Quantcast
Opinion

Letters: Political correctness has gone too far

Comments

Return To Article
  • The Real Maverick Orem, UT
    July 3, 2013 12:25 a.m.

    What has park angered? I don't get it.

  • embarrassed Utahn! Salt Lake City, UT
    July 3, 2013 5:13 a.m.

    Oh how sad to be in the persecuted majority! I'm so thankful that Atheists are helping to keep religion where it should be...in your place of worship and out of the "town square".

  • JoeBlow Far East USA, SC
    July 3, 2013 6:50 a.m.

    "Christians are told not to believe what we believe and that it is offensive to others — but the fact is others are offending us"

    Can you provide anything to back up that claim?

    I highly doubt that anyone, atheist or not, cares what you believe.

    Do you need statues on public property in order to believe? Or the 10 commandments posted in public places to believe? Or prayer in public school to believe?

    There are hundreds of religions out there. It makes much more sense to keep them all off of public property than to allow them all.

    It is not about being "politically correct".

    It is about being "Constitutionally correct"

  • Blue Salt Lake City, UT
    July 3, 2013 6:50 a.m.

    Given that Mormons are an even smaller minority than atheists, may we expect that the letter writer will encourage "offended" Mormons to stop playing the persecution card and begin showing more acceptance whenever other religions are critical of their beliefs?

  • RanchHand Huntsville, UT
    July 3, 2013 7:01 a.m.

    "Atheists count for less than 12 percent of the U.S. and just over 2 percent in the world. Those people should show tolerance and quit filing lawsuits and being so offended by something that causes them no real harm."

    Way to go Patricia; but isn't that just the opposite of what you've endorsed in other letters you've written to the editors of both the DN and SLTrib?

    Please take your own advice. Christians should also show tolerance and quit filing laws and lawsuits and quit being offended BY SOMETHING THAT CAUSES THEM NO REAL HARM. Same sex marriages.

    What is good for the goose is good for the gander, Patricia.

  • Stalwart Sentinel San Jose, CA
    July 3, 2013 7:05 a.m.

    Seriously, DesNews? I understand that opinion forums are a place to engender debate but all you had to do was read the very first sentence of the First Amendment to deem this letter unworthy for publication. And yes, the USA does prohibit the Ten Commandments and Jesus statues in public forums - both immediately fail the first prong of the Lemon Test (statue must have a secular purpose). In fact, Stone v Graham explicitly stated that the Ten Commandments have no secular purpose. Christian zealots once dressed up the Ten Commandments with a bunch of American flag noise in Van Orden v Perry to give it "secular purpose" but that case is an outlier. Indeed, in Everson v. Board of Education the SCOTUS stated "The 1st Amendment has erected a wall between church and state. That wall must be kept high and impregnable. We could not approve the slightest breach." Give it time, the Jesus ski statue will come down.

    As a Christian, I find neither the Ten Commandments objectionable nor a Jesus statue offensive. What I do find offensive is that some Christians believe they need to violate the COTUS and engage in idol worship on public lands.

  • Midvaliean MIDVALE, UT
    July 3, 2013 7:30 a.m.

    I agree PC has gone to far. But the ten commandments ruling is not a part of this. This is about government NOT endorsing religion, not a PC issue. But a fundamental issue, I for one would rather see lady justice or the regular Fed/state gov architecture when I'm at the courthouse, not what the zealots want us to display.

  • pragmatistferlife salt lake city, utah
    July 3, 2013 7:42 a.m.

    I'm sure this will fly right by Pati, but, you don't have to be offended by the ten commandments to be offended by a plague of the ten commandments being placed on public property. Being offended by a statue of Jesus on federal land doesn't mean you are offended by Jesus. In fact you all would be wise to have a healthy respect for a separation of church and state in all aspects. Many states have preemptively passed laws against Sharia law so apparently Christians do believe in a separation of state and church, as long as it's someone else's church.

  • Tolstoy salt lake, UT
    July 3, 2013 7:55 a.m.

    Once again limiting your ability to force your religion on others is not oppression.

  • Ultra Bob Cottonwood Heights, UT
    July 3, 2013 8:10 a.m.

    Oh that I could have a special filter on my eyes and ears that would prevent me from seeing or hearing that which offends me, before I see it. Lacking such a filter I will just have to settle for a negotiated agreement between the others I live with to temper their advertising. America tries to do just that.

    Somewhere in the way-back, religion and churches claimed the right and privilege to tell others what they should believe and also what they should do. For the most part America put limits on the “do” part of religion to allow the “belief” part to be unlimited.

    When you advertise your religion you are trying to tell others what to believe and what they should do. The advertising isn’t necessary for the loyalty of members of your church, so it must be aimed at non-members. We allow the clothes, jewelry that people wear along with building form and shape and even prayers and other actions in public places. Signs, monuments, statues and displays are sometime found to be troublesome when put in the public square.

    Rule: keep your religion to your self.

  • Tekakaromatagi Dammam, Saudi Arabia
    July 3, 2013 8:22 a.m.

    I was in Boston recently. When we went around there were statues of Mary on a lot of lawns. That is part of the diversity of Boston. I noted in a park that there was a statue and people had put prayer candles around the statue. I noted to the person that was hosting me that this would not be allowed in Utah. She smiled and said, "Well, in Boston, we are more liberal."

  • Kalindra Salt Lake City, Utah
    July 3, 2013 8:23 a.m.

    The reasoning of he author seems to be that since she is a member of the majority, her religious beliefs should be given precedence.

    Islam is the fastest growing religion in the world - will she feel the same when it is a statue of Mohammad?

  • george of the jungle goshen, UT
    July 3, 2013 8:24 a.m.

    Minding your manners is simply to be considerate and appreciative. To honor your mom and dad is to support yourself and respect their property. The code of conduct of the Myion Indians was; 1. Watch what you say. 2. don't take what anyone said to heart or personally. 3. Never assume anything. 4. Always do your best. Religion is what you go religiously.

  • 10CC Bountiful, UT
    July 3, 2013 8:31 a.m.

    It looks like some Atheists have gotten on the monument bandwagon and an anonymous donor is paying for 50 monuments to Atheism to be spread across the US, starting with one recently unveiled in Florida.

    Presumably, religionists will have no problem with this, and will welcome the Atheist physical expressions, along side the 10 Commandments.

    Problem solved! (hopefully)

  • The Real Maverick Orem, UT
    July 3, 2013 8:34 a.m.

    Pati, what has a prophet of god said about this?

    "When we believe or say we have been offended, we usually mean we feel insulted, mistreated, snubbed, or disrespected. And certainly clumsy, embarrassing, unprincipled, and mean-spirited things do occur in our interactions with other people that would allow us to take offense. However, it ultimately is impossible for another person to offend you or to offend me. Indeed, believing that another person offended us is fundamentally false. To be offended is a choice we make"

    - David Bednar

    You choose to be offended. Perhaps you should stop worrying so much about how others have offended you and worry more about yourself. Are you serving others? Are you comforting those in need of comfort? Are you loving your fellow man?

    Or are you too busy being "offended" by them to do anything positive for society?

  • TallGuy1970 Syracuse, UT
    July 3, 2013 8:37 a.m.

    I learned a great truth long ago that is so basic and fundamental yet so simple that most people miss it: Others cannot offend you without your permission. You are the one who decides if something offends you, not the other way around.

    Two men in white shirts and ties knock on your door and ask to share about Jesus Christ with you. How do you respond? Was the act of knocking on your door offensive? Was the fact that two men want to talk to you offensive? Or is it your own attitude of "how dare they interrupt my day" or "how dare they contradict what I already believe" that creates the offense?

    You drive down the highway and see a white cross on the side of the road marking the place of a tragic accident. Was the cross in and of itself offensive? Was the idea of remembering a lost loved one offensive? Or is it your own personal outrage that you were "forced" to see something that could represent religion that causes the offense.

    You must make a personal choice to be offended. Likewise, you can make a choice to not be offended. It's that simple!

  • Hutterite American Fork, UT
    July 3, 2013 8:37 a.m.

    Really, in a nation where many are trying to displace science with 'creation theory' in schools you feel offended?

  • LDS Liberal Farmington, UT
    July 3, 2013 9:22 a.m.

    Were a rosary if you wish.
    Put a crucifix up in YOUR yard.
    Hold a Bible camp at your house.
    Put a BYU sticker in your car window.
    Burn a menorah in your front window.
    Dress up in a burqa or hijab.

    How is ANY of that stopping your freedom of Religious expression?

    Just keep it OUT of secular [common to all, neutral territory] Government.

    uber-Christian is no different than uber-Islam, uber-Hindi, and uber-Voo-Doo.

  • RanchHand Huntsville, UT
    July 3, 2013 9:22 a.m.

    Pushy liberals, Patricia Sorensen (slt)
    Attacking belief, Patricia Sorensen (slt)
    Expensive schools, Patricia Sorensen (DN)
    Government programs should be to give people a temporary hand, not a lifestyle, Patricia Sorensen (DN)
    There is no such thing as a free ride — someone must pay, Patricia Sorensen (DN)

    The wonderful (and terrible) thing about the internet is that it never goes away.

  • LDS Liberal Farmington, UT
    July 3, 2013 9:49 a.m.

    RanchHand
    Huntsville, UT

    That RanchHand for the list of Letters.

    BTW - It's easy to see and establish a clear pattern into Patricia's agenda.

    Perhaps we should find out if she's a member of the Utah Eagle Forum?

  • ClarkHippo Tooele, UT
    July 3, 2013 10:03 a.m.

    I am an active Latter-day Saint, but when it comes to public displays of the Ten Commandments either at courthouses or in similar places, I agree with the atheists.

    The whole fight over displays of the Ten Commandments is frankly rather silly. There are many other issues regarding freedom of religion which I feel are a whole lot more important than religious monuments.

  • Ernest T. Bass Bountiful, UT
    July 3, 2013 10:14 a.m.

    How did conservatives react when Muslims wanted to construct a mosque near the WTC in New York?

  • ClarkHippo Tooele, UT
    July 3, 2013 10:21 a.m.

    @Blue

    If you want to stand outside of Temple Square and hold up signs calling me and my fellow Latter-day Saints every foul word under the book, I say, Go For It! Just don't expect me to acknowledge you.

    @LDS Liberal, The Real Maverick, Kalindra, embarrassed Utahn!

    We probably don't agree on a whole lot, but in this case, I would say we agree 100%.

    Whenever I here anyone talk about "Kicking God out of our country" regarding issues such as displays of the Ten Commandments or prayer at high school football games, I almost want to role my eyes and shake my head.

    I have been a religious person my entire life, but no group in our country has a monopoly on freedom of religion or freedom from religion. And if we who are religious wish to preserve our right to worship, fighting over monuments is, in my opinion, the wrong approach.

  • Eric Samuelsen Provo, UT
    July 3, 2013 10:42 a.m.

    Actually, Kalindra, you probably wouldn't see a statue of Mohammed anywhere. Representing the Prophet is prohibited by Islam. But good thoughts otherwise.

  • RanchHand Huntsville, UT
    July 3, 2013 11:02 a.m.

    @ClarkHippo;

    Welcome to the twilight zone. We are on the same side for a change.

  • one old man Ogden, UT
    July 3, 2013 11:12 a.m.

    LDS Liberal -- Haven't you heard of the new conservative group in Utah.

    Yup. Another one.

    The Utah Turkey Vulture Society.

  • one old man Ogden, UT
    July 3, 2013 11:14 a.m.

    MY religion (or lack thereof) is the only TRUE religion.

    So THERE!

  • Kalindra Salt Lake City, Utah
    July 3, 2013 11:23 a.m.

    @ Eric Samuelsen: Supposedly, Christians don't believe in idol worship either (one of the 10 Commandments) but that doesn't stop them from putting statues up everywhere. ;)

    While Muslims may not put up statues of Mohammad, they have other public symbols that reflect their beliefs. Some people in Pleasant Grove object to having a mosque in their town - at least atheists aren't objecting to houses of worship being built.

    There has been a lot of fear lately over Sharia law coming to the US and concerns that it will be honored above the law of the land. Some states have even gone so far as to pass laws prohibiting Sharia to be taken into account when interpreting contracts and wills regardless of the religious preferences of the individuals involved.

    Only by strictly prohibiting Christian laws from being enshrined into US law can we guarantee that we can also keep Sharia law from being enshrined. If we open the door to one, the other will come also.

  • Redshirt1701 Deep Space 9, Ut
    July 3, 2013 12:16 p.m.

    To "LDS Liberal" why do you want to promote the religion of Secular Humanism as the state religion of the US?

    If government is neutral territory, then they should allow all to be represented. What you and the Secular Humanists/Athiests/Anti-Thiests are pushing is not a neutral ground, but a ground devoid of any religion except their.

    To "Ernest T. Bass" conservatives said that the Muslims had a right to, but that it was in poor taste.

  • RFLASH Salt Lake City, UT
    July 3, 2013 2:22 p.m.

    It isn't hurting anyone? How do you know that? I would say that about the gay issue. I am not hurting you or any other christian. In fact, I am a christian myself. A gay person does not hurt any christian and gay marriage is not forced on anyone. So, tell me, why do you not leave it alone? If you think opposition to a statue is painful, try having an entire religion or religions treat you as if you were a demon from hell!
    You did, however touch upon a thought that has been in my mind all day. Why do we do it? Why do we insist on doing these things? We have to be right to the point of hurting those around us? You know, most Mormons won't even have a talk to me about Christ or some other spirtitual subject! I miss it very much! So, maybe we should all look around and see how we can change it. Please, if you give advice, can you try and do the same. Thanks

  • Stalwart Sentinel San Jose, CA
    July 3, 2013 2:27 p.m.

    Redshirt - You actually have the government neutrality analysis inside-out. Government neutrality is not typically viewed as a "free-for-all" of religious symbolism but rather a dedication to advocate for no religion whatsoever. So, for example, there are times when Christmas Trees and/or Menorahs are permissible because they have become secular representations of Winter, as opposed to religion-specific symbols.

    Regarding Secular Humanism - I would suggest you brush up on the differences between a religion and general life philosophies of individuals. Further, if you are pushing the idea that the absence of organized religious symbols is somehow advocating for the non-existent Secular Human religion, one must ask you: What specific symbol represents Secular Humanism? Is it a rock? A piece of grass? The oxygen we breathe? I believe you just engaged in an act of argumentum ad absurdum. Although, I hope you pick "oxygen" as the Secular Humanists' religious symbol because I like the idea that their religion is coursing through your lungs at this very moment, being absorbed into your bloodstream, and then distributed to each and every cell within your body.

  • RFLASH Salt Lake City, UT
    July 3, 2013 2:42 p.m.

    I just want to say that this is the reason we should have more consideration towards others, even those we may not like. If we want something for ourselves, we should allow the same right to everyone else. We may not like it, but it helps protect all of our rights. It amazes me how many people get all bent out of shape when they find out I am gay. The Mormon neighbors all got concerned when I was helping my elderly neighbor and visiting with her. Who knows what they thought. I guess they thought I would turn her gay! Actually, we loved to talk about geneology and many other church related topics! they never seemed to care how much they offended me, but then, why should they??? Why should they care what a gay person thinks or feels? It all depends what side of the issue we fall on!

  • Steve C. Warren WEST VALLEY CITY, UT
    July 3, 2013 2:43 p.m.

    "If you find the Ten Commandments objectionable, do not look at them--problem solved."

    Absolutely right! And if someone hangs posters in a public building saying "Mormonism is a cult" and "God is dead," do not look at them. Or, if you find nudity and sex on prime-time TV objectionable, do not look at them. Problem solved.

  • Redshirt1701 Deep Space 9, Ut
    July 3, 2013 3:30 p.m.

    To "Stalwart Sentinel" according to the dictionary a religion is "a set of beliefs concerning the cause, nature, and purpose of the universe". Secular Humanism is a religion, according to that definition.

    So, tell us how the government is neutral if they favor Secular Humanism/Athiesism/Anti-Thiesm?

    If what you say is true about Christmas Trees and Menorahs, then what about a cross. When placed at a road side that is a non-religion specific symbol of death, yet the courts disagree.

    You ask what specific symbol represents Secular Humanism, they have what they call "The Happy Human". That is according to the International Humanist and Ethical Union.

    Again, how can you have government neutrality when they favor Secular Humanism?

  • LDS Liberal Farmington, UT
    July 3, 2013 3:38 p.m.

    It's called Karma --
    Do unto others as you would have done unto you.

    If YOU want religious freedom,
    YOU must allow others the same.

    It's an Eternal truth.

    For the Record --

    Mr. RedShirt was adamantly opposed to Muslims building a cultural Center in NY [or Utah, or anywhere else in the world.]

    and as for your comment toward me:
    "What you and the Secular Humanists/Athiests/Anti-Thiests are pushing..."

    I find highly offensive 'per this article'.
    I am every bit as much a Latter-Day Saint as you claim to be -
    most likely even more so -- because I'm Liberal, just like Jesus, Joseph Smith, and Brigham Young and all the rest have been.

  • Redshirt1701 Deep Space 9, Ut
    July 3, 2013 4:05 p.m.

    To "LDS Liberal" I never said that I was opposed to the Muslims building in NY, I have always said that their choice in locations was a poor taste.

    Jesus, Joseph Smith, and Brigham Young were classical liberals not Progressive/Liberal we have today, today we would call them Libertarians. You have stated on multiple occasions that you support Socialism and fully believe in it. You cannot be a libertarian and a socialist at the same time, only a hypocrite would claim both. The gospel of Christ is in direct contradiction to socialism, and much of what you have vocally supported.

    The fact that you call yourself a Liberal also shows that you do not understand the church you claim membership in. According to the Apostle and Prophet John Widstow, "the self-called liberal is usually one who has broken with the fundamental principles or guiding philosophy of the group to which he belongs." You have claimed to follow the prophets, but it seems you do so only when it doesn't interfere with your Progressive beliefs.

    As for being offended about Secular Humanism, why be offended in what you are promoting for the Government?

  • RAB Bountiful, UT
    July 3, 2013 4:11 p.m.

    It is dumb to demand 10 commandments monuments. But it is even stupider to whine about them in a country that’s national anthem says: ...may the heav'n-rescued land Praise the Power that hath made and preserved us a nation! ... And this be our motto: ‘In God is our trust”.

    @embarrassed Utahn
    Free country means free to express one's beliefs.

    @JoeBlow
    You can claim that atheists don’t care what other’s believe, but the reality is, atheism IS contention against other people’s beliefs. The Constitution supports freedom to believe and to express beliefs. You want to stop that.

    @Blue
    All anti beliefs, atheist or anti-Mormon, are by definition, offensive. You can share your beliefs. But if you speak out against other people’s beliefs, you are being offensive and contentious.

    @RanchHand
    When our government endorses behavior that many of its people do not endorse, it IS causing real harm.

    @Stalwart Sentinel
    Line up all the ridiculous legal cases you want. You will not convince me that the Constitution was designed to oppress religious expression.

    @ Tolstoy
    Expressing beliefs is not "forcing your religion on others."

  • RAB Bountiful, UT
    July 3, 2013 4:12 p.m.

    @Ultra Bob
    Advertising your religion is NOT telling others what to do. I’m not forced to buy a refrigerator because I just now saw an ad for one on this website. No one should be told where, when, or how to express their beliefs. Period.

    Kalindra
    If Moslems want to express their beliefs with a monument, the commentator likely would not care less. I would be proud to see the diversity of our beliefs publically honored (but not non-beliefs, such as atheism, which exist only to attack other people’s beliefs).

    @10CC
    The atheist monument in Florida proves that the real goal of atheists is not to fight oppression. And rather than express a belief, their monument attacks and denigrates other people’s beliefs.

    @Hutterite
    You denigrate all creation theorists as anti-science fools and then claim YOU are being offended? Wow.

    @Ernest T. Bass
    Offense about the mosque near the WTC had nothing to do with religion.

    @Kalindra
    Statues are not automatically idols.

    @Stalwart Sentinel
    Nice that we can so conveniently segregate religious beliefs from “life philosophies.” Makes it easier to deny rights to the chosen inferior classification of believer.

  • Stalwart Sentinel San Jose, CA
    July 3, 2013 4:17 p.m.

    Redshirt

    First - Secular Humanism is not a religion according to that definition; re-read it more carefully.

    Second - You do realize I have internet access. Hence, I have the ability to look up the definition you cite, which means it is rather simple to confirm that you intentionally left out the latter half of the definition which reads, that your definition applies "especially when considered as the creation of a superhuman agency or agencies, usually involving devotional and ritual observances, and often containing a moral code governing the conduct of human affairs." Redshirt, if you're so correct, why would you try to intentionally mislead me with half-truths?

    Third - IHEU is an NGO, as in corporation, not religion. Regardless, for fun, please show me where the Happy Human is displayed in a public sphere and file your case. Put your money where your mouth is; I can't wait for the outcome.

    Fourth - Convince society at large that a cross symbolizes death in general and you may have a leg to stand on.

    Fifth - if "secular humanism is religion" is your best argument, you'll lose every time.

  • RAB Bountiful, UT
    July 3, 2013 4:24 p.m.

    @Steve C. Warren
    There is a huge difference between an offensive statement attacking another’s beliefs and a positive statement expressing one’s own beliefs. A ten commandments monument merely shows that a segment of America honors the ten commandments. No one is dumb enough to assume it represents everyone's beliefs. Anti God and anti-Mormon expressions however, say nothing about the beliefs of the person expressing those sentiments. They merely attack the beliefs of other people--which is contention and denigration.

    Ludeness and profanity on public TV are similarly lacking in consideration of many people's beliefs and sensitivities. Since they can be acquired elsewhere, there is no justification for obligating large segments of the population to look the other way.

    You seem want it both ways. It is apparently okay to offend, disrespect, and ignore the sensitivities of believers in traditional marriage, believers in God, Mormons, and those who are against public ludeness and profanity. But is not acceptable to disrespect atheists or those who want to change the concept of marriage to suit themselves.

  • Contrarius mid-state, TN
    July 3, 2013 4:33 p.m.

    @Redshirt --

    Red, Dictionary.com actually says: "a set of beliefs concerning the cause, nature, and purpose of the universe, **especially when considered as the creation of a superhuman agency or agencies**..."

    NIce attempt to mislead, Red. ;-)

    from Merriam-Webster:

    re·li·gion

    1: the service and worship of a god, of multiple gods, or of the supernatural...

    2: the state of a religious (life)

    3a : one of the systems of faith and worship : a religious faith
    b : the body of institutionalized expressions of sacred beliefs....

    4: the profession or practice of religious beliefs : religious observances

    5: archaic : scrupulous conformity : conscientiousness, fidelity

    6a : a personal awareness or conviction of the existence of a supreme being...
    b : the access of such an awareness or conviction accompanied by or arousing reverence...

    7a : a cause, principle, system of tenets held with ardor, devotion, conscientiousness, and faith : a value held to be of supreme importance
    b : a quality, condition, custom, or thing inspiring zealous devotion, conscientious maintenance, and cherishing

    When the **US Constitution** talks about religion it's referring to meanings 1,2,3,4, and 6.

    Secular humanism does NOT qualify. It would be nice if it did. ;-)

  • the old switcharoo mesa, AZ
    July 3, 2013 4:44 p.m.

    Maybe there IS a persecution complex unwittingly taught in Christian Sunday school. I can see how that could come across.

    But as adults, be smart enough to know that YOU have not been persecuted against. Atheists have aver right to not have their taxes go to religious purposes.

  • LDS Liberal Farmington, UT
    July 3, 2013 5:14 p.m.

    RedShirt --

    I belong to the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints,
    not the Church of Ezra Taft Benson.
    [and we already know that Ezra T. Benson was not a Liberal].

    Sorry, It is NOT yours to decide.
    and YES, there are Mormons who are Socialists.
    [most are not in Utah, not even in America, and therefore NOT Utah Republican Tea-Partiers.]

  • the truth Holladay, UT
    July 3, 2013 5:42 p.m.

    @Contrarius

    Ah contrar...

    5 and 7 fit secular humanism quite well.

    And the fact is secular humanism does have its gods and supreme beings, they may not be divine nor sometimes even human but they have them, from scientists and philosophers, to Gaia, from money and other items of wealth to power...

    -
    -
    Public religious expression is protected by the constitution NOT denied by it.

    Religions and Religious people have EQUAL access to the public square, to proclaim what they believe and to influence the making of law.

    That is how our system works.

    It is left that wants to silence voices especially religious and conservative ones, with incredibly nonsensical interpretations of the Constitution, they constantly attempt to denigrate and humiliate voices they do not like into submission or silence.

  • zoar63 Mesa, AZ
    July 3, 2013 5:43 p.m.

    @JoeBlow

    "Do you need statues on public property in order to believe? Or the 10 commandments posted in public places to believe? Or prayer in public school to believe?"

    I guess we will have to tell the U.S. Supreme Court that they need to remove their copy of the ten commandments.

  • Contrarius mid-state, TN
    July 3, 2013 8:14 p.m.

    @the truth --

    "Ah contrar..."

    Ummm.....I believe you actually mean "au contraire". ;-)

    "5 and 7 fit secular humanism quite well."

    And I already pointed out that the US Constitution is using the meanings of 1,2,3,4, and 6.

    If you really want to consider secular humanism as a religion, then secular humanist groups ought to start getting tax exemptions. And religious speech protections. And I can just see secular humanists going door to door on missions in Utah to proselytize to the poor confused Mormons. ;-D And secular humanist holidays.

    This could be fun!

    But before any of that happens, you really need to look up the meaning of the word "secular". ;-D

  • UtahBlueDevil Durham, NC
    July 3, 2013 8:57 p.m.

    "Christians are told not to believe..."

    As said before.... I am a Christian, I am LDS..... and at no point has anyone in my 50+ years ever told me I can't believe what I want to believe. I have had plenty tell me they don't agree with what I believe... and that is fine..... as I don't believe what they believe. But honestly, I don't need the co-mingling of government and religion to make me feel secure in my beliefs. I don't need government having any part in my faith.... and likewise I don't need my religion being intertwined with government.

    One is sacred.... one is often subject to corruption and over reach.... I don't need those two part of one another.

  • Kalindra Salt Lake City, Utah
    July 3, 2013 9:12 p.m.

    @ zoar 63: The Supreme Court building does have reference to the 10 Commandments - right next to references to other sources of religious and secular law. The Roman Numerals I through X that are on the main doors actually symbolize The Bill of Rights.

    @ RAB: Not all statues are idols, but when you worship a statue or claim its presence is required in order for you to be able to worship, then that statue is an idol.

    The Star Spangled Banner was written in 1814, and did not become the national anthem until 1931. The majority of the time it is performed, only the first curse is sung - which does not contain the lyrics you reference.

    And claiming that we shouldn't fuss about religion being in so many places because it exists in so many other places besides is a ridiculous argument. I mean really - people shouldn't complain about religion in public places because there is religion in other public places also - that's your argument?

  • RAB Bountiful, UT
    July 3, 2013 11:08 p.m.

    @ Kalindra

    I don’t know of anyone who worships statues or claims they need a statue to be able to worship.

    Fact remains that no one in our nation had a problem acknowledging God’s importance to our nation until the last 40 years or so when atheists began ramming their will down everyone’s throat.

    Congress cannot prohibit exercise of a religion or impede a citizen’s ability to express beliefs. Atheism is not a set of beliefs. It is a not-belief. The Constitution therefore, neither addresses it nor protects it. Congress cannot support non-beliefs. We have a right to share our beliefs. But it is not anyone’s right to contend with other people’s beliefs or to seek to limit their ability to share those beliefs.

    Nativity scenes and displays of the Ten Commandments are religious-based expressions commonly held by many Americans. It can be argued that the spending of public money in support of religious expressions insinuates government support. But that argument ONLY has merit when the government DENIES proportionally equal financial support for the beliefs (not non-beliefs) of other religious groups.

  • DanO Mission Viejo, CA
    July 3, 2013 11:47 p.m.

    One could argue that building a monument to the 10 Commandments is actually against one of the 10 Commandments.

  • tgurd Gonzales, LA
    July 4, 2013 7:06 a.m.

    Kudos RAB Take note of the answers this person gives for the comments made, As I have watched those answers, I would like to go back to what this nation was founded upon lest we forget. It was are you ready RELIGIOUS FReedom! thats right to worship almight God by the dictates of our own conscience. Wether we agree or disagree it matters not what one believes, for as Joseph Smith once said I will defend any mans religious rights. The thing i disagree with is this, in our government halls of Washington there are times when prayers are given, yet denied as mixing state and church in other places. When i was growing up our teacher would offer a simple prayer, not any religion specified and then we would say the Pledge of Alligence, My feelings are how does this offend anyone and if so why not ask to leave the room as opposed to what Madelyn Maree Ohare did in the early 60s by wanting the 30 students to stand outside because she didnt want her child to be part of pray. just for your info this is what started the whole deal.

  • the old switcharoo mesa, AZ
    July 4, 2013 8:01 a.m.

    Thou shalt not share too much. That's what God really meant to say right?

    There's such cognitive dissonance to be a republican.

  • Truthseeker SLO, CA
    July 4, 2013 9:53 a.m.

    I can't imagine that the message Jesus tried to teach us had anything to do with statues of Himself.

    The Grinch thought he could steal Christmas by removing all the visual, tangible symbols.

    "Every Who down in Whoville, the tall and the small,
    Was singing! Without any presents at all!
    Then the Grinch thought of something he hadn't before!
    "Maybe Christmas," he thought, "doesn't come from a store."
    "Maybe Christmas...perhaps...means a little bit more!"

  • zoar63 Mesa, AZ
    July 4, 2013 11:23 a.m.

    @Kalindra


    " The Supreme Court building does have reference to the 10 Commandments - right next to references to other sources of religious and secular law. The Roman Numerals I through X that are on the main doors actually symbolize The Bill of Rights. "

    Google” Ten commandments stunner” and see for yourself it even includes pictures as part of that article. Here is an excerpt:

    “So he continued looking and after calling in some assistance in his hunt for evidence, he found a 1975 official U.S. Supreme Court Handbook, prepared under the direction of Mark Cannon, administrative assistant to the chief justice. It said, “Directly above the Bench are two central figures, depicting Majesty of the Law and Power of Government. Between them is a tableau of the Ten Commandments…”

    Also research the “Weinman Letter," the artist who designed the sculptures.

  • Contrariusier mid-state, TN
    July 4, 2013 12:45 p.m.

    @zoar63 --

    "Google "Ten commandments stunner" and see for yourself it even includes pictures as part of that article. "

    There's a good article at the snopes website rebutting these claims as well as others relating to religion and federal government buildings. Look under the heading "National Capital".

    It even includes a photo of Weinman's letter -- which clearly states that the statue represents THE BILL OF RIGHTS, not the Ten Commandments.

  • Kalindra Salt Lake City, Utah
    July 4, 2013 12:54 p.m.

    @ zoar63: Full research reveals that the tablet between law and government represents many ancient forms of law - the 10 Commandments may be included in this list, but do not encompass the entirety of the list. Catherine Millard may claim differently, but the only reference she provides is herself.

    As depicted in other areas of the Court and in popular culture (and in the Bible), the 10 Commandments were on two tablets - not one.

    Moses, Confucius, Mohammad, and many others are depicted together and given equal precedence.

  • UtahBlueDevil Durham, NC
    July 5, 2013 6:23 p.m.

    Truth... you are always good for a good giggle. So tell me, this secularist religion, who heads it up, where are its doctrines enshrined, what are the conditions of membership, and what are the forms of worship?

    I love the argument that if a government says you can't push your religion on someone else, that the government is anti religion. It isn't. It is just anti coercion. Just because someone isn't promoting your beliefs does that mean they are anti your beliefs. We are back to the silly land of black and whitism. Its either all this, or all that. You are either all good... or all evil.

    I don't need the government dictating any part of my religious beliefs. I would rather religions paid taxes before I would have the government get into the tole it played for 1800 years of dictating religious beliefs. No thanks.... I don't need the government in my religion at all.