Ten Commandments no longer displayed at Giles school

NARROWS, Va. - The Ten Commandments will no longer be displayed in a Giles County school, but will be replaced with a page from a high school history textbook.

Read more
First Prev
of 2
Next Last
Justin Igger

Takoma Park, MD

#1 Jul 2, 2012
Looks like sanity wins.
hmm

Roanoke, VA

#3 Jul 4, 2012
Well, that was a tremendous waste of time and energy on a long since settled issue wasnt it. Maybe the people putting the ten commandment signs up should start following some of them
You know

Todd, NC

#4 Jul 4, 2012
There's this thing called separation of church and state. Schools are state run institutions, the Ten Commandments have no place there.
california

Goodview, VA

#5 Jul 25, 2012
Well I think it is a shame they took them down. When you had prayer in schools and before ballgames and your kids could walk to school without you having to worry about them getting kidnapped, raped or murdered before they got to school or shot after they got there,now you have drought's, floods, tsunami's, wild fire's, countrys trying to kill other countrys......when you take "GOD" out of everything you pay the ultimate price. God created us to live a peaceful life and to create a peaceful world. We have destroyed what he created. You reap what you sow. And whoever started the removal of the Ten Commandments.....I would not want to be you on judgement Day, some how I don't think the pearly gates will open for you.
Strel

Tallahassee, FL

#6 Jul 26, 2012
california wrote:
Well I think it is a shame they took them down. When you had prayer in schools and before ballgames and your kids could walk to school without you having to worry about them getting kidnapped, raped or murdered before they got to school or shot after they got there,now you have drought's, floods, tsunami's, wild fire's, countrys trying to kill other countrys......when you take "GOD" out of everything you pay the ultimate price. God created us to live a peaceful life and to create a peaceful world. We have destroyed what he created. You reap what you sow. And whoever started the removal of the Ten Commandments.....I would not want to be you on judgement Day, some how I don't think the pearly gates will open for you.
Post hoc, ergo propter hoc?

Google this phrase to find out why your are so wrong.

You might also want to look into Pascal's Wager.
JG WENTWORTH

Rupert, WV

#7 Jul 26, 2012
I have a structured settlement but i need cash now..........
Christian smistian

United States

#8 Jul 31, 2012
Well GREAT! That just gave all the "Christians" the go-ahead to bash, hate, & judge ANYONE & EVERYONE who agrees with this decision! I swear, to be such "Godly" people they sure don't act the way God would approve of! Last time I checked, it wasn't the self-proclaimed Christian's job to make judgement calls on everyone, except themselves, OF COURSE! If someone chooses to "sin", according to the Bible, they have to face their judge when the time has come. Unfortunately, Christians are the WORST offenders of the whole, "judge not, lest ye be judged" passage. At least God won't ever get too exhausted, considering all the "Christians" taking that portion of his workload off his shoulders. Haha, you "better-than-thou, judgemental Christians" crack me up! YOU will be the 1st ones that go to Hell! I guess you think if you go to church every Sunday, vote to display the Ten Commandments, only talk behind people's backs (never to their face), quote a few Bible verses, post pictures on facebook about how much you adore God, pray for people (or at least say you will) & tithe 10% of your paycheck every week God will just forget about all the judging you did on earth? Here's an idea.....stop picking apart anyone with different ideas, beliefs, and/or religions & worry about yourself. Start by repenting your own sins, raising your own children, keeping your own skeletons in your closet, sweeping your own back porch, making your own decisions, & living your own life and maybe, JUST MAYBE, God will show you a little mercy when YOUR judgement day comes! The day you will be saying, "Hmmmmm.....maybe I should have been working on getting right with God instead of working on getting everyone else right with God!" Display the Commandments in your OWN home, get a bumper sticker with them on it & put it on your OWN car, make a shirt with them on the front & back! Just because the school system won't allow them to be displayed doesn't mean YOU can't display them. A REAL Christian would not let the fact that school is not the appropriate place to display the Ten Commandments affect their life! They would PROUDLY display them wherever they COULD, & if they can't physically display them they will STILL have them in their heart. If you people spent as much energy on helping, loving, & supporting your fellow humans (regardless of what they believe) as you are fighting to inappropriately display a religious document (that btw may OFFEND other religions) this world would be a much better place! Why is it ok to condone & support YOUR religion if you DO NOT support other religions wishes? What makes YOU better than the person beside you? You are asking to have things YOUR way without taking OTHER ways into consideration! You truely get back what you put in! Just because you say, "I am a Christian", that does not mean you are a Christian, or even a good person. Do unto OTHERS as YOU would have THEM do unto YOU!

Since: Jul 10

Narrows

#9 Aug 4, 2012
The phrase,"separation of church and state" is not in the constitution.Check the 1st amendmendment.
But,it was silly and expensive to take it to court.Displaying the commandments and other religious statements in legal places would have been better.
Let your light shine as a Christian through the good works you do.Put a bag of food on someone's doorstep,give a poor family some clothes,show kindness and mercy to those around you.We are not perfect,but we are able to do some good in this world.That would spread the message of Christ more effectively than anything.

Since: Jul 10

Narrows

#10 Aug 4, 2012
Strel wrote:
<quoted text>
Post hoc, ergo propter hoc?
Google this phrase to find out why your are so wrong.
You might also want to look into Pascal's Wager.
I think you are trying a little too hard with the Latin.Pascal's wager is an exercise in logic that would seem to support a belief in God.Aside from being a pioneer in decision theory,Pascal believed in God.
Strel

Tallahassee, FL

#11 Aug 6, 2012
chandra23 wrote:
The phrase,"separation of church and state" is not in the constitution.Check the 1st amendmendment.
But,it was silly and expensive to take it to court.Displaying the commandments and other religious statements in legal places would have been better.
Let your light shine as a Christian through the good works you do.Put a bag of food on someone's doorstep,give a poor family some clothes,show kindness and mercy to those around you.We are not perfect,but we are able to do some good in this world.That would spread the message of Christ more effectively than anything.
The word "privacy" is not mentioned anywhere in the Constitution, does that mean you have no privacy rights under the 1st, 3rd, 5th, 6th, and 14th amendments? Clearly not.
Separation of church and state, by any other name, IS part of the Establishment clause and the centuries of jurisprudence of this country. Try reading the case law sometime, it is law also you know (or perhaps not).
You would have lost in court, for good reason.
Strel

Tallahassee, FL

#12 Aug 6, 2012
chandra23 wrote:
<quoted text>
I think you are trying a little too hard with the Latin.Pascal's wager is an exercise in logic that would seem to support a belief in God.Aside from being a pioneer in decision theory,Pascal believed in God.
Intimidated by a little Latin? I noticed you didn't bother addressing the glaring logical fallacy it describes that was your previous post.

Pascal's Wager is also a logical fallacy.

You are 0 for 2.

Since: Jul 10

Narrows

#13 Aug 6, 2012
Strel wrote:
<quoted text>
Intimidated by a little Latin? I noticed you didn't bother addressing the glaring logical fallacy it describes that was your previous post.
Pascal's Wager is also a logical fallacy.
You are 0 for 2.
You seem to bend facts to make them your own.So you are smarter than Pascal!Interesting.I didn't know the Latin was addressed to me.Looked it up.Don't see how it applies to any of the posts.
Strel

Tallahassee, FL

#14 Aug 6, 2012
chandra23 wrote:
<quoted text>
You seem to bend facts to make them your own.So you are smarter than Pascal!Interesting.I didn't know the Latin was addressed to me.Looked it up.Don't see how it applies to any of the posts.
What facts, specifically, did I "bend?"

Lots of people are smarter than Pascal. That does not make him any less a genius in the things that he was objective and correct about, but his famous Wager is a famous logical fallacy.

I understand that you don't get it. That's what is so funny.

Since: Jul 10

Narrows

#15 Aug 6, 2012
Strel wrote:
<quoted text>
What facts, specifically, did I "bend?"
Lots of people are smarter than Pascal. That does not make him any less a genius in the things that he was objective and correct about, but his famous Wager is a famous logical fallacy.
I understand that you don't get it. That's what is so funny.
Actually I do get it.That is what is so sad.I believe as Pascal did,that God is real.I'm guessing you are rather young.I've noticed young, college educated people enjoy displaying their newly acquired knowledge.I will even go out on a limb,and guess that you had a professor who was a non-believer.
Of course,I could be wrong.Maybe you are just an old fart,who thinks he's smarter than everyone else.Sad either way.But I acknowledge your right to your own opinion and insensitivity.

Since: Jul 10

Narrows

#16 Aug 6, 2012
Strel wrote:
<quoted text>
The word "privacy" is not mentioned anywhere in the Constitution, does that mean you have no privacy rights under the 1st, 3rd, 5th, 6th, and 14th amendments? Clearly not.
Separation of church and state, by any other name, IS part of the Establishment clause and the centuries of jurisprudence of this country. Try reading the case law sometime, it is law also you know (or perhaps not).
You would have lost in court, for good reason.
The first amendment is intended to prevent an established religion that every one had to join.This was the situation in England and many other countries.Subjects were required to attend the state church.No where does it state that religion is to be expunged from public places.this is a relatively new interpretation that ,hopefully,will be changed at some point.Case law is not the constitution and can be changed.
I didn't mention privacy and feel that I have very little!
Strel

Tallahassee, FL

#17 Aug 6, 2012
chandra23 wrote:
<quoted text>
Actually I do get it.That is what is so sad.I believe as Pascal did,that God is real.I'm guessing you are rather young.I've noticed young, college educated people enjoy displaying their newly acquired knowledge.I will even go out on a limb,and guess that you had a professor who was a non-believer.
Of course,I could be wrong.Maybe you are just an old fart,who thinks he's smarter than everyone else.Sad either way.But I acknowledge your right to your own opinion and insensitivity.
You should probably refrain from guessing, my knowledge is decades from being newly acquired.

Your second guess is also wrong, as is your third.

I also don't feel particularly obligated to be sensitive to people spreading ignorance and using infamous logical fallacies as "arguments", then getting defensive when they are called on it.

I am sorry that I make you sad. You, on the other hand, make me laugh.
Strel

Tallahassee, FL

#18 Aug 6, 2012
chandra23 wrote:
<quoted text>
The first amendment is intended to prevent an established religion that every one had to join.This was the situation in England and many other countries.Subjects were required to attend the state church.No where does it state that religion is to be expunged from public places.this is a relatively new interpretation that ,hopefully,will be changed at some point.Case law is not the constitution and can be changed.
I didn't mention privacy and feel that I have very little!
You are welcome to hold any opinion you like regarding the interpretation of the First Amendment, but the courts do not agree with you, and their word is law.

Once again, you make the strict constructionist textual argument. That's not how our legal system works, nor how it was ever intended to work, nor how it ever could realistically work.

I'll make a guess of my own. You don't have a lot of experience with the legal system.

"Expunged from public places" LOL!!!

Of course not, thanks to Free Exercise, private persons can express their religious views in public all they like, subject to the usual restrictions involving public safety and the rights of others.

That is NOT the issue here. The issue here is NOT a Free Exercise issue, but an Establishment clause issue. This is the state, in the form of a public school, publicly endorsing a specific religion (well, 2-3 technically). That is a direct, obvious and blatant violation of the Establishment clause. This issue has been tried more than once before the courts in various places around the nation, and guess which side wins?

Or you could just look up the cases yourself, and see why you are so wrong.

Since: Jul 10

Narrows

#19 Aug 6, 2012
Strel wrote:
<quoted text>
You are welcome to hold any opinion you like regarding the interpretation of the First Amendment, but the courts do not agree with you, and their word is law.
Once again, you make the strict constructionist textual argument. That's not how our legal system works, nor how it was ever intended to work, nor how it ever could realistically work.
I'll make a guess of my own. You don't have a lot of experience with the legal system.
"Expunged from public places" LOL!!!
Of course not, thanks to Free Exercise, private persons can express their religious views in public all they like, subject to the usual restrictions involving public safety and the rights of others.
That is NOT the issue here. The issue here is NOT a Free Exercise issue, but an Establishment clause issue. This is the state, in the form of a public school, publicly endorsing a specific religion (well, 2-3 technically). That is a direct, obvious and blatant violation of the Establishment clause. This issue has been tried more than once before the courts in various places around the nation, and guess which side wins?
Or you could just look up the cases yourself, and see why you are so wrong.
You seem to have a problem with simple english.I was talking about Nativity scenes being removed from public places.Prayer from school,etc.Law is changed all the time.Decisions are overturned.When Jefferson mentioned the wall separating the garden of the church from the wilderness outside(rough quote),I don't think all this modern nonsense is what he meant.Only time will tell which laws will hold up and which will eventually be changed.Myself and many others would like to see some of these changes.I don't think people need to be cruel in their remarks on either side.Sad to see Christians making crude,judgemental remarks.On the other hand,there is no need for you to club anyone with your education.I didn't know anyone needed a degree to comment on Topix.
Strel

Tallahassee, FL

#20 Aug 7, 2012
chandra23 wrote:
<quoted text>
You seem to have a problem with simple english.I was talking about Nativity scenes being removed from public places.Prayer from school,etc.Law is changed all the time.Decisions are overturned.When Jefferson mentioned the wall separating the garden of the church from the wilderness outside(rough quote),I don't think all this modern nonsense is what he meant.Only time will tell which laws will hold up and which will eventually be changed.Myself and many others would like to see some of these changes.I don't think people need to be cruel in their remarks on either side.Sad to see Christians making crude,judgemental remarks.On the other hand,there is no need for you to club anyone with your education.I didn't know anyone needed a degree to comment on Topix.
It's not my problem if you can't a) stay on the thread topic and b) figure out I was responding to another poster in the first place.
If I happen to be more educated than some people arguing this issue, that is also not my problem. Frankly I am sick and tired of seeing our legal system, the Constitution and even the basic history of the nation twisted and misrepresented by fundamentalist loonies, who not only embarrass themselves but embarrass the nation with their ignorance.

Since: Jul 10

Narrows

#21 Aug 7, 2012
Strel wrote:
<quoted text>
It's not my problem if you can't a) stay on the thread topic and b) figure out I was responding to another poster in the first place.
If I happen to be more educated than some people arguing this issue, that is also not my problem. Frankly I am sick and tired of seeing our legal system, the Constitution and even the basic history of the nation twisted and misrepresented by fundamentalist loonies, who not only embarrass themselves but embarrass the nation with their ignorance.
You replied to my post and even quoted bits of what I said in you remarks.Yes,posters get off the thread topic in response to remarks made by others.
I AM NOT A FUNDAMENTALIST!!!!!!I am embarassed by what some of them post on these sites.
I am sick of seeing biased and ignorant people twist our history and our Constitution.I thought I might make a difference in how a few people see things.Again I see that it is old-fashioned to believe in love and kindness;to actually care about fellow humans.It is heart-breaking to see our country become cold and uncaring.This country used to stand for higher ideals.I quit this site last year because I couldn't stand the cruelty.I suppose I will leave it to the young,who want to twist our laws until America means nothing anymore.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker
First Prev
of 2
Next Last

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Ripplemead Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Nikki smith pregnant? 1 hr ddddddd 5
Jeff Spicer 3 hr secret admirer 1
If I won the lottery 10 hr Wake up Alice 2
County deputys 14 hr serious 15
Brooke mcneer Tue Jake 20
Pavingscams Tue Scootch Gravely 4
terri Tue Lt Farva 12
More from around the web

Ripplemead People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

Personal Finance

Mortgages [ See current mortgage rates ]