[OldManMac]

Another one of those "activist" judges has declared that a bible outside a courthouse is illegal.

Discuss.

------------
http://www.cnn.com/2004/LAW/08/10/bi....ap/index.html

HOUSTON, Texas (AP) -- A judge on Tuesday ordered Harris County to remove a Bible from a monument outside its civil courts building, ruling that the display violates the constitutional separation between church and state.

Federal Judge Sim Lake said the county should be exercising religious neutrality and "not be seen as endorsing Christianity." He gave officials 10 days to remove the Bible.

"The court concludes that the purpose of the Bible display is to encourage people to read the Bible," Lake wrote. "What other purpose could there be for prominently displaying an open Bible in an illuminated case tilted toward passers-by in a heavily frequented plaza in front of the main entrance to the courthouse?"

Real estate broker and attorney Kay Staley sued the county last August. She expressed delight over Tuesday's ruling.

"It is just a wonderful day for religious freedom and religious diversity," she said.

The county argued that the display originated as a private expression of free speech -- with private donations being used to buy the Bible -- and that the county should not be held responsible for its contents.

Harris County Judge Robert Eckels said he is reviewing the ruling with the county attorney to develop strategies for an appeal.

[pman68]

We HAVE to have seperation of church and state.

Can you imagine if the United States had an even MORE religious President?

He already thinks he's on a mission from God.

He won't fund stem cell research.

etc, etc...

[Millennium]

I'd like to see pictures of the display before I weigh in on this. I can think of quite a few uses for such a monument other than endorsing Christianity, but a monument created for such purposes would have to be constructed very carefully. Not having seen this I can't say whether or not it actually is this way, but I cannot deny the possibility that it could be.

Therefore, I ask: does anyone have any pictures of this monument? I'd be particularly interested in any text on or surrounding the monument, including whatever's on the pages that the Bible is open to.

[Zimphire]

So is the Judge saying all rulings while that monument was there is now unlegit?

The court worked well before this .

This is just petty anti-God zealots forcing their views on others.


This is NOT about Sep of Church and state. That is a scape goat.

[zigzag]

Good for him. "[A]n open Bible in an illuminated case tilted toward passers-by in a heavily frequented plaza in front of the main entrance to the courthouse" sounds like more than a historical piece to me. Sounds like it was just petty pro-God zealots trying to force their views on others.

Apparently, citizens of the fine city of Houston can still read the Bible whenever they like and worship at the church of their choice. Hallelujah - true freedom of religion lives on.

[Wiskedjak]

There's absolutely nothing wrong with have religious monuments outside of a court house, as long as there are monuments representing the religions and beliefs of everyone in the community.

[TheMosco]

I think this is far worse than the 10 commandments and the bible should be removed. Atleast some of the 10 commandments were vague enough that they didn't have anything to do with religion.

[deomacius]

While we're at it we need to remove ALL the goddess symbols from state seals. Oh, and don't forget statues of goddesses entering state buildings. Portlandia comes to mind.

[MacNStein]

Originally posted by deomacius:
While we're at it we need to remove ALL the goddess symbols from state seals. Oh, and don't forget statues of goddesses entering state buildings. Portlandia comes to mind.

No doubt. Athena seems to be everywhere. Why are the pagans getting special treatment?

[Millennium]

Originally posted by deomacius:
While we're at it we need to remove ALL the goddess symbols from state seals. Oh, and don't forget statues of goddesses entering state buildings. Portlandia comes to mind.

There actually is a fair amount of goddess imagery on state and national seals. Most of this derives from ancient Greek deities. They're often stylized and given new names, but hey, that's exactly how the Romans got their religion.

This is a historical religion, but not quite a dead one. Its heyday was some 2000 years ago but you can still find a few people who practice it to this day. There's a small but active cult of Athena at Bryn Mawr College, for example, which claims to have been active since shortly after the college's creation. The people in this group are quite serious about their worship, though it doesn't always take forms that many Levantines (Jewish/Christian/Islamic) or atheists would recognize as worship. As it so happens, Athena -goddess of wisdom and warfare to the Greeks- is one of the more common goddesses depicted in seals and statues such as this.

Given that this religion is still active, even though it is small, should we be removing these seals as well? After all, if we are going to insist on "freedom from religion", then isn't it only fair to target all religions, or at least all active ones?

[MacNStein]

Originally posted by Wiskedjak:
There's absolutely nothing wrong with have religious monuments outside of a court house, as long as there are monuments representing the religions and beliefs of everyone in the community.

I don't have a problem with that. Sounds fair to me.

[zigzag]

Originally posted by MacNStein:
No doubt. Athena seems to be everywhere. Why are the pagans getting special treatment?

She's better-looking than Jesus.

[zigzag]

Originally posted by Millennium:
There actually is a fair amount of goddess imagery on state and national seals. Most of this derives from ancient Greek deities. They're often stylized and given new names, but hey, that's exactly how the Romans got their religion.

This is a historical religion, but not quite a dead one. Its heyday was some 2000 years ago but you can still find a few people who practice it to this day. There's a small but active cult of Athena at Bryn Mawr College, for example, which claims to have been active since shortly after the college's creation. The people in this group are quite serious about their worship, though it doesn't always take forms that many Levantines (Jewish/Christian/Islamic) or atheists would recognize as worship. As it so happens, Athena -goddess of wisdom and warfare to the Greeks- is one of the more common goddesses depicted in seals and statues such as this.

Given that this religion is still active, even though it is small, should we be removing these seals as well? After all, if we are going to insist on "freedom from religion", then isn't it only fair to target all religions, or at least all active ones?

I think you have to consider intent and context - for the most part, those sculptures are historical/aesthetic in nature and no one would mistake them for an endorsement. The Supreme Court building is like that. Featuring an open Bible in a lighted display case in front of the courthouse is a bit more like an endorsement (unless that particular Bible has some artifactual value). I don't think there's a well-defined line, but this might have crossed it.

[MacNStein]

Originally posted by zigzag:
She's better-looking than Jesus.

Don't know, her face is usually covered with a blindfold.

[zigzag]

Originally posted by MacNStein:
Don't know, her face is usually covered with a blindfold.

That's even hotter.

[itai195]

From the Houston Chronicle:

In trial last week, Assistant County Attorney Frank Sanders argued that the monument at 301 Fannin is intended to honor the memory of philanthropist William S. Mosher for his donations to the Star of Hope Mission. Sanders said the Bible, which lies open under glass and is lighted by orange neon, represents Mosher's Christian faith.

Lake's ruling does not require removing the 4-foot-tall stone monument to Mosher — only the Bible displayed inside. Although there has been talk of moving the monument, Eckels said it and the Bible should stay put.

I think in this case, I may have to agree with the Zimphire clan. If it's a monument honoring a man who was driven by religious faith, I don't see anything wrong with displaying an item symbolizing that faith. How can a ruling like this even seem legitimate when the judge himself was likely sworn into office with a Bible, an obvious violation of the first amendment. America...

[Millennium]

Originally posted by zigzag:
I think you have to consider intent and context - for the most part, those sculptures are historical/aesthetic in nature and no one would mistake them for an endorsement. The Supreme Court building is like that. Featuring an open Bible in a lighted display case in front of the courthouse is a bit more like an endorsement (unless that particular Bible has some artifactual value). I don't think there's a well-defined line, but this might have crossed it.

In that case, would closing the Bible be enough to bring it back across the line without removing it completely?

[deomacius]

Originally posted by zigzag:
I think you have to consider intent and context - for the most part, those sculptures are historical/aesthetic in nature and no one would mistake them for an endorsement. The Supreme Court building is like that. Featuring an open Bible in a lighted display case in front of the courthouse is a bit more like an endorsement (unless that particular Bible has some artifactual value). I don't think there's a well-defined line, but this might have crossed it.

I don't see them or anybody saying let's replace it with a more compliant Christian symbol. They want it removed. I want all references to godesses removed from seals and court buildings.

[cpt kangarooski]

Still depends on the purpose.

There's several different establishment clause tests. Under, say, the Lemon test, that specific bible has to go if any one of the following is true: 1) It was put there with the intention of promoting or hindering religion, 2) It has the effect of promoting or hindering religion, or 3) It excessively entangles the government with religion.

So if the intent were to promote Christianity, it wouldn't matter if the bible was closed and it had no religious effect.

Likewise, this is why classical god imagery is generally okay: it wasn't intended to promote the cult of the dieties shown, but rather to use them as a symbol. And it pretty evidently doesn't have the effect of promoting their worship. And since their religions are more or less defunct, and certainly unrelated to the images being used, there's no entanglement.

[BlackGriffen]

Originally posted by MacNStein:
Don't know, her face is usually covered with a blindfold.

I thought you were the religious expert, and you don't even know the difference between Athena and the goddess of Justice? Here's an article on the very topic brought up, actually. An excerpt:

In a forum thread about Themis and Justitia, goddesses of Justice, MISSMACKENZIE asks: "I mean which did they intend to portray, a Greek or Roman goddess?" And BIBACULUS answers: "The modern image of Justice is a conflation of various images and iconography over a period of time: the sword and the blindfold being two of the images that would have been alien to antiquity."

Herep is a collection of images.

There's an important difference between a statue and a monument with words, though. Words are unambiguous - the 10 commandments and the Bible are part of a specific religious tradition. A statue of a person, on the other hand, is not obvious without some kind of explanation. These statues of Justice may as well be Santa Claus without an explanation. Moreover, the image of Justice has more meaning outside of a religious context anymore than inside. Especially since ours is a mish mash of different ancient traditions. It's like Kleenex - the word has become synonymous with any facial tissue, even though it was originally a company trademark.

So, long story short, the statues of Justice are no worse than the statue of Moses on the Supreme Court. That is, no big deal.

Reading itai's post just before I submit, perhaps a compromise is in order. Close the book, and put a label on it (ribbon or something) that says "Mosher's bible" or something. That, or move the whole thing to a museum.

BlackGriffen

Edit: thought I should add that the statues of Justice are no more an endorsement of a religion than the Lincoln Memorial, which very much resembles a Greek or Roman temple.

[Zimphire]

Originally posted by deomacius:
I don't see them or anybody saying let's replace it with a more compliant Christian symbol. They want it removed. I want all references to godesses removed from seals and court buildings.

Which is why I said this wasn't about the separation. If it was, you'd see people going after ALL symbols of the like. So far, only Christianity is being attacked.

[zigzag]

Originally posted by Millennium:
In that case, would closing the Bible be enough to bring it back across the line without removing it completely?

I didn't mean to focus on the fact that it was open - I was just sorta quoting the news item - but I suppose that, yes, that might go into the equation. I was wondering myself whether an open Bible is more evocative than a closed one. I suppose it is, or people wouldn't display them that way.

Like I said, I don't think there's a clear line. It's often a judgment call, no pun intended. I wouldn't advocate removing all religious references from public buildings, just those that have an indoctrinal purpose. This one's a tough call, especially since it's been pointed out that it was part of a memorial to an individual. It's a real grey area.

[MacNStein]

Originally posted by BlackGriffen:
I thought you were the religious expert, and you don't even know the difference between Athena and the goddess of Justice? Here's an article on the very topic brought up, actually. An excerpt:

Herep is a collection of images.

That's incorrect. Themis and Justitia are both incarnations of Athena, one representing her Mercy, the other Justice... both combined to make Wisdom. It's a common gaff made by amateurs.

[cpt kangarooski]

Originally posted by Zimphire:
Which is why I said this wasn't about the separation. If it was, you'd see people going after ALL symbols of the like. So far, only Christianity is being attacked.

Well, only Christians are trying and succeeding at violating the establishment clause, apparently. When you find a courthouse with a statue of some Hindu diety that violates the Constitution, then it'll get attacked too.

Seriously, stop with the ******** about people attacking Christians already. It has nothing to do with Christianity; it has to do with there being enough Christians around here with enough of a zeal for enlisting the government's aid in proselytizing that they keep crossing the line. Apparently other religions are, if not better behaved, at least not managing to cross that line anyway.

[Zimphire]

Originally posted by cpt kangarooski:
Well, only Christians are trying and succeeding at violating the establishment clause, apparently. When you find a courthouse with a statue of some Hindu diety that violates the Constitution, then it'll get attacked too.

But there are "Goddesses" (AKA PAGAN) on our buildings too cpt. As was pointed out, No one is going after those. No one cares to.

[BlackGriffen]

Originally posted by cpt kangarooski:
Well, only Christians are trying and succeeding at violating the establishment clause, apparently. When you find a courthouse with a statue of some Hindu diety that violates the Constitution, then it'll get attacked too.

Seriously, stop with the ******** about people attacking Christians already. It has nothing to do with Christianity; it has to do with there being enough Christians around here with enough of a zeal for enlisting the government's aid in proselytizing that they keep crossing the line. Apparently other religions are, if not better behaved, at least not managing to cross that line anyway.

Christianity has a persecution complex leftover from the old days when it was a persecuted cult. That's why it is obsessed with carrying around a cross - so it can climb up and nail itself to a cross from time to time.

Ahhh, another meaningless anthropomorphism.

BG

[RonnieoftheRose]

Originally posted by Zimphire:

But there are "Goddesses" (AKA PAGAN) on our buildings too cpt. As was pointed out, No one is going after those. No one cares to. [/B]

That's because there are no Ancient Greek pagan lobbies or Ancient Greeks knocking on your door with copies of Odysseus.

[MacNStein]

Originally posted by Zimphire:

But there are "Goddesses" (AKA PAGAN) on our buildings too cpt. As was pointed out, No one is going after those. No one cares to. [/B]

Doesn't matter that the Freemasons who placed these statues did so to revere these gods. The placement of these gods and goddesses wasn't centered soley around the concepts they represent and inspire.

[RAILhead]

Originally posted by BlackGriffen:
Christianity has a persecution complex leftover from the old days when it was a persecuted cult. That's why it is obsessed with carrying around a cross - so it can climb up and nail itself to a cross from time to time.

Ahhh, another meaningless anthropomorphism.

BG

I don't have a "persecution complex," just for the record.

Thanks,
Maury

[MacNStein]

Originally posted by RonnieoftheRose:
That's because there are no Ancient Greek pagan lobbies or Ancient Greeks knocking on your door with copies of Odysseus.

No, they just espouse Wicca and pay large amounts of money to special interest groups like the Sierra club and Greenpeace.

[Zimphire]

Originally posted by RonnieoftheRose:
That's because there are no Ancient Greek pagan lobbies or Ancient Greeks knocking on your door with copies of Odysseus.

Oh, so non-seperation is ok as long as the religion isn't knocking on your door? Bullocks.

[Zimphire]

Originally posted by RAILhead:
I don't have a "persecution complex," just for the record.

Thanks,
Maury

Either do I.

[BlackGriffen]

Originally posted by RAILhead:
I don't have a "persecution complex," just for the record.

Thanks,
Maury

Note that I was careful to talk about Christianity as a whole as if it were one person in order for the joke to work.

I see it fell flat, though. *shrugs*

BG

[RonnieoftheRose]

Originally posted by Zimphire:
Oh, so non-seperation is ok as long as the religion isn't knocking on your door? Bullocks.

You mean bollocks. Bullocks are bovine beasts walking around.

[itai195]

Originally posted by BlackGriffen:
Note that I was careful to talk about Christianity as a whole as if it were one person in order for the joke to work.

It was a joke?

To address the others... there's nothing wrong with Christians or any other religious folks donating money to political campaigns and seeking influence. It's when money, favors, etc flow the opposite way from government to certain religious groups that I'd take issue. I find goddess symbols acceptable merely because nobody really associates them with religion. They're seen in a largely secular context by most Americans. The bible, however, carries a rather obvious religious connotation. I don't think I agree with this judge's ruling because this seems to be a monument to a man who valued his Christian faith, so the bible seems an appropriate symbol. I guess we could nitpick over the legality of having an open bible as opposed to a closed one. The bible and monument were funded and maintained with private funds, and so it strikes me as a private expression of speech on public ground, which should be legal. If it isn't, then why not sue my county for allowing Christmas displays in public parks.

[deomacius]

If you're truly going to separate church and state then all references to other religions (symbolic or otherwise) have to go. That includes goddesses.

See, the way I see it, people are too flippin' sensitive. What was it about that statue that had anything to do with the rulings made inside the court? Christians have turned a blind eye to all the goddess and other mystical symbology throughout the country and throughout the years. Now all you hear about is remove Christian this, unlawful Christian that. What a bunch of crap.

[phoenixboy70]

Originally posted by deomacius:
Christians have turned a blind eye to all the goddess and other mystical symbology throughout the country and throughout the years.

*sigh*



anyway, i think all the crosses and statues should stay. who cares. you don't have to look at them. a little bit of diversity would be fun.

anyway, anybody remember the incident where a55croft actually covered up a statue's bare breasts because he thought it was offensive?

now, that's what i call ridiculous!

[BlackGriffen]

Originally posted by phoenixboy70:
anyway, anybody remember the incident where a55croft actually covered up a statue's bare breasts because he thought it was offensive?

now, that's what i call ridiculous!

It's because if he didn't get them out of sight, one day he would give in to the temptation to fondle those firm firm boobies as he walked by. He couldn't have a picture of that getting out, now could he?



BG

[Zimphire]

[QUOTE]Originally posted by deomacius:
[B]If you're truly going to separate church and state then all references to other religions (symbolic or otherwise) have to go. That includes goddesses.
Otherwise they are being transparent with your motivation .
How many Christians have you seen going after these statues because it doesn't follow their beliefs?

Heck, we are going to have to uproot ALL of DC.

See, the way I see it, people are too flippin' sensitive. What was it about that statue that had anything to do with the rulings made inside the court? Christians have turned a blind eye to all the goddess and other mystical symbology throughout the country and throughout the years. Now all you hear about is remove Christian this, unlawful Christian that. What a bunch of crap.

Indeed.

[Zimphire]

Originally posted by phoenixboy70:

anyway, anybody remember the incident where a55croft actually covered up a statue's bare breasts because he thought it was offensive?

now, that's what i call ridiculous!

And I would agree with you.

[deomacius]

Originally posted by phoenixboy70:
*sigh*

Geez, where do I begin...

A. I was speaking of more modern times. No civilization in history is blameless when it comes to unjust killings. People are people.

B. If you're going to continue to blame modern Christianity for the poor judgement of past generations then surely you have no problem paying ME restitution for the slavery, lynchings and torture your forefathers inflicted on my forefathers. (an equally absurd notion). I won't hold my breath for the check.

C. Funny that in modern history Christianity has been "tolerant" of various public displays of alternate religions and yet the same "tolerance" is NOT afforded Christianity. Why is that?

[phoenixboy70]

Originally posted by deomacius:
Geez, where do I begin...

A. I was speaking of more modern times. No civilization in history is blameless when it comes to unjust killings. People are people.

a) no, you weren't. (you said "throughout the years")

b) the stupid "people did it"/"religion isn't responsible for this" argument.

i just can't believe how some folks foolishly try to deny the interconnectedness of "what people believe in" and their "actions".

yes, religion was SPECIFICALLY the impetus for committing such heinous acts against humanity like the holy inquisition. not "teh devil", not "human weakness", or "sin", but the actual "software" which was driving those folks at the time.

it's like saying "software" can't crash computers, it's always the wiring or the hardware. NO! it's the crap software that is DIRECTLY responsible for things that happen. yes, the "jesus os"™ has had some major upgrades in the past, but still, it has a LOT of problems.

c) as for the stupid example of paying you "reparations", - i'm not in any way for slavery, nor have i in any way shape or form partaken in it (as a matter of fact i'm against it, and everything it implies). something which you certainly can't say about your beloved operating system. n'est ce pas!?

[Millennium]

Originally posted by RonnieoftheRose:
That's because there are no Ancient Greek pagan lobbies or Ancient Greeks knocking on your door with copies of Odysseus.

I'd wonder how they got the human-cloning technology, more than anything else. Oh, wait; did you mean the Odyssey (of which Odysseus is the main character)?

Either way, it's irrelevant. If there is to be separation of Church and State, then it must be a clean separation; anything allowed (or disallowed) to one religion must be allowed (or disallowed) to all. That's what equality means.

[deomacius]

Originally posted by phoenixboy70:
a) no, you weren't. (you said "throughout the years")

b) the stupid "people did it"/"religion isn't responsible for this" argument.

i just can't believe how some folks foolishly try to deny the interconnectedness of "what people believe in" and their "actions".

yes, religion was SPECIFICALLY the impetus for committing such heinous acts against humanity like the holy inquisition. not "teh devil", not "human weakness", or "sin", but the actual "software" which was driving those folks at the time.

it's like saying "software" can't crash computers, it's always the wiring or the hardware. NO! it's the crap software that is DIRECTLY responsible for things that happen. yes, the "jesus os"™ has had some major upgrades in the past, but still, it has a LOT of problems.

c) as for the stupid example of paying you "reparations", - i'm not in any way for slavery, nor have i in any way shape or form partaken in it (as a matter of fact i'm against it, and everything it implies). something which you certainly can't say about your beloved operating system. n'est ce pas!?

Wow, Phoenixboy! You said it so it must be true. Your right. It's stupid to point out that people will use anything at their disposal to justify their desires, including religion. Did you know that the Bible doesn't condone how slaves in this country were treated? But people tried to justify it with religion. I guess it helped them to sleep better at night believing that their God condoned that behavior.

As for your assertion that my example of reparations is stupid, you've missed the mark completely. My example is exactly parallel with how Christianity is viewed. See below...

Past Christians + Atrocities = Current Christianity

Past Whites + Abuse & Slavery = Current Whites

Neither of which is accurate. I certainly don't blame modern day white people for the things that happened so long ago. I don't hold those things over their heads as a reminder either. But Christianity can't seem to shake some of the blemishes that ruthless men have given it. Justifying wrong through your beliefs was and is man's way. I mean think about it. From a secular point of view, man was doing evil before Christianity came on the scene. Christianity didn't invent it.

[deomacius]

Originally posted by Millennium:
That's what equality means.

[Millennium]

Originally posted by phoenixboy70:
i just can't believe how some folks foolishly try to deny the interconnectedness of "what people believe in" and their "actions".

I can't believe how some folks foolishly try to deny the huge gulf which lies between thought and action.

yes, religion was SPECIFICALLY the impetus for committing such heinous acts against humanity like the holy inquisition. not "teh devil", not "human weakness", or "sin", but the actual "software" which was driving those folks at the time.

How's about this one: "greed"? These acts would be committed anyway; religion was simply the most convenient excuse. Another would have been found. If you want to speak of the Inquisition, then I can counter with the Holocaust. Although many people believe Hitler's attacks on the Jews to be religiously-motivated, this isn't actually the case. Hitler went so far as to call religion-based anti-Semitism misguided (a fact which didn't win him many friends among the anti-Semites of the time). His fiendish acts were motivated by race, not religion. That doesn't make them any better or worse, but they are what they are.

it's like saying "software" can't crash computers, it's always the wiring or the hardware. NO! it's the crap software that is DIRECTLY responsible for things that happen.

Sometimes, sometimes not. In a well-constructed operating system, ordinary software can't crash the computer; only drivers and other things which work at the lowest levels of the computer/psyche can do that. Religion is a powerful psychological force, but it's not that low-level.

c) as for the stupid example of paying you "reparations", - i'm not in any way for slavery, nor have i in any way shape or form partaken in it (as a matter of fact i'm against it, and everything it implies). something which you certainly can't say about your beloved operating system. n'est ce pas!?

Ah, this crap again. The Bible was used to justify slavery, but it was also used to justify the abolition thereof, not just in the US but in many places which abolished it well before the US did. Who, I ask you, was twisting the words around? It seems to me that the ones who used it to abolish slavery were acting much more in accordance with the message projected by the rest of the book.

[MacNStein]

Originally posted by phoenixboy70:
a) no, you weren't. (you said "throughout the years")

b) the stupid "people did it"/"religion isn't responsible for this" argument.

i just can't believe how some folks foolishly try to deny the interconnectedness of "what people believe in" and their "actions".

yes, religion was SPECIFICALLY the impetus for committing such heinous acts against humanity like the holy inquisition. not "teh devil", not "human weakness", or "sin", but the actual "software" which was driving those folks at the time.

it's like saying "software" can't crash computers, it's always the wiring or the hardware. NO! it's the crap software that is DIRECTLY responsible for things that happen. yes, the "jesus os"™ has had some major upgrades in the past, but still, it has a LOT of problems.

c) as for the stupid example of paying you "reparations", - i'm not in any way for slavery, nor have i in any way shape or form partaken in it (as a matter of fact i'm against it, and everything it implies). something which you certainly can't say about your beloved operating system. n'est ce pas!?

Yeah, those terrible religious leaders... like Stalin, Pol Pot, and Castro. Shame, shame.

[cpt kangarooski]

Zimphire--

But there are "Goddesses" (AKA PAGAN) on our buildings too cpt. As was pointed out, No one is going after those. No one cares to.

Because they lack religious intent or effect. For all we know, there's someone out there that worships courthouses themselves -- that ALONE would not bar us from building them.

Exactly what part of 'effect or intent' are you not picking up on? The mere fact that they're of gods or whatever is IRRELEVANT.

In a NON-religious context, it is actualy okay to put up symbols that also happen to be religious symbols. The Ten Commandments at the federal Supreme Court building are there as being representative of a noteworthy law -- but there is no intent that they are to be followed (in fact really all you see are two tablets -- not what's on them), nor does there appear to be any effect of people following the commandments based on their display IN THAT CONTEXT.

If the bible here is a mere historical artifact, was put there for its value as such, and has no religious effect by virtue of its being there, then it would be fine.

Most if not all of the classical god and goddess imagery used by the government is of just that sort: they're used as being iconic of various things, and are frankly devoid of religious meaning.

It's more difficult for this to be true for modern religions. And frankly, for modern religious symbols, most of 'em tend to be put up by people who have a religious intent in doing so, and there it goes out the window again.

Do you by any chance comprehend the difference between a class on comparative religions and a bible study class? Well, that's basically the same difference here.

BlackGriffen--
Well I picked up on the joke and thought it was funny, anyway.

[MacNStein]

Originally posted by cpt kangarooski:
[B]Zimphire--


Because they lack religious intent or effect. For all we know, there's someone out there that worships courthouses themselves -- that ALONE would not bar us from building them.

Exactly what part of 'effect or intent' are you not picking up on? The mere fact that they're of gods or whatever is IRRELEVANT.
/B]

Well, that's incorrect. In Freemasonry the forms of the goddess are extremely important, and are worshipped in many ways. Their placement in a public building is to envoke the presence of these archetypes and godforms... not just decoration. But then, most people aren't aware that this country was founded on the precepts of Freemasonry.

With over 400,000 members in the US alone, that's a pretty large religious group.

[Zimphire]

Nope, and religion is religion.

If you take all Christian things away, you must take every other religious matters away.

I think it should apply to gov art grants too. No religious material. Bad or good.