# Liberals and the second amendment



## seabass (Sep 26, 2002)

Some good talking points there and something for the few liberals on this site to heed:

http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2010/7/4/881431/-Why-liberals-should-love-the-Second-Amendment


----------



## Plainsman (Jul 30, 2003)

Seabass :thumb:

Very good point. Another I might make is that the first amendment isn't just freedom of speech it's also freedom of religion. That's freedom of, not freedom from religion. I consider it unconstitutional for the Supreme court to tear down the ten commandments in public places. As a matter of fact they have no business promoting or detracting in any way from the rights of the people. If a small town wishes to display the ten commandments that is their right. If a judge is Christian and finds strength and wisdom in Biblical teachings and wishes to have the ten commandments in his court ---- well, it's his court. Sure it can be argued that the building belongs to the public, but if 85% of the people in this nation believe in the Christian God the 15% telling them what they can and can not display is out of line. 
I will ague that this is still a Christian nation. Of the people signing the constitution 97% were Christian, and the other two agreed that Christian ideals were the way to run a government. One of those was Benjamin Franklin, and to a lesser degree Thomas Jefferson. Interestingly that was our sermon last Sunday (July 4) in our church. 
The points about the second amendment were right on Seabass, that was a very good article. Thank you for posting, and I hope that sparks some thought in your fellow liberals who read it.


----------



## seabass (Sep 26, 2002)

> If a judge is Christian and finds strength and wisdom in Biblical teachings and wishes to have the ten commandments in his court ---- well, it's his court


It's OUR court, not his. I dont want any religious symbolism in the court room, be it hindu, Christian, or Muslim. Religion doesn't relong in the courtroom at the whim of some judge. Judge should find strength and wisdom in the law. I disagree with, I believe, all of your points regarding the first amendment below.


----------



## Chuck Smith (Feb 22, 2005)

> If a judge is Christian and finds strength and wisdom in Biblical teachings and wishes to have the ten commandments in his court ---- well, it's his court
> 
> It's OUR court, not his. I dont want any religious symbolism in the court room, be it hindu, Christian, or Muslim. Religion doesn't relong in the courtroom at the whim of some judge. Judge should find strength and wisdom in the law. I disagree with, I believe, all of your points regarding the first amendment below.


To play devils advocate..... How about I want to see the 10 commandments in OUR courtroom.... How do you answer that?

The problem is people or our nation is way to political correct. What I mean by this people are over sensitive on these things. If a person see's a flag, religious symbol, a quote, a color, etc.... and they don't like it they feel that it should change. Instead of the belief of...well I don't care for it but it is in no way shape or form ruining my way of life so it does not really need to be changed.

To explain it a little better if the quote, flag, religious symbol has on effect on your daily life other than you have to see it. WHO CARES. It is like walking by a city building or drive by a city building every day.... if you don't like the color should the city pay to have it changed?


----------



## seabass (Sep 26, 2002)

No, if I don't like the color of a building, the government shouldn't change it. That's an easy one because color is not religious. A flag is also decidely not religous. We can make up all sorts of things, but in the end we're talking about historical items that are unquestionably religious such as 10 commandments, Bibles, etc.

If I am a judge and I want the Koran displayed, that okay too? You can't have it both ways. This is where Plainsman says 'yeah, but we are a Christian nation." So what? I can play devil's advocate too; what if a judge wants a Koran displayed and, as Plainsman mentioned earlier about Christian judges, uses the basic tenets of Islam to give him strength to decide a case. That okay?

The easy answer, and the answer I believe the original framers had, is that there should be no religious symbols in a court of law. Have a nice weekend, folks.


----------



## Chuck Smith (Feb 22, 2005)

> No, if I don't like the color of a building, the government shouldn't change it. That's an easy one because color is not religious. A flag is also decidely not religous. We can make up all sorts of things, but in the end we're talking about historical items that are unquestionably religious such as 10 commandments, Bibles, etc.
> 
> If I am a judge and I want the Koran displayed, that okay too? You can't have it both ways. This is where Plainsman says 'yeah, but we are a Christian nation." So what? I can play devil's advocate too; what if a judge wants a Koran displayed and, as Plainsman mentioned earlier about Christian judges, uses the basic tenets of Islam to give him strength to decide a case. That okay?
> 
> The easy answer, and the answer I believe the original framers had, is that there should be no religious symbols in a court of law. Have a nice weekend, folks.


Seabass... I agree about the court thing. The law is all that should be worried about in a court room.

What I was eluding with my example was ten commandments (or any religion artifacts) displayed in a public office....like city hall, outside a courtroom, in a park, etc. Or lets say even books or lessons from the Koran. I don't care. Again if it does not affect my day in and day out activities. THEN WHO CARES.

Now lets look at the Flag.... it is not getting displayed in schools anymore. How can having a flag in a class room be a problem?


----------



## Plainsman (Jul 30, 2003)

I guess to make my point simple there is no separation of church and state in the constitution and it is not unconstitutional to have the ten commandments on public property. Our Supreme Court is just trying to be supremely politically correct. Yes, if a judge was Muslim he would have the rights to some religious symbol if he wished. Separation of church and state is a pipe dream for liberals to abuse our rights in yet another area. What bothers them is the ten commandments displays moral values. Moral values are scary things.  Maybe liberals would feel better if some rewording was done. Something like: Thou shall not steal unless doing so through redistribution of wealth by a low life politician.


----------



## Csquared (Sep 5, 2006)

You're both right. This topic is muddied by implications that the Bible and Christian ideals should dictate law. Many christians and conservatives like that idea and most all liberals hate it. I've argued my stance on that here before, and as stated I believe that is where the negative aspect of "the Christian right" comes to light.

I have very strong Christian beliefs, but it is my opinon laws should be (and actually are, in most cases) based on banning or restricting any behavior that harms another. Not simply because God said so. Call it separation _from _religion if you want, but I strongly believe it is NOT my government's job to worry about where my soul spends eternity....that's *MY* job. They've got LOTS of other things much more important in this country to worry about! But it's a very slippery slope if you attempt to adopt God's law as THE law.

As to the Bible or Koran in the courtroom....if I met a judge with a Koran in his courtroom you'd have to restrain me to keep from wrapping the flag (which I would hope was still there) around his neck and watching his face turn blue! :x 
And since my biggest pet peave of all is someone who tries to have it both ways, I guess I'm ok with no Bible either. :beer:

Although I'm glad, and proud my country was founded on Christian beliefs and fear of God, the Constitution is the "bible" that should matter most in a court of law.

Great post, seabass!


----------



## Plainsman (Jul 30, 2003)

> As to the Bible or Koran in the courtroom....if I met a judge with a Koran in his courtroom you'd have to restrain me to keep from wrapping the flag (which I would hope was still there) around his neck and watching his face turn blue!


Perhaps, but I would feel better with a (not nut job) Muslim than a liberal judge.   Seriously.

Example, some punk crawls through your bedroom window with a baseball bat at 3:00am in the morning and tells you to give him all your money and your daughter too. He comes at you with a bat and you plug his dumb &^^%$. So now some airhead states attorney files suite against you. You claim self defense and head into court. Court room A on the left has our old friend Ryan as the judge and court room B on the right has a common every day Muslim, but America judge. Which courtroom do you want?

Oh, and the idea of separation of church and state was so that government kept their hands off religion entirely. Individuals should be able to do what they want. If you want a cross or a Koran on your desk at work that should be your business. If you want to wear jewelry with a cross on it, but your a government employee that should be your business. It's liberal to say that a state employee wearing a cross is violating separation of church and state. It's a huge stretch of even a liberal mind to think that a piece of jewelry on a state employee means the state endorses that religion.


----------



## Csquared (Sep 5, 2006)

Good point!

Only real difference is the Muslim is commanded to kill me.

The liberal judge would prefer to tax me to death


----------



## seabass (Sep 26, 2002)

Plainsman said:


> If you want a cross or a Koran on your desk at work that should be your business. If you want to wear jewelry with a cross on it, but your a government employee that should be your business. It's liberal to say that a state employee wearing a cross is violating separation of church and state. It's a huge stretch of even a liberal mind to think that a piece of jewelry on a state employee means the state endorses that religion.


Is that really true plainsman? State and/or Federal workers cannot wear a cross on their neck? I've never heard of such a thing and I see both state and federal workers allll the time. If that is true, then goverment is over-stepping their bounds. To me, this is entirely different than the 10 commandments displayed in the main hall of a court room, of which I am opposed..


----------



## Plainsman (Jul 30, 2003)

Well seabass I remember a lawsuit a few years back where a teacher was warned not to be wearing a cross necklace to school. If you don't see it in state and federal employees you are near a people lot less political correct than I came into contact with as a federal employee.

To tell the truth if common sense was used this would not be a problem. I see the ten commandments on places like the supreme court still stand. It's sites like this that are historic and part of our culture. Those types of monuments should stand. I can see the federal gov not putting up religious monuments today, but they should not hinder local people from doing as they wish. to often today the first amendment is used to guarantee freedom from religion, not freedom of religion. It is odd that at a time when we are trying to remove all traces of Christianity from our land that we are building foot washing and prayer rooms for the Muslims. There appears to be a double standard, and it's coming from the liberal side of our government.


----------

