• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

Oklahoma Supreme Court: Ten Commandments Monument Must Be Removed

Status
Not open for further replies.
Unfortunately the U.S Supreme Court in Van Order V. Perry that 10 commandments was constitutional based on historical reasons. I don't agree with it and it was a 5-4 split. Curious to see what happens here.

The Oklahoma ruling specifically says it violates the Oklahoma constitution. Can't wait to see all the people yelling "States Rights" about marriage equality turn a 180.
 

Trojita

Rapid Response Threadmaker
If you make a law that says you can't do it then don't do it is how I see it. Thing is...I don't understand why they made the law? I'm an atheist and don't mind religious stuff out there. It'd be like getting offended at someone saying Merry Christmas or Happy Hannukah instead of Happy Holidays to me.

Way I see it is if you want to let this one rock then just abolish the law and let everyone have permission to put up statues. That'd be my solution honestly...let everyone have a voice instead of either giving one preferential allowances or plain silencing them all. Just let it rock and let em all celebrate what they love. I'm always more for good will towards all than tightening the reigns honestly.

The problem is it being at government grounds and the need then to include any monuments on religious ground, no matter how frivolous.
 

BocoDragon

or, How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Realize This Assgrab is Delicious
These two always get me.

No idols please -> Statue of Virgin Mary, Jesus on the Cross, Ten Commandment tablet
Sabbath is broken to hell and back when they change it from Saturday to Sunday

No one could sense the irony of no idol rule when erecting the Ten Commandment explicitly saying so.
The Bible is also a textbook idol.

Get it.. "Textbook idol"? Tee hee

But really.. It is. A collection of Christian newsletters that they put together and decided over a few generations of fanboyism was the "word of God". They certainly do worship that book they made... An idolatrous object that is not actually the divine, but mistaken for the divine.
 

Dai101

Banned
The Bible is also a textbook idol.

Get it.. "Textbook idol"? Tee hee

Mv0BEAB.gif



Awww I wanted Baphomet erected.

He always is.
 

BocoDragon

or, How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Realize This Assgrab is Delicious
I get where you were going with this but you really should have said non-Abrahamic. The Ten Commandments came from the Jewish scripture. Jews, Christians, and Muslims all worship the same God.
Yeah that's true. I thought about saying Abrahamic but kept it simple.
 
If you make a law that says you can't do it then don't do it is how I see it. Thing is...I don't understand why they made the law? I'm an atheist and don't mind religious stuff out there. It'd be like getting offended at someone saying Merry Christmas or Happy Hannukah instead of Happy Holidays to me.

These aren't even remotely close to the same thing. One is a government that is showing favor to a particular religion, suggesting that everyone else is a second class citizen or their beliefs are less than the chosen faith. The other is a single individual's greeting, an expression of their personal beliefs.

Way I see it is if you want to let this one rock then just abolish the law and let everyone have permission to put up statues. That'd be my solution honestly...let everyone have a voice instead of either giving one preferential allowances or plain silencing them all. Just let it rock and let em all celebrate what they love. I'm always more for good will towards all than tightening the reigns honestly.

Everyone does have a voice. No one is being silenced. But by having a monument to a particular faith on government property, you're giving special attention to that faith. You're giving that faith a louder voice than any other. This is not a tightening of the reigns, it is putting everyone back on equal footing.
 

sangreal

Member
It's not a commandment to people visiting the court or something that has been established within the legal system. It's a purely aesthetic monument that exists because it's a famous set of laws. If they had a monument of the Code of Hammurabi I wouldn't feel compelled at all to follow any of the laws because I would recognise immediately that it's merely a thematically appropriate aesthetic monument.

This ruling has nothing to do with the establishment clause. As the OP article states, it is based on the OK constitution, not the US constitution

No public money or property shall ever be appropriated,
applied, donated, or used, directly or indirectly, for the use,
benefit, or support of any sect, church, denomination, or system
of religion, or for the use, benefit, or support of any priest,
preacher, minister, or other religious teacher or dignitary, or
sectarian institution as such.

seems pretty clear to me
 
Since the original monument was erected in 2012, several other groups have asked to put up their own monuments on the Capitol grounds. Among them is a group that wants to erect a 7-foot-tall statue that depicts Satan as Baphomet, a goat-headed figure with horns, wings and a long beard.

I think we know why the ten commandments are being removed now.

Was hoping for the Baphomet statue to be placed first :(
 

demon

I don't mean to alarm you but you have dogs on your face
The Oklahoma ruling specifically says it violates the Oklahoma constitution. Can't wait to see all the people yelling "States Rights" about marriage equality turn a 180.

How does this work? Doesn't the US Constitution always supersede state constitutions?
 

RDreamer

Member
Just saw something about this posted on my Facebook by my aunt with her saying "What a joke. Where is our Freedom of Speech?"

When are conservatives going to learn what Freedom of Speech actually means? It's really not that hard of a concept to grasp, but so few of them ever do.
 

boiled goose

good with gravy
To those who would not be bothered by a Christian/Jewish monument on the Oklahoma courthouse:

See, I would not be bothered by it if circumstances were different.
If Christians (not all people disclaimer!!!) in this country were not trying to infiltrate their beliefs into our laws and our education it would probably be harmless and of course other monuments of other faiths would also be allowed.

THAT SAID

Christians have denied basic rights to gays as late as last weekend.
Christians have tried to introduce creationism into science classrooms.
Christians pass 'morality' based laws as often as possible.
Christians have tried to teach a false historical narrative about the US being a Christian nation.
Christians used their book to justify slavery.
Christians use their religion to deny body autonomy to women.
Christians introduced "In God We Trust" into our money in the last century
Christians introduced "Under God" in the pledge of allegiance in the last century.

So...HELL NO.

We all know their intentions.
 

GaimeGuy

Volunteer Deputy Campaign Director, Obama for America '16
I literally just had this conversation on FB:


Cousin: I can't believe Oklahoma has folded on this. It's not right. God is basically being removed a little at a time.

Me: It endorses a religion which the state Gov can't legally do.

Cousin: So you are saying you agree with this?

Me: Doesn't matter what i agree with. The law is the law. There is a reason we are a Democracy and not a Theocracy. Our Founding Fathers knew this.

Cousin: It absolutely DOES matter if your agree or not. There is a very small percentage of the public that made this happen. It happened because too many people are afraid to stand up and say something because we have all been turned into sheep and convinced that anything said will be deemed as offensive, racists, bigotry, etc.

Me: How did this small percentage effect THE LAW? This went to the courts, the LEGAL COURTS, who used thier knowledge of THE LAW to say that this is not LEGAL. So are you saying that even if it's illegal as deemed by the PEOPLE who created and voted on these laws (keeping in mind the seperation of church and state) that it should stay there? Would you be just as adamant if it was buddist statue? Or a satanic one? Should the law be changed because it's YOUR religion? Do you understand how that's biased and the reason that law even exists?

Cousin: Pilgrim.....do you believe in God?

Me: Dude, really? If you think this is an attack on religion then there is no need to continue this.

Cousin: You're right. No need to continue. (But I will say a prayer for you).

I WILL PRAY FOR YOU, PILGRIM

I WILL PRAY FOR YOOOUUUUUUUUUUUUUUU! *tear*
 

Monocle

Member
I see the War on Christianity continues apace. Do you hear that sound on the wind, wayfarer? It's Satan clicking his hooves.
 
I see the War on Christianity continues apace. Do you hear that sound on the wind, wayfarer? It's Satan clicking his hooves.
How could satan click his hooves if he only has two legs? Wouldn't he have to sit on a really tall chair and / or have tiny little baby legs?
 
How does this work? Doesn't the US Constitution always supersede state constitutions?

The US Constitution's 10th Amendment:

The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.

The US constitution only supersedes states when enacting its specific enumerated powers. So in this case Oklahoma is free to have (and enforce) a stricter separation of church and state than the national standard.

How could satan click his hooves if he only has two legs? Wouldn't he have to sit on a really tall chair and / or have tiny little baby legs?

Like so, I imagine.

VUuIysO.gif
 
I find it weird how some people take for granted the preferential treatment their religion receives (from their society and government) to the point that anything that intends to equalize the playing field--even constitutionally--is viewed as an attack or an act of persecution (against the majority).
 

Codeblue

Member
I can't believe this state actually got something right. Maybe we can stop being so monumentally dumb on every other issue now.
 

FyreWulff

Member
As someone who does not believe in God or religion those mean absolutely nothing to me. If anything I would look at that monument as an art piece then a religious symbol. I don't understand how people get offended by things they don't believe in, that's like being offended by someone who says they hunt unicorns for sport.

Government buildings and grounds should be as neutral as possible. They shouldn't be defacto proselytization amplifiers for one particular religion, who already enjoy tax-free land ownership elsewhere.

Also, a lot of these ten commandment monuments are actually ads.. because they were paid to be put there as an ad for CC Demille's Ten Commandments movie.

Aren't only like 2 of the 10 actually represented in US law, and the rest are just pure applesauce?

It's actually canonically law that the US is not based on the Christian religion. Right in a treaty written and signed by a Founding Father.
 

Fusebox

Banned
Lol, that shadow. Oh my.

I am so sick of this argument. Why not put the code of Hammurabi up on the lawn? At least its laws are still generally against the law. Of the ten commandments, only TWO are definitively against the law in the US (Shalt not kill, shalt not steal), with a third (shalt not bear false witness) only the law when under oath (eg: perjury). The rest are completely irrelevant to the justice system. I don't know how anybody with half a brain could think this symbol was non-religious and a foundation of western law.

It's worse than that, iirr Oklahoma has the death penalty so they don't even follow the most obvious commandment on the list.

What a bunch of wankers.
 

K.Sabot

Member
The far right's incredibly literal interpretation of law is biting them back in the ass for once, I honestly thought they'd just ignore this until the troops would get sent in.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom