not germane to the point I was making, which is that the influence of the 10C’s on American culture is undeniable. It’s one of our common cultural roots. Deny it if you like, but the idea of a common code of law to which ALL are bound is a hallmark of true civilization, and the 10 C’s are a seminal example.
Windsor – atheists post at places like B*Net because in fact they have nothing much really SAY anywhere else. Shadows don’t exist without a source of light. In a similar way, the contemporary breed of American atheist must fuel itself with an unreflective, reactive loathing of Christianity. Therefore, it must hang out at the periphery, launching poorly-argued books or blog posts or what have you, because when it tries to exist on its own it quickly spins itself into irrelevance.
But personally I like having atheists like nnmns around, donning the multicolored tights and doing the court jester bit. Keeps us sharp.

jestrfyl, I’d support monuments for those laws. But, let’s face it, they wear better on bumper stickers and t-shirts and nylon-mesh ballcaps and such, don’t you think?

Kaffinator you are clearly of the “I can’t debate worth a darn but I can make irrelevant obnoxious claims with the best of them” school of conservative intellectuals. Note I didn’t say intellectuals.

“Deny it if you like, but the idea of a common code of law to which ALL are bound is a hallmark of true civilization, and the 10 C’s are a seminal example.”
Are you saying we are bound by the 10 C’s? Surely not. So you must be saying someone somewhere was bound by them. But that’s true of a lot of codes, many more sensible than the 10 C’s.
A far better example would be Hammurabi’s Code, of which it is said “The code is often pointed to as the first example of the legal concept that some laws are so basic as to be beyond the ability of even a king to change. Hammurabi had the laws inscribed in stone, so they were immutable.”
His code was given by a person, it’s not a pretend code given by a god many of us don’t even believe in (actually that god is so foreign to our modern beliefs that likely no one believes in it; maybe some ultra orthodox Jews).
Granted there are 282 of them but they could be in cuneiform; it’s the principal of the thing, right?

“religious zealots”…”tin gods”…”peoples idea of the insecurities of a god”…”god hadn’t gotten the memo”….
I appreciate the props, but, nnmns, I really don’t think I’m in your league when it comes to irrelevant obnoxious claims. I simply wouldn’t _dream_ of asking you to cede your turf!

That’s the trouble. A bunch of Christians decided that a copy of the 10C’s whould be appropriate for a city park never dreaming that some other religious group whould demand equal access. Arrogance born of ignorance — how many sins have been commited in thy name (it would be too easy to make a George Bush aside here, so I shall refrain)? I fear that, unless the city remove the 10C memorial form their park, they may be forced to accept any number of tacky stone tschokes commemorating the various and sundry superstions to which human beings are prone. Won’t someone think of the children?!?

Long as the IPU has a place to stamp her holy hoofs!

Kaffinator-
Out of you five “cultural artifacts”, only two are truly American….The Declaration of Independence and MKL’s “I’ve Got a Dream” speech. So, if we are going to exclude ideas that are not truly “American” then only the DI and MKL’s speech should remain.
As far as your comments on nnmns and atheists…..as a Christian who is focused on following the teachings of Christ….I find I agree with his points far more often that than I do of many of the self-identified Christians who seem to be more focused on following the teachings of Paul.
BTW, this is the United States of America. We are a free nation…not a Christian nation. Our forebearers settled this country based on the concept of freedom of (and, from) religion. Our forebearers founded this nation based on the concept of liberty. There is plenty of space for all people….without the exclusion of any people. There is even space for Paulians.
It will be interesting to see what SCOTUS does with this case. The outcome may be a C-change for many people.
The ACLJ is using scare tactics to get the faithful sheep fired up to donate the big bucks. So, I think we can suppose that there will be many more articles about this in bnet in the future.
The Big Ten are often discussed as though there is complete agreement as to what are the specific Ten Commandments….much as the term Christianity is used as though all Christians agree on what the important beliefs are that make one a Christian. Well, there is not agreement on what are the specific commandments nor, what are the non-negotiable beliefs that make one Christian.
With that said, I am amazed that some Christians believe that there is not room for the thoughts/beliefs of other people (non-Christians).
Peace!

JohnQ, thank you. And excellent post.
“”religious zealots”…”tin gods”…”peoples idea of the insecurities of a god”…”god hadn’t gotten the memo”….”
Well Kaffinator those aren’t Religiously Correct so I’m not surprised you find them obnoxious. Somehow that doesn’t worry me.
But since the Summum’s very reasonable claim for a place for their Aphorisms is based on the 10 C’s presence in the park and since we can predict some people (religious zealots) would object to their removal, even to a “place of honor” on private land, a discussion of the contents and merits of the 10 C’s is clearly relevant.
Now if you look at them you are (if your eyes are open) struck by the ancient Israelis’ priests’ claims their god is afraid of other gods and metallic (ok, maybe not tin) god idols. And the mystery poster gave a reasonable explanation of the barbaric punishment of children and even grandchildren for their parents’ bad deeds based on the idea an afterlife had not yet been invented. But if we bow to the claim the 10 C’s are from a god and that god didn’t know about afterlives there’s an obvious breakdown of communication between that OT god and NT claims. Funny, huh?

JohnQ, I wasn’t claiming that Americans wrote them. Obviously. Only that they have, and continue to exert, a significant influence upon America.
And, please, nobody is saying that “there is not room for the thoughts/beliefs of other people”. In terms of freedoms, certain people are gunning to eliminate any mention of God from public discourse anywhere. Them’s the thought-police you ought be worrying about.
nnmns – *gasp* you would recommend the code of Hammurabi with its rules for buying and selling slaves? I’m disappointed in you.

For some reason a post I sent out got hung up in moderation. Guess I will pack up my plastic shovels and go play in another sandbox. Have a good day, y’all.

It happens to all of us now and then.

nnmns-
I will suggest to you that it is not God that changed… but rather mankind’s understanding, conceptualization, and interpretation of God that has changed.
Yes, many early writings…as well as the words of many current day preachers makes God sound jealous, insecure, egotistical, hot-tempered, misogynistic, sexist, heterocentric, and paternalistic, etc. These are the words and/or beliefs of the author/speaker…not, of God.
The laws that actually govern physics have not changed….however, mankind’s interpretation and written description of those laws continues to change. I will suggest to you that this is the same with God.
Peace!

JohnQ, that all makes sense if you assume
a) there is a god, which of course I don’t but will give you a pass on here to proceed to b) and
b) the 10 C’s and the Bible were not divinely inspired. If they were I think you’d have to presume they represent the inspirer and then start wondering about whether there are different inspirers over time or whether there’s one changing its mind. Or of course maybe they were originally inspired but after that miscopyings and editings and etc were uninspired, which brings into question the point of inspiring the original.
I don’t know how far down the not-divinely-inspired road you are willing to go.
To me, of course, the simplest explanation is that those ancient Israeli priests wanted their god to be a jealous one so the folks wouldn’t wander away and the people working on the Bible later weren’t able to edit the OT to suit their new religion because the OT was in other hands. So it’s not surprising they represent different gods because those gods’ inventors had different agendas.

As I mentioned in my only post, if the town insists on leaving the 10 C’s in a public park 47 years running (which I find inappropriate, separation of church and state) they, in “fairness” should allow anyone with a set of religious rules in the public park…diversity of religious expression. This is taking place in Utah, land of Mormons, after all. Actually the 10 C’s should just be removed and there would be no reason for any other religious rules to be on a monument, stuck in the park.

It isn’t a question of being “brainless religious nuts”. It’s about pushing a religious agenda into the public square.
The 10 Commandments have no business being there in the first place. As the article points out, if they are allowed to stay, then not only should the Summum monument be allowed, but also Fred Phelps’s horrendous anti-gay agenda should be allowed, along with a counter argument on the pro-gay side.
It would have NO end. What would come next, an animal rights monument? A scroll with an anti-smoking tirade? The Sermon on the Mount? A Goth shrine?
Come on folks. Religion is – and should remain – a PERSONAL decision. Heck, when I grew up, in a sect of the Christian religion, it was called “a personal relationship with Jesus”. Please let’s keep it that way. You go to your church and I’ll go to mine, and let’s all of us leave it out of the public square.

Windosr’s Child,
You ask, “Isn’t there a website for atheists Isn’t there a website for atheists to get together and encourage each other in their own set of superstitions?
WE, OTOH, could ask the same of you in regards to the public park being used for religious purposes. Isn’t there a Church Christians could go to to get together and encourage each other in their own set of superstitions?

I have no problem leaving the decision of which monuments to place in public parks up to city officials – just as long as they avoid showing any religious favortism (as should be the case whenever government is involved). I would say the the 10 commandment monument crosses the line, but I still wouldn’t say it’s worth the trouble to have it removed, necessarily. For future installments, however, the selection should be limited to secular (not atheist, mind you) works of art.
No Summumisms, please.

Ah but if you leave the 10 C’s you surely have to let anything else religious in.

Don’t get me wrong – I’d prefer to see them gone. But, much like “In God We Trust” printed on the money and “One Nation Under God” in the pledge, while I would much rather be rid of them altogether, I can live with them if only because they were put in place during different times.

“Isn’t there a website for atheists Isn’t there a website for atheists to get together and encourage each other in their own set of superstitions?”
What set of superstitions is that WC? It’s no “superstition” to conclude there’s no god in the total absence of proof there is one.
Superstition: An unreasonable belief based on ignorance and sometimes fear
or
Superstition: A belief in something not justified by reason or evidence.
So while individual atheists may, for instance, avoid stepping on cracks we don’t have superstitions common to us all like members of a religion do.
Join us. It doesn’t hurt a thing and we’d be glad to have you.

“I simply wouldn’t _dream_ of asking you to cede your turf!”
Posted by: Kaffinator | April 2, 2008 12:03 AM
Sorry, folks, for not putting my name on the post about ‘religious tradition as non-changing’, didnt mean to be cowardly; but the above quote exemplifies how religious rigorism changes.
From the times of Theodosius I closing pagan temples all the way to wanting a ban on the teaching of evolution- the authoritarians now, with less authority, want “completeness and fairness” without you cedeing your turf, all the while arguing for a privileged status for their beliefs.
And in regards to kaffinators little list, would he ever put Thomas Paines ‘Common Sense’ on it? Probably not.
Go summums!

It might not be good for you Kaffinator here if I am on your side but I think you make very good points, debate with the fairness of a gentleperson and are far less insulting then most of the frequent flyers here. Don’t be discouraged they will try to gang up they have the a dark alliance with subtle destruction personally but blatant destruction for Christianity.
Be blessed and strong.

Kaffinator, it looks like you have been “warned” by the mystery poster. Some of us have a different outlook on things. I don’t want to destroy Christianity. I just don’t believe in it. Had my chance, said forget it. Why would I want to destroy it?

I have no problem leaving the decision of which monuments to place in public parks up to city officials – just as long as they avoid showing any religious favortism (as should be the case whenever government is involved). I would say the the 10 commandment monument crosses the line, but I still wouldn’t say it’s worth the trouble to have it removed, necessarily. For future installments, however, the selection should be limited to secular (not atheist, mind you) works of art.
No Summumisms, please.
Sorry Thelemite, but you can’t have it both ways. Displaying The 10Cs already DOES show “religious favoritism”. And so does your insistence that no atheist installments be allowed. And so does not allowing the Summums.
Why do your beliefs trump mine/others’?