# Ten Commandments monument removed from Oklahoma Capitol



## gapeach (Dec 23, 2011)

*Ten Commandments monument
removed from Oklahoma Capitol
*
*http://gazette.com/workers-removing-ten-commandments-from-oklahoma-capitol/article/feed/278423

*How terribly sad. They removed it under the cover of darkness. How appropriate.


----------



## wiscto (Nov 24, 2014)

Appropriate that it was done under the cover of darkness. Give it a rest. Christians don't hold a monopoly over morality. Removing it was frivolous in my opinion, though.


----------



## arabian knight (Dec 19, 2005)

gapeach said:


> *Ten Commandments monument
> removed from Oklahoma Capitol
> *
> *http://gazette.com/workers-removing-ten-commandments-from-oklahoma-capitol/article/feed/278423
> ...


Yes just yet another war on Christians. This is so sad this country is going to heck in a hand basket very quickly and the liberal progressive lefties are 100% At Fault for doing this to once such a great county.


----------



## gapeach (Dec 23, 2011)

I think it is appropriate to say it is sad. Many of our former presidents along with the founders of this great country would have stood to the death, I feel, to protect what they believed. Christianity was real to them and they felt that it was a part of our government.
George Washington was a great example and there are many quotes from him along with many others.


----------



## wiscto (Nov 24, 2014)

gapeach said:


> I think it is appropriate to say it is sad. Many of our former presidents along with the founders of this great country would have stood to the death, I feel, to protect what they believed. Christianity was real to them and they felt that it was a part of our government.
> George Washington was a great example and there are many quotes from him along with many others.


Washington said a lot of things about religion. That makes it easy to cherry pick his beliefs. I doubt very seriously, considering the spirit of our revolution was about liberty, freedom from the oppression of state sponsored religion, and many other things, that any of them would have fought to the death over a monument to the Ten Commandments being removed from government grounds. I think that would have gone against the very fiber of their belief in democracy, and what makes for a stable nation. They may not have liked it, but they certainly wouldn't have allowed something like that to bring the country to arms. They would have maintained their beliefs, the freedom to do so, and they would have worked toward a different future through democracy. And they would have called for peace and unity.


----------



## gapeach (Dec 23, 2011)

Well, we will never know anyway. That is just what I believe. It is very upsetting to me to see so many who have no religious beliefs at all. 
It is extremely sad that Christians throughout the world are being persecuted and that the refugees are being refused refugee status when Muslims are being accepted.


----------



## BlackFeather (Jun 17, 2014)

The basis of western law can trace it's roots in part to the Bible and the 10 Commandments. It is one cornerstone of the foundation that civil law was built upon, the removal of these commands are a denial of the origins of western law. This is not surprising since our leaders, businessmen and commoner have continually become more criminal. The big bankers, Big business and our "gift" taking leaders have corrupted themselves. As leaders do so do the followers. So it is no surprise that offense is taken at a cornerstone of law, it convicts them, so it must be removed. It isn't really about religion, but law.


----------



## gapeach (Dec 23, 2011)

BlackFeather said:


> The basis of western law can trace it's roots in part to the Bible and the 10 Commandments. It is one cornerstone of the foundation that civil law was built upon, the removal of these commands are a denial of the origins of western law. This is not surprising since our leaders, businessmen and commoner have continually become more criminal. The big bankers, Big business and our "gift" taking leaders have corrupted themselves. As leaders do so do the followers. So it is no surprise that offense is taken at a cornerstone of law, it convicts them, so it must be removed. It isn't really about religion, but law.


I totally agree. I just cannot even stand to read the comments not here but on sites that are repeating this article just how callous they are. I am glad to know that some people realize the truth and you are right, that the people in charge of our laws are corrupt to the core. It is a country now where people like the Kardashians and Miley Cyrus are worshipped.


----------



## Allen W (Aug 2, 2008)

I fail to see what the big deal is, it was decided by our state supreme court that it violated our state constitution. This is a new monument, actually the second the first was destroyed by an act of vandalism, that was paid for by private funds and placed at the state capital in recent years. 

If this was a historical monument it would be a tragedy.


----------



## MO_cows (Aug 14, 2010)

Allen W said:


> I fail to see what the big deal is, it was decided by our state supreme court that it violated our state constitution. This is a new monument, actually the second the first was destroyed by an act of vandalism, that was paid for by private funds and placed at the state capital in recent years.
> 
> *If this was a historical monument it would be a tragedy*.


That's what I thought, too. If the monument had been there since the capitol was built, or since statehood, it it had any kind of historical significance, I would really hate to see it disturbed. But this was installed just a few years ago, apparently the result of a political spitting match. It's installation was more about poking the other side in the eye than any true reverence for the commandments it looks like to me.


----------



## Evons hubby (Oct 3, 2005)

arabian knight said:


> Yes just yet another war on Christians. This is so sad this country is going to heck in a hand basket very quickly and the liberal progressive lefties are 100% At Fault for doing this to once such a great county.


Why should Christians care about the Ten Commandments being removed? It's not like they worry about obeying them, it's my understanding that we are no longer bound by Old Testament law.


----------



## gapeach (Dec 23, 2011)

Yvonne's hubby said:


> Why should Christians care about the Ten Commandments being removed? It's not like they worry about obeying them, it's my understanding that we are no longer bound by Old Testament law.



Maybe by some. That does not mean we are not supposed to follow the 10 Commandments. 

Jesus left us in no doubt about His standard of righteousness. We are not even to think that He came to abolish the law. "Do not think that I have come to abolish the law or the prophets; I have come not to abolish but to fulfill" (Matt. 5:17). Anyone who dares to teach that one of God's established commandments is not binding will be rejected by heaven (verse 19). We know what set of laws Jesus meant because he quoted the Ten Commandments (verses 21, 27).

The New Testament teaching regarding the new covenant experience is based firmly on the Old Testament. Hebrews 8:10-12 quotes Jeremiah 31:31-33. The good news is that under the new covenant the law of God is written on believers' hearts. There can be no doubt that the reference is to the Ten Commandment law, for this was the standard of righteousness accepted by Jeremiah (see Jer. 11:1-8).
The New Testament like the old promotes righteousness and salvation by faith in Christ. It is God's grace that saves and grace alone, but grace received is never alone. God's grace includes His gift of spiritual power (1 Cor. 1:4-9). It always results in obedience to the Ten Commandments. God's law is not merely ten suggestions that may be lightly set aside. It is an established, immutable standard of righteousness, obedience to which is made possible by the free gift of His grace.


----------



## Evons hubby (Oct 3, 2005)

gapeach said:


> Maybe by some. That does not mean we are not supposed to follow the 10 Commandments.
> 
> Jesus left us in no doubt about His standard of righteousness. We are not even to think that He came to abolish the law. "Do not think that I have come to abolish the law or the prophets; I have come not to abolish but to fulfill" (Matt. 5:17). Anyone who dares to teach that one of God's established commandments is not binding will be rejected by heaven (verse 19). We know what set of laws Jesus meant because he quoted the Ten Commandments (verses 21, 27).
> 
> ...


Are you saying only the Ten Commandments need be observed? (Referring only to Gods laws from the Old Testament.)


----------



## Shrek (May 1, 2002)

Back in 2001 Roy Moore as state Chief Justice sneaked a rock monument of them into the Alabama Judiciary Building in the middle of the night starting a two year legal battle that eventually resulted in the monument and Roy Moore's removal from office.

Since Moore regained the office of state Chief Justice two years ago he hasn't tried to put them back in the Judicial Building.


----------



## keenataz (Feb 17, 2009)

arabian knight said:


> Yes just yet another war on Christians. This is so sad this country is going to heck in a hand basket very quickly and the liberal progressive lefties are 100% At Fault for doing this to once such a great county.


For goodness sake it is just a rock with writing on it. It's not the original stones with the commandments on them. No one is restricting Christian's right to practice their religion or follow the commandments.

As far as blaming us liberals maybe you should also blame some of the so called Conservative Christians such as Swaggart, Bakker


----------



## Irish Pixie (May 14, 2002)

Yvonne's hubby said:


> Why should Christians care about the Ten Commandments being removed? It's not like they worry about obeying them, it's my understanding that we are no longer bound by Old Testament law.


That's what I'm told when I ask why it's OK for christians to cherry pick what they want to obey.


----------



## Patchouli (Aug 3, 2011)

Yvonne's hubby said:


> Are you saying only the Ten Commandments need be observed? (Referring only to Gods laws from the Old Testament.)


There are actually 613 commandments in the OT and no they do not keep the vast majority of them.


----------



## gapeach (Dec 23, 2011)

The 613 laws are for the Jews.

This is where we get the laws against incest and homosexuality.


----------



## keenataz (Feb 17, 2009)

gapeach said:


> The 613 laws are for the Jews.
> 
> This is where we get the laws against incest and homosexuality.


Thank goodness we got rid of the law against homosexuality.


----------



## plowjockey (Aug 18, 2008)

Sorry, but they had this one coming, IMO.

If it had been there for 100 years, that would be one thing, but in 2009 everybody _knew the drill_, about "church and state" and this was just an "in your face" move by the religious Right.

At least they now get to play the _victim card_.



> Originally authorized by the Republican-controlled Legislature in 2009, the privately funded monument has been a lightning rod for controversy since it was erected in 2012, prompting a lawsuit from Bruce Prescott, a Baptist minister from Norman who complained it violated the state constitution.


LOL, They were ratted out by another Christian.


----------



## Patchouli (Aug 3, 2011)

gapeach said:


> The 613 laws are for the Jews.
> 
> This is where we get the laws against incest and homosexuality.





> Originally Posted by *gapeach*
> _Maybe by some. That does not mean we are not supposed to follow the 10 Commandments.
> 
> Jesus left us in no doubt about His standard of righteousness. *We are not even to think that He came to abolish the law. "Do not think that I have come to abolish the law or the prophets; I have come not to abolish but to fulfill" (Matt. 5:17). Anyone who dares to teach that one of God's established commandments is not binding will be rejected by heaven (verse 19). We know what set of laws Jesus meant because he quoted the Ten Commandments (verses 21, 27).*
> ...


Okay to start Jesus mentioned 3 out of the "10" commandments. He also mentioned 2 out of the other 603. So exegetically speaking your theory holds no water. Check out verses 38 and 43. 

You either have to keep the whole Law or none of it. You don't get to pick the ones you like and dump the other ones. According to Paul you dump them all.


----------



## Patchouli (Aug 3, 2011)

I do have to admit I am disappointed that OK wussed out and didn't go with all religions getting to put up their symbol. On the upside looks like we may get Lucifer on our court house lawn here in AR instead.  

https://www.rt.com/usa/314775-arkansas-capitol-satanic-temple/


----------



## Evons hubby (Oct 3, 2005)

gapeach said:


> The 613 laws are for the Jews.
> 
> This is where we get the laws against incest and homosexuality.


I had no idea the Jews were running this country! I notice we have gotten away from stoning women who commit adultery along with several other sharia like laws.


----------



## gapeach (Dec 23, 2011)

This is why I don't like to discuss religion. I posted what I did because I think that there is a war on Christianity all over the world even the United States.


----------



## arabian knight (Dec 19, 2005)

Yes and it has been ratcheting up, this war on Christians, big time over the last few years. So sad.


----------



## Evons hubby (Oct 3, 2005)

gapeach said:


> This is why I don't like to discuss religion. I posted what I did because I think that there is a war on Christianity all over the world even the United States.


perhaps if others had a better understanding of your religion?


----------



## keenataz (Feb 17, 2009)

arabian knight said:


> Yes and it has been ratcheting up, this war on Christians, big time over the last few years. So sad.


Not questioning your religious beliefs, but who is conducting this war? I think most will agree their are radical muslims who are conducting a war on anyone who is not. But other than that who is it? Bill Maher? Us notorious atheists? the media?

And I know someone will bring up the Seasons Greetings vs. Merry Christmas which is simply stupid. I hate Seasons Greetings and the other variations. But other than that example where is this war?

As far as I know most people I know are live and let live. You can celebrate your beliefs any way you want, just don't expect others to follow. Is that so bad?


----------



## poppy (Feb 21, 2008)

It's a given that those who wanted it gone would want it gone from its new location too if they had their way. Fortunately it is not on public property but it still risks being vandalized. Seems more and more people go out of their way to be offended. Anyone offended by a monument, which is little more than a sign, has mental issues IMO.


----------



## MO_cows (Aug 14, 2010)

Patchouli said:


> Okay to start Jesus mentioned 3 out of the "10" commandments. He also mentioned 2 out of the other 603. So exegetically speaking your theory holds no water. Check out verses 38 and 43.
> 
> *You either have to keep the whole Law or none of it. *You don't get to pick the ones you like and dump the other ones. According to Paul you dump them all.


Says you? How people keep their faith is their own business.


----------



## Evons hubby (Oct 3, 2005)

MO_cows said:


> Says you? How people keep their faith is their own business.


I agree, even if that religion is not tied to the bible.


----------



## Allen W (Aug 2, 2008)

MO_cows said:


> That's what I thought, too. If the monument had been there since the capitol was built, or since statehood, it it had any kind of historical significance, I would really hate to see it disturbed. But this was installed just a few years ago, apparently the result of a political spitting match. It's installation was more about poking the other side in the eye than any true reverence for the commandments it looks like to me.


Just another gift from our republican's who are in power right now. If they would work as hard at every thing as they do at promoting Christianity and making up unenforceable abortion laws we would be a great state.


----------



## gapeach (Dec 23, 2011)

Allen W said:


> Just another gift from our republican's who are in power right now. If they would work as hard at every thing as they do at promoting Christianity and making up unenforceable abortion laws we would be a great state.


It is your state and if you are happy with the decision and action, that that is important.


----------



## Fennick (Apr 16, 2013)

gapeach said:


> Well, we will never know anyway. That is just what I believe. *It is very upsetting to me to see so many who have no religious beliefs at all. *
> 
> It is extremely sad that *Christians throughout the world are being persecuted* and that the refugees are being refused refugee status when Muslims are being accepted.


Honey, you need to poke your head out of your shell and check out what is actually happening in the world. Both of your above statements are incorrect. 

Christians throughout the world are NOT being persecuted and whoever told you they are is lying to you. If it was a Christian who told you that then they aren't a very good Christian for telling you lies. You need to stop promoting such an awful lie.

A third of the world's population is Christian, it's the most highly populated religion in the world and it's still growing, it's not stagnating or decreasing. 

Only 16% of the global population does not have a religion so you have no reason and no right to be upset about that. Everybody else has a right to believe in whatever religion they want to believe in, or not believe in any religion at all.

Is it possible that what's really upsetting you is that you want the entire world's population to be only Christian and that you are intolerant of all other religions? Because that is what it sounds like and if that's the case then you have control issues about your religion and many other people are sick and tired of intolerant Christians with control issues trying to control the world and other people who are not Christians.

Let it go. Just learn to live and let live and be happy with what you believe in for yourself.


----------



## Patchouli (Aug 3, 2011)

gapeach said:


> This is why I don't like to discuss religion. I posted what I did because I think that there is a war on Christianity all over the world even the United States.


Well I'll tell you what you tell me when you have to worry about losing your job or your kids because you are a Christian. You tell me when you get death threats. You tell me when you look down the barrel of a shotgun because somebody hates your religion so much they want to kill you. Because you know what? I have done all of those. Christians have been so busy persecuting the daylights out of other religions maybe it will good for them to actually suffer a little of the horror they have dished out.


----------



## Patchouli (Aug 3, 2011)

MO_cows said:


> Says you? How people keep their faith is their own business.


Says the Bible actually. But they ignore it whenever it suits them anyways so never mind.


----------



## arabian knight (Dec 19, 2005)

Fallin called for a constitutional amendment to restore the monument Tuesday, saying, "We're going to let the people of Oklahoma decide this issue."
The way it should be not some dumb group that wants to control everyone. Let the People Vote to decide such things.~!!!!!!


----------



## Evons hubby (Oct 3, 2005)

arabian knight said:


> Fallin called for a constitutional amendment to restore the monument Tuesday, saying, "We're going to let the people of Oklahoma decide this issue."
> The way it should be *not some dumb group *that wants to control everyone. Let the People Vote to decide such things.~!!!!!!


right, let's let some other dumb group control everybody instead. :facepalm:


----------



## mmoetc (Oct 9, 2012)

plowjockey said:


> Sorry, but they had this one coming, IMO.
> 
> If it had been there for 100 years, that would be one thing, but in 2009 everybody _knew the drill_, about "church and state" and this was just an "in your face" move by the religious Right.
> 
> ...


Perhaps he was upset they left off the 11th commandment baptists hold dear-
There shall be no dancing. Footloose forever!


----------



## beenaround (Mar 2, 2015)

wiscto said:


> Appropriate that it was done under the cover of darkness. Give it a rest. Christians don't hold a monopoly over morality. Removing it was frivolous in my opinion, though.


It's not a christian thing although Christians hold to it. These are foundational laws that carry serious consequences you are already paying. The act of breaking them is bad enough, calling them wrong compounds the seriousness of the consequences. You will live or die by the morals they demand. It's is you're supposed morals, if they differ that have no authority as they have no consequences. As it is, your moral code is nothing more than the breaking of the moral code and that has consequences one you can clearly see, the ever increasing size of government. No government was ever enabled when people love their neighbor. Look at all the government involved in relationships, your moral code, or the lack of adhering to the moral code has given all this regulation, the strangling of freedom.

The removal of the moral code makes those who removed it your god, your petty god. Petty gods who if they had everything would not be satisfied till they had everything you had. That's called coveting, something man, all men suffer from and you're making them your god.


----------



## beenaround (Mar 2, 2015)

Patchouli said:


> Well I'll tell you what you tell me when you have to worry about losing your job or your kids because you are a Christian. You tell me when you get death threats. You tell me when you look down the barrel of a shotgun because somebody hates your religion so much they want to kill you. Because you know what? I have done all of those. Christians have been so busy persecuting the daylights out of other religions maybe it will good for them to actually suffer a little of the horror they have dished out.


so you want christians to suffer, how many people in the world do you think have that urge? Seems to me that if that number is high that would be the motive for the crimes.

People just found you, asked your religion and shoved a shotgun in your face? Begs a lot of questions, what religion are you?

Just so we're clear, what you're describing above is against the moral code removed.


----------



## Jolly (Jan 8, 2004)

A little Jesus would do most everybody good.

Ten Commandments wouldn't hurt, either.


----------



## AmericanStand (Jul 29, 2014)

The Ten Commandments is a foundation to build a good society. 
And perhaps a good limit.


----------



## Laura Zone 5 (Jan 13, 2010)

gapeach said:


> *Ten Commandments monument
> removed from Oklahoma Capitol
> *
> *http://gazette.com/workers-removing-ten-commandments-from-oklahoma-capitol/article/feed/278423
> ...


It is the world we live in.
We cannot stop it......
However, we can store up those treasures in our hearts. 
That's where they are supposed to be anyway.

Christians can print T-shirts w/ the 10 Commandments and wear them every single day, and that would reach infinitely more........but w/o an explanation of what the 10 Commandments MEAN? Folks will just think it's a 'set of rules to get to heaven'.
And that's not what they are.

1 Peter 3: 15-16
But in your hearts revere Christ as Lord. Always be prepared to* give an answer to everyone who asks you to give the reason for the hope that you have.* _*
But do this with gentleness and respect,*_ keeping a clear conscience, so that those who speak maliciously against your good behavior in Christ may be ashamed of their slander.


----------



## mmoetc (Oct 9, 2012)

Laura Zone 10 said:


> It is the world we live in.
> We cannot stop it......
> However, we can store up those treasures in our hearts.
> That's where they are supposed to be anyway.
> ...


Or they could just live by them and let others be.


----------



## Laura Zone 5 (Jan 13, 2010)

mmoetc said:


> Or they could just live by them and let others be.


Right, that was the point of my post.

The first 5 Commandments are the relationship between the Believer and God. 
The next 5 Commandments are the relationship man should have w/ fellow man ('man' as in humanity).

If Believers want to start conversations, wear a shirt w/ the 10 Commandments, every day, everywhere, and when someone ASKS about it; be ready to give an answer.

My God does not need a monument anywhere.
He speaks thru Creation....something you cannot ban, or avoid.:grin:


----------



## Irish Pixie (May 14, 2002)

Jolly said:


> A little Jesus would do most everybody good.
> 
> Ten Commandments wouldn't hurt, either.


Not if you think it's a bunch of hogwash. 

I don't need religion to be a decent human being, if you do fine, but don't push it on me.


----------



## Laura Zone 5 (Jan 13, 2010)

Irish Pixie said:


> Not if you think it's a bunch of hogwash.
> 
> I don't need religion to be a decent human being, if you do fine, but don't push it on me.


I love this!!!

It's so useful.


"Not if you think it's a bunch of hogwash"

That doesn't mean you are a bigot or hater, it just means you don't believe.
YOU very well may be an amazing person, you just don't believe.
That's ok.

"I don't need ________ to be a decent human being, if you do fine, but don't push it on me".

Fill in the blank, and it applies...........

Religion (you choose.....any religion will fit)
to celebrate gay marriage
love the president
inter racial marriage
raise goats

You can put all kinds of things in that blank.........
This is a great quote Pixie!!!


----------



## mmoetc (Oct 9, 2012)

Laura Zone 10 said:


> Right, that was the point of my post.
> 
> The first 5 Commandments are the relationship between the Believer and God.
> The next 5 Commandments are the relationship man should have w/ fellow man ('man' as in humanity).
> ...


Or try could just live by them and let others be. If two gay men walking down the street is forcing things down Christian's throats, as some here have stated, isn't wearing a shirt proclaiming your beliefs doing the same? I don't object to either. But then my beliefs are mine and I dont expect anyone else to live by them.


----------



## greg273 (Aug 5, 2003)

BlackFeather said:


> The basis of western law can trace it's roots in part to the Bible and the 10 Commandments. It is one cornerstone of the foundation that civil law was built upon, the removal of these commands are a denial of the origins of western law.


 Not lying, stealing, cheating, and murdering are not just 'western laws', pretty much every society in the history of humanity has those precepts as the basis for their laws.


----------



## greg273 (Aug 5, 2003)

poppy said:


> It's a given that those who wanted it gone would want it gone from its new location too if they had their way. Fortunately it is not on public property but it still risks being vandalized. Seems more and more people go out of their way to be offended. Anyone offended by a monument, which is little more than a sign, has mental issues IMO.


 Uh huh, and those who get offended by a LACK of a religious monument on public property have mental issues also, if we're gonna take that route. 
Although if this was a Muslim group wanting a monument, I am guessing you'd be one of those 'offended', please correct me if I am wrong on that. 
Theres many places where religious monuments are perfectly acceptable, they're called CHURCHES. Or theres even more places called 'PRIVATE PROPERTY'. 
We are NOT a theocracy, there is no need for government to endorse one particular religion over another.


----------



## Woolieface (Feb 17, 2015)

Patchouli said:


> I do have to admit I am disappointed that OK wussed out and didn't go with all religions getting to put up their symbol. On the upside looks like we may get Lucifer on our court house lawn here in AR instead.
> 
> https://www.rt.com/usa/314775-arkansas-capitol-satanic-temple/


Just curious, are you being really serious when you say a monument of Baphomet is the "upside"?


----------



## gapeach (Dec 23, 2011)

greg273 said:


> Uh huh, and those who get offended by a LACK of a religious monument on public property have mental issues also, if we're gonna take that route.
> Although if this was a Muslim group wanting a monument, I am guessing you'd be one of those 'offended', please correct me if I am wrong on that.
> Theres many places where religious monuments are perfectly acceptable, they're called CHURCHES. Or theres even more places called 'PRIVATE PROPERTY'.
> We are NOT a theocracy, there is no need for government to endorse one particular religion over another.


It a Muslim monument was put on the Capitol grounds in Ga, there would be no doubt that everyone in State Govt. of Georgia had lost their minds.
That is a profound statement.


----------



## mmoetc (Oct 9, 2012)

gapeach said:


> It a Muslim monument was put on the Capitol grounds in Ga, there would be no doubt that everyone in State Govt. of Georgia had lost their minds.
> That is a profound statement.


Why? Don't Georgians believe in religous freedom?


----------



## gapeach (Dec 23, 2011)

They would not believe in putting a Muslim monument on the statehouse grounds. I know that without a shadow of a doubt. Neither would any other state of the Union.


----------



## Laura Zone 5 (Jan 13, 2010)

mmoetc said:


> Or try could just live by them and let others be. If two gay men walking down the street is forcing things down Christian's throats, as some here have stated, isn't wearing a shirt proclaiming your beliefs doing the same? I don't object to either. But then my beliefs are mine and I dont expect anyone else to live by them.


Awwwwwww.

S....lowwwwww down.............

I agreed with you.

Go back, and re read what I said........2 gay men walking down the street is about as 'confrontational' as a chrisitan wearing a shirt w/ the 10 Commandments on it.........and that amount is 100% ZERO CONFRONTATIONAL.

So we agree.......2 gay men walking down the street......ok.
Christian wearing a t-shirt w/ the 10 Commandments......ok.

2 gay men walking down the street forces me to do........NOTHING.
If they are engaged in a conversation and not paying attention to where they are walking, I might have to step around.......but, short of that?
There's nothing there. Nothing to be confrontational about???

2 Christians walking down the street wearing shirts w/ the 10 Commandments forces me to do........NOTHING.If they are engaged in a conversation and not paying attention to where they are walking, I might have to step around.......but, short of that?
There's nothing there. Nothing to be confrontational about???

I am not sure what your arguement is, or with whom, but I am pretty sure, that I agreed......:facepalm:


----------



## Laura Zone 5 (Jan 13, 2010)

Target does not allow ANY ANY ANY group to 'solicit' in front of their stores / on their property.
Not the Salvation Army
Not the Girl/Boy Scouts.
Not The Red Cross
No school groups
No church groups 
NO ONE NO ONE NO ONE.

I am ok with that.
That way no one can say "Oh Target is this or Target is that or Target discriminates or Target bla bla bla.

I am absolutely OK with ZERO ZERO ZERO 'religious" ANYTHING erected ANYWHERE other than on private property Period NO exceptions.


----------



## oneraddad (Jul 20, 2010)

If God is gonna sort this all out, why is everybody so concerned about others ?


----------



## wr (Aug 10, 2003)

Patchouli said:


> Says the Bible actually. But they ignore it whenever it suits them anyways so never mind.


I'm not Christian but I know some pretty terrific Christians and while sometimes what they do doesn't always make sense to me but I don't think it's possible for me or anyone else to tell them they're not doing it right. 

I'm sure that you and I would both be a bit unhappy if someone chose to tell us that we were practicing our respective faiths incorrectly.


----------



## Bearfootfarm (Jul 13, 2006)

Woolieface said:


> Just curious, are you being really serious when you say a monument of Baphomet is the "upside"?


If you don't believe in it , it's just a weird looking statue with no meaning at all.
Why should it bother you?


----------



## wiscto (Nov 24, 2014)

Jolly said:


> A little Jesus would do most everybody good.
> 
> *Ten Commandments wouldn't hurt, either.*





AmericanStand said:


> *The Ten Commandments* is a foundation to build a good society.
> And perhaps a good limit.


Wasn't the first of it's kind. Wasn't the last of it's kind. Wasn't even the best of it's kind.


----------



## hippygirl (Apr 3, 2010)

What gets me about those who so vehemently oppose anything contrary to their own belief system (or lack thereof) is that, many times, the simple fact that "it" even EXISTS is an offense to them and "its" display is somehow an infringement on their "rights"...

Well, what about my rights? Why should my rights be diminished so yours can be upheld (I'm using the terms "my" and "yours" broadly, not specifically)? What it basically boils down to is whose rights are more important, yours or mine?

Logic suggests the answer would be an all-or-none solution...if a religious icon of any religion is allowed to be on display, then icons of all religions should be allowed to be on display, but even that won't work because of those who want NO icons on display would have a hissy fit, those who want only their icon on display would have a hissy fit, and those who want their icon on display where there is none would have a hissy fit as well...back to square one.

The way "rights" are perceived/judged at present creates an "us versus them" mentality where there is ZERO room for anything other than black or white. It doesn't bother me one bit whether there is a 10 ton granite statue/sculpture of the Ten Commandments at the entrance of every single government building in this country or not as that, in and of itself, does not diminish OR reinforce my beliefs, but what DOES bother me is the thinking that one person's or one group's rights are more important/relevant than anothers.

So...what to do, what to DO???

When someone comes up with a solution that works for ALL who cry about infringement upon their rights, let me know...until then, we (as a society) will continue to moan and shake our collective fingers wildly about in righteous indignation for...what, exactly?

At best, it's an exercise in futility.


----------



## Patchouli (Aug 3, 2011)

> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *arabian knight*
> _Fallin called for a constitutional amendment to restore the monument Tuesday, saying, "We're going to let the people of Oklahoma decide this issue."
> The way it should be *not some dumb group *that wants to control everyone. Let the People Vote to decide such things.~!!!!!!_





Yvonne's hubby said:


> right, let's let some other dumb group control everybody instead. :facepalm:


Yup because letting the majority make these decisions and trample the minority has never gone badly in the past. It's what the constitution was written for!


----------



## Patchouli (Aug 3, 2011)

beenaround said:


> so you want christians to suffer, how many people in the world do you think have that urge? Seems to me that if that number is high that would be the motive for the crimes.
> 
> People just found you, asked your religion and shoved a shotgun in your face? Begs a lot of questions, what religion are you?
> 
> Just so we're clear, what you're describing above is against the moral code removed.


No it is perfectly acceptable and even commanded by the Bible. Exodus 22:18.

As for where I was, it was a Pagan gathering in Texas at a campground rented for the gathering. Guess the locals didn't like the idea and we wound up staring down the locals and their shotguns until the police showed up and they melted away into the darkness like the rats they were.


----------



## wr (Aug 10, 2003)

Patchouli said:


> No it is perfectly acceptable and even commanded by the Bible. Exodus 22:18.
> 
> As for where I was, it was a Pagan gathering in Texas at a campground rented for the gathering. Guess the locals didn't like the idea and we wound up staring down the locals and their shotguns until the police showed up and they melted away into the darkness like the rats they were.



I don't feel anyone should have to apologize for for their faith but I also feel that it's unfair to judge the actions of an entire group on the actions of a few in any faith. 

We ask people to accept our individual beliefs but I can't see that acceptance will come from rejecting theirs. 

Obviously threatening any group intending to worship is unacceptable but does that make all Christians bad or does that simply mean some people aren't very nice? I don't think so because I know some wonderful people who just happen to be Christians.


----------



## Patchouli (Aug 3, 2011)

I don't have a problem with Christians in general nor have I ever judged all of them. I have actually defended one group of Christians against other groups here. You want to see some fun around here ask if Mormons are real Christians or if Catholics are really the Church of the Antichrist. 

There is a certain member here who wants to make me out to be a Christian hater but that is simply untrue. I don't hate any religious group even if I have been heavily mistreated by one of them. I also was one of them for most of my life. I know there are plenty of decent people who are Christians. But please don't tell me I can not share my bad experiences or others.


----------



## greg273 (Aug 5, 2003)

hippygirl said:


> When someone comes up with a solution that works for ALL who cry about infringement upon their rights, let me know.


 There is a very simple solution. Government does not endorse one religion over another.


----------



## wr (Aug 10, 2003)

Patchouli said:


> I don't have a problem with Christians in general nor have I ever judged all of them. I have actually defended one group of Christians against other groups here. You want to see some fun around here ask if Mormons are real Christians or if Catholics are really the Church of the Antichrist.
> 
> There is a certain member here who wants to make me out to be a Christian hater but that is simply untrue. I don't hate any religious group even if I have been heavily mistreated by one of them. I also was one of them for most of my life. I know there are plenty of decent people who are Christians. But please don't tell me I can not share my bad experiences or others.


I could better accept your statement if you had said you were mistreated by some of members of a faith but I struggle to accept that anyone can say they have been mistreated by an entire group. 

You are entitled to your opinion I'm not telling you that you can't share negative experiences but I doubt if dwelling on negative experiences fosters religious tolerance. 

I've been judged a time or two as well and it wasn't an experience I enjoyed either but I would never consider that an uninformed person was an indication that all of their beliefs were of the same opinion.


----------



## Patchouli (Aug 3, 2011)

wr said:


> I could better accept your statement if you had said you were mistreated by some of members of a faith but I struggle to accept that anyone can say they have been mistreated by an entire group.
> 
> You are entitled to your opinion I'm not telling you that you can't share negative experiences but I doubt if dwelling on negative experiences fosters religious tolerance.
> 
> I've been judged a time or two as well and it wasn't an experience I enjoyed either but I would never consider that an uninformed person was an indication that all of their beliefs were of the same opinion.


That's what I meant but let me clarify my sentence: I don't hate any religious group even if I have been heavily mistreated by a fairly decent sized swath of members from one of them.

Keep in mind I was raised by an abusive parent who used their brand of Christianity as their reasoning for that abuse. My father was a minister and so I got to see all the ugly behind the scenes at various churches. I was Wiccan for 7 years and then converted back to Christianity as an adult. And then finally left for several reasons including coming to the conclusion there is no god at all. But one of the driving reasons I believe that is because of bad behavior on the part of other members of the faith.

So do I have some real issues with Christianity? Absolutely. Do I have good cause to paint with a pretty wide brush? Yes. Do I know for a fact that there are plenty of good, kind, decent people who are Christians who try to do the right thing every day? Absolutely. Do I make a sincere effort to not paint with a wide brush? Yeah I actually do.


----------



## Woolieface (Feb 17, 2015)

I wonder if we can stop confusing tolerance of People with tolerance of Every Belief.


----------



## Patchouli (Aug 3, 2011)

Woolieface said:


> I wonder if we can stop confusing tolerance of People with tolerance of Every Belief.


Not sure what you mean?


----------



## plowjockey (Aug 18, 2008)

arabian knight said:


> Yes and it has been ratcheting up, this war on Christians, big time over the last few years. So sad.


 the lawsuit against the statue, was brought on by a Baptist.


----------



## plowjockey (Aug 18, 2008)

gapeach said:


> This is why I don't like to discuss religion. I posted what I did because I think that there is a war on Christianity all over the world even the United States.


If it's a war, then at least in this case, it was _Christians_, who fired the first shot.

They knew that putting that stature in was wrong, that is why they coerced the legislators.


----------



## Woolieface (Feb 17, 2015)

Patchouli said:


> Not sure what you mean?


What if I can care about someone and see the good qualities in them even if I really don't condone every singe thing they believe?


----------



## beenaround (Mar 2, 2015)

Patchouli said:


> No it is perfectly acceptable and even commanded by the Bible. Exodus 22:18.
> 
> As for where I was, it was a Pagan gathering in Texas at a campground rented for the gathering. Guess the locals didn't like the idea and we wound up staring down the locals and their shotguns until the police showed up and they melted away into the darkness like the rats they were.


no it isn't perfectly acceptable, read the entire thing. If you pick and chose what you want out of the book you're a mirror reflection of those you wish harm to.

So you were being confrontational...in Texas...and ended up looking down a barrel. What about that didn't you expect?

You didn't answer the question of suffer or how many you think share your desire? Pagans have no history of persecuting others who don't share their belief?


----------



## Patchouli (Aug 3, 2011)

Woolieface said:


> What if I can care about someone and see the good qualities in them even if I really don't condone every singe thing they believe?


That's what I thought you meant I just wasn't sure.  You and I have had good discussions and I have no problems with you at all because of your faith. From what I have seen you appear to a be a good caring person. I don't really have a problem with any of the posters here unless they follow me around trying to point out my faults.


----------



## Irish Pixie (May 14, 2002)

beenaround said:


> no it isn't perfectly acceptable, read the entire thing. If you pick and chose what you want out of the book you're a mirror reflection of *those you wish harm to*.
> 
> So you were being confrontational...in Texas...and ended up looking down a barrel. What about that didn't you expect?
> 
> You didn't answer the question of suffer or how many you think share your desire? Pagans have no history of persecuting others who don't share their belief?


Who here wishes harm to anyone?


----------



## Patchouli (Aug 3, 2011)

beenaround said:


> no it isn't perfectly acceptable, read the entire thing. If you pick and chose what you want out of the book you're a mirror reflection of those you wish harm to.
> 
> So you were being confrontational...in Texas...and ended up looking down a barrel. What about that didn't you expect?
> 
> You didn't answer the question of suffer or how many you think share your desire? Pagans have no history of persecuting others who don't share their belief?


Excuse me? I was NOT being confrontational. I was at a campground rented for the purpose of a group of Pagans getting together to have a festival and celebrate Beltane. We were having a processional to the area we had our Circle set up and looked up to see a group of locals TRESSPASSING on the property sitting on their pick-up trucks with their headlights on holding shot guns. 

I was 22, pregnant and scared half to death thinking I was going to die that night. Fortunately the police showed up and the locals ran off. 

I would never want to see anyone in that position no matter what their faith. Having a statue taken down (that supposedly was not there to represent a specific faith in the first place) in no way equates to losing your job or your kids or facing death. But inevitably if you keep dishing something out it will get dished back at you.


----------



## gapeach (Dec 23, 2011)

This is not meant to be confrontational against anyone but being Pagan is something I have always been taught in church as being sacreligious.
I have known one Wiccan in my life and she is young and mostly wears black and is Gothic, white and black only make-up and black clothes.

This is what I have found on my search.
pagan is anyone with no religion at all.

Pagan comes from the Latin word paganus, which means âcountry dwellerâ; paganism can refer to polytheism or the worship of more than one god, such as in ancient Rome. A pagan is also considered to be one who, for the most part, has no religion and indulges in worldly delights and material possessions; someone who revels in sensual pleasures; a hedonistic or self-indulgent individual. Another, more modern term is neo-paganism, which refers to some of the contemporary forms of paganism such as Wicca, Druidry, and Gwyddon.

These modern âpaganâ practices are actually similar to their ancient counterparts in that they rely heavily on hedonismâsensual gratification and self-indulgence and the pursuit of happiness and pleasure to the exclusion of everything else. In ancient times, sexual ceremonies were a major part of pagan religions. The Old Testament references these perverted religions in such passages as Deuteronomy 23:17, Amos 2:7â8, and Isaiah 57:7â8.


----------



## Woolieface (Feb 17, 2015)

Patchouli said:


> That's what I thought you meant I just wasn't sure.  You and I have had good discussions and I have no problems with you at all because of your faith. From what I have seen you appear to a be a good caring person. I don't really have a problem with any of the posters here unless they follow me around trying to point out my faults.


Thanks, though I don't think I was born that way 

Christians should do and say whatever they do and say out of caring about fellow human beings, but being human means having pesky emotions. Emotions can get the better of us, even when we mean well.

If you feel a Christian is treating you badly, remind them that they are supposed to love their enemies. That makes the brain cells fire every time.


----------



## Laura Zone 5 (Jan 13, 2010)

Patchouli said:


> Excuse me? I was NOT being confrontational. I was at a campground rented for the purpose of a group of Pagans getting together to have a festival and celebrate Beltane. We were having a processional to the area we had our Circle set up and looked up to see a group of locals TRESSPASSING on the property sitting on their pick-up trucks with their headlights on holding shot guns.
> 
> I was 22, pregnant and scared half to death thinking I was going to die that night. Fortunately the police showed up and the locals ran off.
> 
> I would never want to see anyone in that position no matter what their faith. Having a statue taken down (that supposedly was not there to represent a specific faith in the first place) in no way equates to losing your job or your kids or facing death. But inevitably if you keep dishing something out it will get dished back at you.


I don't care what state you are in........there is NO EXCUSE for humans to harass and draw guns on other humans that are doing nothing illegal.
If you were exceeding noise ordinances, burning a fire when you shouldn't etc.....then fine, call the police, ya'all are breaking the law.
But if you are just doing your thing inside the law?
NO ONE has the right EVER to point a gun in your face and intimidate / harass you cause they don't like your religion. Period. Ever.

I'm sorry if those toting guns didn't like your religion or practice there of.
But the last time I check, this was the United States of America, and I believe the 1rst amendment to our Constitution PROTECTS this practice of religion.

I am a Bible believing Christ following human......and I wouldn't want guns drawn on me in my church while doing a Bible study.......

I am sorry this happened. This is one of the most assinine things I have ever heard. Oy Vey!


----------



## Patchouli (Aug 3, 2011)

gapeach said:


> This is not meant to be confrontational against anyone but being Pagan is something I have always been taught in church as being sacreligious.
> I have known one Wiccan in my life and she is young and mostly wears black and is Gothic, white and black only make-up and black clothes.
> 
> This is what I have found on my search.
> ...


See now I am going to take you at your word that you were not trying to be offensive.  But you basically just hashed Paganism there. And I am not sure what your source was but it appears to have been antagonistic towards Pagans and Wiccans and pretty much none of that is true. 

Let me give you a better source:



> *What Paganism Is*
> Paganism is the ancestral religion of the whole of humanity. This ancient religious outlook remains active throughout much of the world today, both in complex civilisations such as Japan and India, and in less complex tribal societies world-wide. It was the outlook of the European religions of classical antiquity â Persia, Egypt, Greece and Rome â as well as of their âbarbarianâ neighbours on the northern fringes, and its European form is re-emerging into explicit awareness in the modern West as the articulation of urgent contemporary religious priorities.
> The Pagan outlook can be seen as threefold. Its adherents venerate Nature and worship many deities, both goddesses and gods.
> *Nature â Veneration*
> The spirit of place is recognised in Pagan religion, whether as a personified natural feature such as a mountain, lake or spring, or as a fully articulated guardian divinity such as, for example, Athena, the goddess of Athens. The cycle of the natural year, with the different emphasis brought by its different seasons, is seen by most Pagans as a model of spiritual growth and renewal, and as a sequence marked by festivals which offer access to different divinities according to their affinity with different times of year. Many Pagans see the Earth itself as sacred: in ancient Greece the Earth was always offered the first libation of wine, although She had no priesthood and no temple.


http://www.paganfederation.org/what-is-paganism/


----------



## Agriculture (Jun 8, 2015)

gapeach said:


> *Ten Commandments monument
> removed from Oklahoma Capitol
> *
> *http://gazette.com/workers-removing-ten-commandments-from-oklahoma-capitol/article/feed/278423
> ...


I'm delighted to read this story. Thanks for posting it. Believe whatever you want, but keep it to yourself. Admit it or not, displaying religious symbols like this on state property is sanctioning and promoting a certain belief system. Stop shoving it in my face and I'll support your right to believe whatever you want, in private.


----------



## mmoetc (Oct 9, 2012)

Laura Zone 10 said:


> Right, that was the point of my post.
> 
> The first 5 Commandments are the relationship between the Believer and God.
> The next 5 Commandments are the relationship man should have w/ fellow man ('man' as in humanity).
> ...


Or they could just live by them and let others be. A simple statement.

Here's the difference between your two people wearing t-shirts and two gay men walking down the street. One is done with the hope of provoking a reaction and starting a conversation about the benefits of a particular faith. Its not a bad thing or an unacceptable thing nor a thing to be banned. But it is done with a purpose. The other is done with none of those expectations. In fact, the couple would most likely not have to answer questions.

Wearing a shirt with the hope one gets to prostelytize has nothing to do with living by the Ten Commandments. It offers no evidence or proof that one is indeed following them. It does allow one to follow other tenets of the faith as you pointed out. But it has nothing to do with living by the commandments and letting others be.


----------



## Vahomesteaders (Jun 4, 2014)

The saddest part of all of this is the blindness. This nation exploded from nothing (the nation that rose from the sea to great power in the bible). We prospered and became the greatest nation on earth. From that time until the mid 80s we boasted about our faithful nation and carried well over the majority of people believing in God. That had declined rapidly in the last 20 years and with it our society. More death and killing. More people giving up their own lives out of despair. More people living off the govt. 1 out of every 4 on since physiatric drug because happiness can't be found when your denying your very core self by denying your creator. It's plain to see the further we have gotten from God and the more we legislate against him, the further we collapse as a nation.


----------



## Laura Zone 5 (Jan 13, 2010)

mmoetc said:


> Or they could just live by them and let others be. A simple statement.
> 
> Here's the difference between your two people wearing t-shirts and two gay men walking down the street. One is done with the hope of provoking a reaction and starting a conversation about the benefits of a particular faith. Its not a bad thing or an unacceptable thing nor a thing to be banned. But it is done with a purpose. The other is done with none of those expectations. In fact, the couple would most likely not have to answer questions.
> 
> Wearing a shirt with the hope one gets to prostelytize has nothing to do with living by the Ten Commandments. It offers no evidence or proof that one is indeed following them. It does allow one to follow other tenets of the faith as you pointed out. But it has nothing to do with living by the commandments and letting others be.


Well that's the "hostile way" of looking at it.

Maybe my two people wearing t shirts are ready to give an answer, if asked, but otherwise, just like to wear graphic T's (like everyone else in the world that wears a graphic T) and that's the end of it?

Bless your heart I know you want to argue and disagree, even when I agree with you.

*Live an let live.*

2 gay men walking down the street......no big deal.
2 men wearing 10 Commandment T's walking down the street....no big deal.
A black man and his white wife walking down the street....no big deal.
2 Darwinians wearing "Evolution" t shirts walking down the street.....no big deal.
2 white bald guys w/ rebel flags on their t shirts walking down the street....no big deal.

If, in fact, 2 of ANY folks, are just walking down the street, JUST walking down the street..........what they are wearing is not confrontational.
The confrontation STARTS when someone 'gets offended' and opens their big fat mouth.
If everyone heeded the *"Live and let live"* motto......we'd all mind our own business and get out of the business of being butt hurt and offended.


----------



## mmoetc (Oct 9, 2012)

Laura Zone 10 said:


> Well that's the "hostile way" of looking at it.
> 
> Maybe my two people wearing t shirts are ready to give an answer, if asked, but otherwise, just like to wear graphic T's (like everyone else in the world that wears a graphic T) and that's the end of it?
> 
> ...


Read your own post. It starts off with the words "If believers want to start conversations........". A proactive act designed to elicit a response. If that's what they wish to do they have every right to. Others have every right to be offended, agree or ignore them. But it has nothing to do with living by the ten commandments and letting others be.


----------



## oneraddad (Jul 20, 2010)

Or just refuse to get offended by people who's opinion don't matter to you.


----------



## Laura Zone 5 (Jan 13, 2010)

mmoetc said:


> Read your own post. It starts off with the words "If believers want to start conversations........".



"Maybe my two people wearing t shirts are _*ready to give an answer, if asked, *_but otherwise," 

Re read. I said nothing about 'starting' a conversation......nothing.



> A proactive act designed to elicit a response. If that's what they wish to do they have every right to.


Does everyone who wears a Sponge Bob graphic T want to start a conversation about cartoons?

Does everyone who wears a Nascar graphic T want to start a conversation about auto racing?

Does everyone who wears a Marine graphic T want to start a conversation about the military?

Does everyone who wears a cute kitty graphic T want to start a conversation about cats?

No, the graphic T is a reflection of something they like, something they are into, something that reflects a little bit of them.........



> Others have every right to be offended, agree or ignore them.


Great be offended. Keep it to yourself.
Great agree. Keep it to yourself.
Great Great Great idea, ignore it........that is a great idea.

What is the one thing all of the above options have in common?
Mind your own business, w/ your mouth shut.
*"Live and let Live"*



> But it has nothing to do with living by the ten commandments and letting others be.


It has everything to do w the offended getting over themselves and shutting their mouths, minding their own business, and go be butt hurt in the privacy of your own home.

*"Live and Let Live"*


----------



## mmoetc (Oct 9, 2012)

oneraddad said:


> Or just refuse to get offended by people who's opinion don't matter to you.


Most often, I don't. I'm not even offended by the opinion of those who see the Ten Commandments and their particular beliefs are the be all and end all. It does bother me when they dont grant the same tolerance to others they demand for themselves.


----------



## mmoetc (Oct 9, 2012)

Laura Zone 10 said:


> "Maybe my two people wearing t shirts are _*ready to give an answer, if asked, *_but otherwise,"
> 
> Re read. I said nothing about 'starting' a conversation......nothing.
> 
> ...


I could quote you again. It would include both "start" and "conversation" and posit that the reason for wearing particular shirt would be to elicit such a response. You gave the people motive for wearing such shirts , not I. Motive which I gave to no one I mentioned which makes your comparison and "agreement" false. I don't presume the reasons anyone wears anything. I do wonder sometimes if mirrors have been outlawed. ( and no, that wasn't directed at you.)

And still, none of that has a thing to do with living by the Ten Commandments or with leaving others to their beliefs. Before I'm again accused of being rude and mean spirited I'll now leave you to your opinions, beliefs and wardrobe choices.


----------



## oneraddad (Jul 20, 2010)

When I see others wearing Motocross or Supercross T-shirts, I always take notice and try to strike up a conversation.


----------



## Laura Zone 5 (Jan 13, 2010)

mmoetc said:


> I could quote you again.


"*If* Believers want to start conversations, wear a shirt w/ the 10 Commandments, every day, everywhere, *and when someone ASKS* about it; be ready to give an answer."

Ok that's what you are talking about.
Sure.
And if you want to talk about Motocross, wear a MotoX shirt, and folks who are into MotoX or are curious, just might ask you a question!

And if you want to talk about the Marines, wear a Marine shirt, and folks who are Marines, or are curious about the Marines, just might ask you a question!

And if you want to talk about Nascar, wear a Nascar shirt, and folks who are into Nascar, or are curious about the Nascar, just might ask you a question!



> It would include both "start" and "conversation" and posit that the reason for wearing particular shirt would be to elicit such a response.


*Live and let Live. *
If you're not interested, don't ask. Ignore.




> You gave the people motive for wearing such shirts , not I. Motive which I gave to no one I mentioned which makes your comparison and "agreement" false. I don't presume the reasons anyone wears anything. I do wonder sometimes if mirrors have been outlawed. ( and no, that wasn't directed at you.)


I often wonder if people ran thru the Goodwill naked, and whatever stuck to their bodies is what they wore that day!!!

I also believe that folks who LOVE cats, but HATE dogs, don't wear graphic T's with dogs on the front.........they tend to choose cat graphic T's.
I believe that folks who wear graphic T's that say "Breast Cancer Survivor" are most likely folks, who have survived breast cancer; and that shirt will elicit a response or comment from other survivors.

Clothing choices are reflections of the person wearing the clothing, MOST of the time.

Again.....Live and Let Live.



> And still, none of that has a thing to do with living by the Ten Commandments or with leaving others to their beliefs. Before I'm again accused of being rude and mean spirited I'll now leave you to your opinions, beliefs and wardrobe choices.


You're not being rude, you arguing with someone who agreed with you.


----------



## oneraddad (Jul 20, 2010)

I don't have any Hello Kitty T-shirts


----------



## mmoetc (Oct 9, 2012)

Laura Zone 10 said:


> "*If* Believers want to start conversations, wear a shirt w/ the 10 Commandments, every day, everywhere, *and when someone ASKS* about it; be ready to give an answer."
> 
> Ok that's what you are talking about.
> Sure.
> ...


Actually I'm neither. Clothing choices can be a simple as reaching for the last clean shirt in the drawer. They can be as complex as hoping to cause a reaction. I've been trying to explain the rather simple difference between donning a shirt hoping to garner a reaction and walking down the street holding the hand of someone you like. I've been trying to explain how proseltyzing about the 10 Commandments is different than living by them and leaving others to their beliefs. Now I'm done with even that. The last word will be yours.


----------



## Laura Zone 5 (Jan 13, 2010)

mmoetc said:


> Actually I'm neither. Clothing choices can be a simple as reaching for the last clean shirt in the drawer. They can be as complex as hoping to cause a reaction.


You keep saying "reaction".
Why does a graphic T HAVE to initiate a 'reaction'?
WHY can't a graphic T just be a shirt, that reflects a little bit about the wearer?



> I've been trying to explain the rather simple difference between donning a shirt hoping to garner a reaction and walking down the street holding the hand of someone you like.


Neither should 'cause' a reaction?
A person wearing a graphic T (that is appropriate, not one that says I HATE ____) should cause ZERO 'reaction', just like 2 men or 2 women holding hands should cause ZERO "reaction"???

is it possible that 2 men or 2 women can walk down the street holding hands, and it go (a) unnoticed (b) noticed, but ZERO REACTION?

Is it possible to wear a 10 Commandments Tshirt and walk down that same street, and (a) go unnoticed (b) noticed, but ZERO REACTION?

Sure. It happens, every day.
The ONLY time there is a 'reaction' is when the person NOT holding hands or wearing the T shirt......OPENS THEIR MOUTH with negativity (read; not minding their own business and allowing other to LIVE AND LET LIVE) and the couple or the T shirt guy is verbally assaulted by a terminally ignorant intrusive instigator.



> I've been trying to explain how proseltyzing about the 10 Commandments is different than living by them and leaving others to their beliefs. Now I'm done with even that. The last word will be yours.


So it is proselytizing to wear a T shirt, with the 10 Commandments on the shirt? 
WHO is the T shirt wearer trying to convert or attempt to convert (someone) from one religion, belief, or opinion to another?

WHO are the 2 men holding hands trying to convert or attempt to convert (someone) from one religion, belief, or opinion to another?


Um, that would be no one.
They are living their lives, minding their own business.
It's the perpetually butt hurt that mess this up because they want to cry 'foul' when there is no foul.

I bet you can make a beautiful sweater on a spinning wheel.....


----------



## keenataz (Feb 17, 2009)

Vahomesteaders said:


> The saddest part of all of this is the blindness. This nation exploded from nothing (the nation that rose from the sea to great power in the bible). We prospered and became the greatest nation on earth. From that time until the mid 80s we boasted about our faithful nation and carried well over the majority of people believing in God. That had declined rapidly in the last 20 years and with it our society. More death and killing. More people giving up their own lives out of despair. More people living off the govt. 1 out of every 4 on since physiatric drug because happiness can't be found when your denying your very core self by denying your creator. It's plain to see the further we have gotten from God and the more we legislate against him, the further we collapse as a nation.


Well the mid 80's? That was the middle of the so called Reagan Revolution. I knew he was trouble, all along.


----------



## Vahomesteaders (Jun 4, 2014)

keenataz said:


> Well the mid 80's? That was the middle of the so called Reagan Revolution. I knew he was trouble, all along.


That's when the liberals started crying fowl over gay rights and anything christ related. It didn't take hold until the 90s but since late 90s is been all down hill. And the last 6 years have been a steam roller to moral decay.


----------



## plowjockey (Aug 18, 2008)

Vahomesteaders said:


> The saddest part of all of this is the blindness. This nation exploded from nothing (the nation that rose from the sea to great power in the bible). We prospered and became the greatest nation on earth. From that time until the mid 80s we boasted about our faithful nation and carried well over the majority of people believing in God. That had declined rapidly in the last 20 years and with it our society. More death and killing. More people giving up their own lives out of despair. More people living off the govt. 1 out of every 4 on since physiatric drug because happiness can't be found when your denying your very core self by denying your creator. It's plain to see the further we have gotten from God and the more we legislate against him, the further we collapse as a nation.


Society has changed dramatically, for a multitude of reasons, tying it all to loss of religion, seems too simple, IMO and it is just another result.

Back, when "everyone had god", we also had substance abuse, pedophilia, teen pregnancy, spouse abuse, cheating, lying, murder, bigotry, homophobia, etc. 

It was all just better hidden (and largely ignored) back then and certainly not at today's levels.

Besides, countries like Brazil are still "deeply" religious and their problems are endless. Always have been.

http://mic.com/articles/90625/11-problems-brazil-doesn-t-want-the-world-to-see-before-the-world-cup


----------



## Evons hubby (Oct 3, 2005)

Vahomesteaders said:


> That's when the liberals started crying fowl over gay rights and anything christ related. It didn't take hold until the 90s but since late 90s is been all down hill. And the last 6 years have been a steam roller to moral decay.


I see it a bit differently.... I think this has been the era that several individuals and groups have finally taken a stand to demand the same rights the so called "moral majority" has enjoyed for over two centuries. It's regrettable that some feel they are being unfairly abused by others gaining equality, but that is what this country is supposed to be all about.


----------



## mrsgcpete (Sep 16, 2012)

Vahomesteaders said:


> That's when the liberals started crying fowl over gay rights and anything christ related. It didn't take hold until the 90s but since late 90s is been all down hill. And the last 6 years have been a steam roller to moral decay.


Its the gays, and the non believers that caused it all the trouble in the world? arent you forgetting to blame the muslims, and Obama? because i'm sure he did it too! 

maybe all of us heathens are just tired of the tyrannical overbearing misrepresentation of Christ that so many folks are holding on to with their greedy little fists. All the people that push the "Christian" agenda would have been called out as pharisees by the Jesus that in the bible I have read. :shrug:
Jesus wouldnt want your stone statues in the public square he would want that money, time and energy used to serve the least of his people.


----------



## Vahomesteaders (Jun 4, 2014)

mrsgcpete said:


> Its the gays, and the non believers that caused it all the trouble in the world? arent you forgetting to blame the muslims, and Obama? because i'm sure he did it too!
> 
> maybe all of us heathens are just tired of the tyrannical overbearing misrepresentation of Christ that so many folks are holding on to with their greedy little fists. All the people that push the "Christian" agenda would have been called out as pharisees by the Jesus that in the bible I have read. :shrug:
> Jesus wouldnt want your stone statues in the public square he would want that money, time and energy used to serve the least of his people.


Your exactly right. He wouldn't care about statues and paintings or big cathedrals. He would however care greatly about the reasons why these things are destroyed. Which is unbelief and anti God sentiment. Christ was God created flesh. Same agenda, same belief. Jesus said what's so says the father says the son. And his father called out the things society says is right as abomination. He wrote his law on two tables of stone to be displayed for all the people to see as guidance and law. So displaying the same law would not draw his condemnation. But he told us society would say what is evil is good and what is good is evil. So it's just more solidifying prove his word is true.


----------



## Irish Pixie (May 14, 2002)

Vahomesteaders said:


> Your exactly right. He wouldn't care about statues and paintings or big cathedrals. He would however care greatly about the reasons why these things are destroyed. Which is unbelief and anti God sentiment. Christ was God created flesh. Same agenda, same belief. Jesus said what's so says the father says the son. And his father called out the things society says is right as abomination. He wrote his law on two tables of stone to be displayed for all the people to see as guidance and law. So displaying the same law would not draw his condemnation. But he told us society would say what is evil is good and what is good is evil. So it's just more solidifying prove his word is true.


In your opinion, which is fine, just don't try to force everyone to think that way simply because you do. 

Oh, and keep it out of government, it does not belong there.


----------



## no really (Aug 7, 2013)

Guess I must be thick skinned, just never been upset by a monument. Keep or not really doesn't matter one way or another. :shrug:


----------



## Laura Zone 5 (Jan 13, 2010)

Irish Pixie said:


> In your opinion, which is fine, just don't try to force everyone to think that way simply because you do.
> 
> Oh, and keep it out of government, it does not belong there.


Totally agree.
What you chose to do in your own heart, life and home is your business.
No one else should have to bow to your hearts desires, your life choices or what you do in the privacy of your own home.

The government should get out of the business of morality, life choices, lifestyles, religion or lack there of, etc.

If you choose to worship a cow, that is your choice.
No one else should be forced to embrace you choice, celebrate your choice, understand your choice, learn about your choice, accept your choice, or bow to your choice.

I really could not agree more.


----------



## Vahomesteaders (Jun 4, 2014)

How can a nation founded on Christian principles as one nation under God who's national anthem is Christian hymn (read all the lyrics), who's money carries God's name, throw him under the bus and out of the govt? Separation of church and state was to protect the church from the state. Not remove the church from the state.


----------



## Evons hubby (Oct 3, 2005)

Vahomesteaders said:


> How can a nation founded on Christian principles as one nation under God who's national anthem is Christian hymn (read all the lyrics), who's money carries God's name, throw him under the bus and out of the govt? Separation of church and state was to protect the church from the state. Not remove the church from the state.


Which church was that again? There are so many to choose from and I was absent the day my history class discussed that part. :shrug:


----------



## Bearfootfarm (Jul 13, 2006)

Vahomesteaders said:


> *How* can a nation founded on Christian principles as one nation under God who's national anthem is Christian hymn (read all the lyrics), who's money carries God's name, throw him under the bus and out of the govt? Separation of church and state was to protect the church from the state. Not remove the church from the state.


The Constitution say the Govt cannot establish a religion.

The OK Constitution goes further and says the Govt cannot interact with any established religion in any way.

Any "separation" was to protect the people from having a religion forced on them against their will


----------



## Irish Pixie (May 14, 2002)

Vahomesteaders said:


> How can a nation founded on Christian principles as one nation under God who's national anthem is Christian hymn (read all the lyrics), who's money carries God's name, throw him under the bus and out of the govt? Separation of church and state was to protect the church from the state. Not remove the church from the state.


You do realize that "in god we trust" was added to the currency in *1957*, right? The national anthem "The Star-Spangled Banner" is a poem who's lyrics were written in *1889* by Francis Scott Key. Finally, not even all the founding fathers were christian. 

Your right to religion ends with my right to no religion.


----------



## mrsgcpete (Sep 16, 2012)

Vahomesteaders said:


> Your exactly right. He wouldn't care about statues and paintings or big cathedrals. He would however care greatly about the reasons why these things are destroyed. Which is unbelief and anti God sentiment. Christ was God created flesh. Same agenda, same belief. Jesus said what's so says the father says the son. And his father called out the things society says is right as abomination. He wrote his law on two tables of stone to be displayed for all the people to see as guidance and law. So displaying the same law would not draw his condemnation. But he told us society would say what is evil is good and what is good is evil. So it's just more solidifying prove his word is true.


There is no Anti God sentiment in my not wanting to see religious monuments on public land, church belongs at church, government belongs in government. I dont understand who "us" is when you say that he told "us" what is evil is good and what is good is evil. Maybe us is me? and I am right.


----------



## Woolieface (Feb 17, 2015)

mrsgcpete said:


> There is no Anti God sentiment in my not wanting to see religious monuments on public land, church belongs at church, government belongs in government. I dont understand who "us" is when you say that he told "us" what is evil is good and what is good is evil. Maybe us is me? and I am right.


This would be where that's at...

_Woe unto them that call evil good, and good evil; that put darkness for light, and light for darkness; that put bitter for sweet, and sweet for bitter!

Woe unto them that are wise in their own eyes, and prudent in their own sight! - Isa. 5:20,21_


----------



## mrsgcpete (Sep 16, 2012)

Woolieface said:


> This would be where that's at...
> 
> _Woe unto them that call evil good, and good evil; that put darkness for light, and light for darkness; that put bitter for sweet, and sweet for bitter!
> 
> Woe unto them that are wise in their own eyes, and prudent in their own sight! - Isa. 5:20,21_


but that doesnt answer the question... we are on opposite side of the debate. how do you know you are right and i am wrong?


----------



## Vahomesteaders (Jun 4, 2014)

Well our founding fathers said these.

http://christianity.about.com/od/independenceday/a/foundingfathers.htm


----------



## Bearfootfarm (Jul 13, 2006)

Vahomesteaders said:


> Well our founding fathers said these.
> 
> http://christianity.about.com/od/independenceday/a/foundingfathers.htm


They said all those things, but agreed to the First Amendment


----------



## Agriculture (Jun 8, 2015)

mrsgcpete said:


> but that doesnt answer the question... we are on opposite side of the debate. how do you know you are right and i am wrong?


It's the righteous sounding text, silly. Doesn't that "Woe unto you" stuff make you nervous too?


----------



## mmoetc (Oct 9, 2012)

Vahomesteaders said:


> Well our founding fathers said these.
> 
> http://christianity.about.com/od/independenceday/a/foundingfathers.htm


They also said these. http://www.addictinginfo.org/2013/07/04/35-founding-father-quotes-conservative-christians-will-hate/


----------



## Agriculture (Jun 8, 2015)

Vahomesteaders said:


> Your exactly right. He wouldn't care about statues and paintings or big cathedrals. He would however care greatly about the reasons why these things are destroyed. Which is unbelief and anti God sentiment. Christ was God created flesh. Same agenda, same belief. Jesus said what's so says the father says the son. And his father called out the things society says is right as abomination. He wrote his law on two tables of stone to be displayed for all the people to see as guidance and law. So displaying the same law would not draw his condemnation. But he told us society would say what is evil is good and what is good is evil. So it's just more solidifying prove his word is true.


All nonsense. A bunch of words written by men designed to try to control people. It's no different from the religious propaganda spouted by Muslim extremists. They are just as convinced that their beliefs are true. Convenient how it has a built in self fulfilling prophesy of circular rhetoric. The original water tight case.


----------



## Jim Bunton (Mar 16, 2004)

Bearfootfarm said:


> They said all those things, but agreed to the First Amendment


Not only did they agree to the 1st amendment, but these men who routinely spoke of a God in there every day life, and writings never referenced any God in the constitution. This shows how deeply they believed that religion did not have a place in government. 

Jim


----------



## Irish Pixie (May 14, 2002)

Agriculture said:


> All nonsense. A bunch of words written by men designed to try to control people. It's no different from the religious propaganda spouted by Muslim extremists. They are just as convinced that their beliefs are true. Convenient how it has a built in self fulfilling prophesy of circular rhetoric. The original water tight case.


I doubt that the people that want religion in our government realize that it would be the equivalent of sharia law.


----------



## Woolieface (Feb 17, 2015)

mrsgcpete said:


> but that doesnt answer the question... we are on opposite side of the debate. how do you know you are right and i am wrong?


I'd imagine that the Author of that statement laid it out fairly well. Of course if you don't believe in Him, then the statement itself is a moot point and doesn't need an explanation. So there you have it. I was just providing the source.


----------



## Laura Zone 5 (Jan 13, 2010)

Is anyone 'offended, upset, concerned, outraged, uncomfortable' that the Pope addressed our government?


----------



## Bearfootfarm (Jul 13, 2006)

Laura Zone 10 said:


> Is anyone 'offended, upset, concerned, outraged, uncomfortable' that the Pope addressed our government?


It didn't bother me at all
He seems like a nice fellow.
I didn't hear him tell anyone they were "sick" or "perverted" or "going to Hell" simply because they don't believe all the things he does.
The thing I remember him saying the most was "pray for *me*"


----------



## Woolieface (Feb 17, 2015)

Laura Zone 10 said:


> Is anyone 'offended, upset, concerned, outraged, uncomfortable' that the Pope addressed our government?


Well, you can at least color me skeptikal...

His biggest issue was the environment. :hohum:


----------



## Vahomesteaders (Jun 4, 2014)

Is funny. Our constitution was written by a bunch of men setting rules to govern and rule over us. But they aren't crazy are they?


----------



## arabian knight (Dec 19, 2005)

Laura Zone 10 said:


> Is anyone 'offended, upset, concerned, outraged, uncomfortable' that the Pope addressed our government?


He has NO business what so ever speaking to Congress. NONE
And THEN to stick his nose into global warming debacle stunk even worse.
As the leader of the Catholic Church, and as a powerful voice for peace throughout the world, His Holiness has a real opportunity to change the climate of slaughter in the Middle East not to make a fool out of himself with this climate change stuff.


----------



## Bearfootfarm (Jul 13, 2006)

arabian knight said:


> He has *NO business* what so ever speaking to Congress. NONE
> And THEN to stick his nose into global warming debacle stunk even worse.
> As the leader of the Catholic Church, and as a powerful voice for peace throughout the world, His Holiness has a real opportunity to change the climate of slaughter in the Middle East *not to make a fool out of himself *with this climate change stuff.


He was invited to speak to them.
Doesn't he have as much right to speak about anything he wants to as anyone else?


----------



## Patchouli (Aug 3, 2011)

arabian knight said:


> He has NO business what so ever speaking to Congress. NONE
> And THEN to stick his nose into global warming debacle stunk even worse.
> As the leader of the Catholic Church, and as a powerful voice for peace throughout the world, His Holiness has a real opportunity to change the climate of slaughter in the Middle East not to make a fool out of himself with this climate change stuff.


In response to taking down the 10 Commandments you said: 



arabian knight said:


> Yes just yet another war on Christians. This is so sad this country is going to heck in a hand basket very quickly and the liberal progressive lefties are 100% At Fault for doing this to once such a great county.


I am a little confused as to what your stance is really? Religious freedom and speech should only be supported so long as it passes your test?


----------



## Agriculture (Jun 8, 2015)

Laura Zone 10 said:


> Is anyone 'offended, upset, concerned, outraged, uncomfortable' that the Pope addressed our government?


I'm more offended, upset, concerned and outraged about what a lot of people in our government say when they address the people. I'm more offended that he gave that broad Kim Davis the time of day than him speaking to Congress.


----------



## Bearfootfarm (Jul 13, 2006)

> I'm more offended that he gave that broad Kim Davis the time of day than him speaking to Congress.


I suspect he only met with her because it was arranged by others as a publicity stunt, because he later commented he didn't really know any details about her case.


----------



## Vahomesteaders (Jun 4, 2014)

He did of coarse fire that gay priest the other day from both teaching and preaching.


----------



## arabian knight (Dec 19, 2005)

Agriculture said:


> Kim Davis the time of day than him speaking to Congress.


That is the BEST thing he did. Good for the Pope for taking the time.


----------



## GREENCOUNTYPETE (Jul 25, 2006)

arabian knight said:


> That is the BEST thing he did. Good for the Pope for taking the time.


he already put out a statement that he doesnt condone what she did and that he was not responsible for inviting her. she was part of a large group that got to shake his hand. right after he met with her, he met with a former student and his husband in private. all the media hype is from her attorney.


----------



## Evons hubby (Oct 3, 2005)

GREENCOUNTYPETE said:


> he already put out a statement that he doesnt condone what she did and that he was not responsible for inviting her. she was part of a large group that got to shake his hand. right after he met with her, *he met with a former student and his husband in private. *all the media hype is from her attorney.


wonder why he would take a gay couple into a private room?:whistlin:


----------

