Minnesota Courthouse Removes God’s Laws From Wall Following Complaint From Atheist Group

HIBBING, Minn. — Officials at a Minnesota courthouse have removed a plaque featuring the Ten Commandments as the result of a letter submitted by one of the most conspicuous atheist activist organizations, which claimed that the display violated the U.S. Constitution.

The Freedom From Religion Foundation (FFRF) recently submitted a complaint to the administrator of Saint Louis County to request that the plaque, displayed at the county courthouse in Hibbing, be taken down.

The display, which was placed between two doors that lead to the courts of law, read “God’s Laws” at the top and featured each of the Ten Commandments. Underneath, it quoted from Jesus’ words in Mark 12:30-31, “You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, and with all your soul, and with all your mind, and with all your strength … You shall love your neighbor as yourself.”

The plaque had been posted at the courthouse for the past 60 years.

However, FFRF says that the display violates the Establishment Clause to the U.S. Constitution, which states, “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion…”

“Given the placement of the plaque next to courtrooms, its ‘God’s Law’ inscription, its inclusion of a New Testament passage, and its location within a county courthouse, it is unconstitutional and cannot remain on county property,” the group’s letter, written by attorney Patrick Elliott, read.

“Ten Commandments displays within or near courtrooms are especially concerning given the religious message they impart. They affiliate the justice system with biblical prohibitions, rather than our secular laws,” it continued. “They signal that the court is not impartial.”

  • Connect with Christian News

FFRF further asserted that the first commandmandment also poses an issue because, it said, the government “has no business” telling its inhabitants what God they should serve.

“There are ample private and church grounds where this religious display may be freely placed,” Elliott wrote.

According to a press release posted to the Church-State separation group’s website on Thursday, FFRF was informed this week by the county attorney that the plaque has been removed.

“After careful consideration, a determination was made to remove the plaque from public display. As you might presume, the law and norms have developed considerably since the plaque was initially installed decades ago,” County Administrator Kevin Gray told Fox21 News in a statement.

“The county attorney’s office researched applicable law including relevant federal Supreme Court decisions on this topic, which contributed to the decision to direct property management to remove the plaque earlier this week,” he explained. “Removal of the plaque was scheduled during a time that would have the least disruption to courtroom and other courthouse activities.”

FFRF applauded the move, as FFRF Co-President Annie Laurie Gaylor remarked in a statement, “It is grotesque to insinuate that the Ten Commandments are associated with a county government’s justice system in any way.”

Blackstone

However, as previously reported, for over 100 years in early America, those in the legal profession often looked to British judge William Blackstone’s “Commentaries on the Laws of England,” which regularly pointed to Scripture—particularly the Torah—as the foundation for the law.

“Considering the Creator only as a being of infinite power, He was able unquestionably to have prescribed whatever laws He pleased to His creature, man …, ” Blackstone wrote in 1753. “But as He is also a being of infinite wisdom, He has laid down only such laws as were founded in those relations of justice, that existed in the nature of things antecedent to any positive precept. These are the eternal, immutable laws of good and evil, to which the Creator Himself in all His dispensations conforms; and which He has enabled human reason to discover, so far as they are necessary for the conduct of human actions.”

“Such among others are these principles: that we should live honestly, should hurt nobody, and should render to everyone its due; to which three general precepts Justinian has reduced the whole doctrine of law,” he stated.

“If man were to live in a state of nature, unconnected with other individuals, there would be no occasion for any other laws, than the law of nature and the law of God. Neither could any other law possibly exist, for a law always supposes some superior who is to make it; and in a state of nature we are all equal, without any other superior but Him who is the Author of our be­ing.”

Read Blackstone’s words here.

As previously reported, officials in Lovingston, Virginia also recently voted to temporarily cover a plaque that read “Keep God’s Commandments” after the atheist group similarly lodged a complaint. However, a mayor in Tennessee rather decided to defy FFRF last July after the group requested that a Scripture posted to the walls of the Henderson County Courthouse in Lexington be removed.

“Our community is based on the belief of a true and living God,” Mayor Dan Hughes declared.


Become a Christian News Network Supporter...

Dear Reader, has ChristianNews.net been of benefit and a blessing to you? For many years now, the Lord has seen fit to use this small news outlet as a strong influential resource in keeping Christians informed on current events from a Biblical worldview. Despite Facebook's recent algorithm changes, which has limited our readership, and, as a result, has affected operational revenue, we continue to strive to bring you the news without compromise and to keep Christ in focus. If you have benefited from our news coverage, would you please prayerfully consider becoming a Christian News supporter by clicking here to make a one-time or monthly donation to help keep the truth widely and freely published and distributed? May Christ continue to be exalted through this work!

Print Friendly, PDF & Email
  • Asilomar

    The real question is, how did they stay up for so long?

    • Stinger

      In the past Americans were not so intolerant and hateful, and a small group of vicious, fascist atheists were not allowed to bully people the way they do now.

      • Asilomar

        No sir, in the past the Church had all the power. Now that the Church has had it’s proverbial hand smacked with the ruler of law, it is sulking and reminiscing about the good old days when fear of the commies brought renewed fear of a godless society.

        • Billy Pilgrim

          No sir, in the past the Church had all the power.

          Nonsense. We are a constitutional republic. Not a theocracy.

          the good old days when fear of the commies brought renewed fear of a godless society.

          Which means what?

          • Asilomar

            Learn your history. Churches had all the power to elect whomever they wanted.

            Learn your history. It was the threat of the Commies that got “In God We Trust” on our bills and started the rash of putting up the Ten Commandments to prove to the world we are a god fearing nation.

          • Billy Pilgrim

            Learn your history. Churches had all the power to elect whomever they wanted.

            I know my history. If churches in America had that kind of power, we wouldn’t have seen the likes of LBJ.

            It was the threat of the Commies that got “In God We Trust” on our bills and started the rash of putting up the Ten Commandments to prove to the world we are a god fearing nation.

            Wrong. Communism had nothing to do with it.

          • Asilomar

            By all means, tell me more.

          • Billy Pilgrim

            Tell you what?

      • W2.718281828stl2.718281828y

        How is it “bullying” to have a courthouse follow the law?

      • james blue

        a small group of vicious, fascist atheists were not allowed to bully people the way they do now.

        Sure, but big groups like Christians were allowed to bully the small groups.

        Do you even realize your second sentence refutes your first?

      • Mr. Chips

        “In the past Americans were not so intolerant and hateful…” Tell that to the black who were dragged behind horses and lynched.

  • Allan Trenholme

    Psalm 9:15-20

    • aitchpb

      Psalm 137:9

  • james blue

    Of those laws how many could the court in question actually convict you for breaking?

    The ten that belongs in courts of aw are the bill of rights.

    • John O

      the bill of rights was like equal rights. the commies backed gay rights, womens rights, abortion rights, civil rights, and if u aren’t included u fell by the side according to Patrick Henry. I agree that God has left the building and left the whole shebang to whoever wants to play god.

      • Tim Matter

        @John 0- What’s wrong with civil rights and women’s rights?

        • John O

          nothing wrong. they itemized therefore replacing equal rights. if u follow politics we are close to a constitutional convention. last survey I saw was 36 states in favor but I don’t know what the legal situation is now. I am a constitutionalist but now that is a minority.

          • W2.718281828stl2.718281828y

            they itemized therefore replacing equal rights

            Complete nonsense. And it isn’t “itemized”, they are about traits that EVERYONE has, like gender and race.

          • John O

            gender and race were equal rights. anything added was special rights to nullify equal rights.

          • W2.718281828stl2.718281828y

            TheKingOfRhye referred to the 1964 Civil Rights Act and the 19th and 14th amendments. What problem do you have with those?

          • W2.718281828stl2.718281828y

            What, like religion?

          • TheKingOfRhye

            So, you’re saying you’re completely fine with discrimination against people due to their religion, veteran status, age, disability status, pregnancy, citizenship, familial status, or genetic information? (all things covered by the 1964 Civil Rights Act)

          • John O

            I am in favor of equal rights. when u itemize someone gets lost. vets are quinny pigs by xo of bill Clinton. no rights. u try to twist. I have allways been in favor of equal rights and that was the law until the selfish special people changed it. I am done.

          • TheKingOfRhye

            I’ll say it again…the Constitution, the 14th Amendment in particular, should have meant everybody gets equal rights. But, all you have to do is look at history and see that, in practice, hasn’t been the case. That’s why we have to have things like anti-discrimination laws. And those don’t protect just one certain group of people, they protect all people. Like the laws that are in effect in some places in the US that make discrimination due to sexual orientation illegal: They don’t just protect people of one orientation, they protect everybody.

      • TheKingOfRhye

        the bill of rights was like equal rights.

        The problem with that is, many people weren’t given equal rights until much later. (Remember, black people weren’t even considered citizens for quite a while, just for one example) So that’s why we’ve had to have things like the 19th Amendment, the Civil Rights Acts, and such. That’s why there have been pushes for the rights of such-and-such-group-of-people, they weren’t getting those equal rights.

        But, you know what’s really “like equal rights”? The 14th Amendment. That’s really what gives equal rights to all citizens of the United States. After that, things like Civil Rights Acts shouldn’t have been necessary, but history has proven otherwise.

        • John O

          exactly. so instead of enforcing equal rights, we now have special rights. years ago I tried to teach my son equal rights and when he went to school the blacks had different rules. so I was outdated and knew nothing. recently a 19 year old girl told me she applied for some government program and was turned down because she wasn’t black or indian. progress?? special interest groups only give government authority to prosecute. her question was “what difference does it make?” maybe u have a answer.

          • TheKingOfRhye

            Well, now you’re talking about affirmative action, not civil rights. I’m not for any group of people getting preferential treatment either, but that’s not what civil rights, LGBT rights, etc, are about.

          • John O

            u must be a lawyer to make distinctions like that

          • TheKingOfRhye

            Nope, I do like to think of myself as fairly intelligent and well-read, though.

          • Mr. Chips

            Christians have special rights. Are you saying they should be stripped of those rights?

    • Tim Matter

      @James Blue- “Of those laws how many could the court in question actually convict you for breaking?”
      About 2 1/2. (1) Don’t steal. (2) Don’t kill. (There are several degrees of that, and some exceptions where it is allowed) And (3) don’t lie. But mostly limited to “Don’t lie to the government”. I don’t think your wife can have you arrested for lying about why you were hours late coming home from work.

      • james blue

        Thank you for the reply, however it was a rhetorical question.

        Have a blessed evening

        • Tim Matter

          It’s for other people who read the comments, to get them thinking.

          Another thought. The 1st Amendment, which grants us freedom of religion, contradicts the 1st Commandment, which denies it.
          A good part of our economy is based on getting people to covet the goods we make. (10th Commandment)
          The 4th Commandment carries the death penalty. (working on Saturday)

  • Jeffrey

    As if this has anything to do with the law: “one of the most conspicuous atheist activist organizations”

    • W2.718281828stl2.718281828y

      Well no, it doesn’t, which is why the plaque came down.

    • Billy Pilgrim

      It would be more accurate to say: “One of the best-known hate groups in America.”

  • Freedom foundation

    So much hate in America. Anyone who calls this “progress” is blind.

    • Tim Matter

      @Freedom Foundation- “Anyone who calls this “progress” is blind.”
      Progress toward religious equality.
      Many Christians don’t want that. They want exclusive rights have their religion endorsed by the government. That’s the reason they replaced “E pluribus unum” with “In God we trust” on money, inserted “Under God” into the pledge of allegiance, posted their 10 Commandments in courthouses, and want their nativity scenes on courthouse property instead of church or private property.

      • Billy Pilgrim

        Many Christians don’t want that.

        Prove it.

        • W2.718281828stl2.718281828y

          See e.g. Americans United for Separation of Church and State. The recently-retired head was Reverend Barry Lynn for 25 years, and AU has plenty of other Christian members.

          Is it really hard to believe that some Christians don’t want the government to decide religious matters? If a courthouse can post the 10 commandments today, they can post Sharia law tomorrow, and you’ll have no room to complain since you gave the government that power.

          • Billy Pilgrim

            Barry Lynn? That’s the best you got?

            That man is as much of a man of God as Jesse Jackson.

          • W2.718281828stl2.718281828y

            It’s more than you have, yes.

          • Billy Pilgrim

            Lame troll. Go away.

          • W2.718281828stl2.718281828y

            Sorry, you still don’t know what “troll” means, and it looks like you’re just angry that I could easily point to a large organization where Christians support separation of church and state.

          • Billy Pilgrim

            Americans United isn’t a Christian organization, which is obvious in the title. And you need to prove its membership is Christian. Which you can’t.

          • W2.718281828stl2.718281828y

            Americans United isn’t a Christian organization

            Correct, they have all kinds of believers, including Christians.

            And you need to prove its membership is Christian.

            No, I just need some of them, and I did.

          • Billy Pilgrim

            You have one alleged Christian. Which means you have nothing at all.

          • W2.718281828stl2.718281828y

            All you wanted was proof that many Christians want separation of church and state. You got that.

          • Billy Pilgrim

            Liar

          • W2.718281828stl2.718281828y

            Are you claiming that there aren’t Christians who support it? Got any proof?

          • Tim Matter

            @Billy Pilgrim- Christians ought to be for the separation of church and state. Just look at the history of Europe. Centuries of Christians killing other Christians for being the wrong kind of Christian. In this country (for the moment) another denomination of Christianity might accuse you of heresy, but they don’t have the power to have you arrested for it. That would change if religion gets to used the power of the government.

  • Amos Moses – He>i

    Engaged Ohio Teacher Had Sex With 13-Year-Old Female Student From Her School

    An Ohio teacher was sentenced on Wednesday to three years in prison for sexual battery after she pleaded guilty to having sex with a 13-year-old female student.

    it is all just a matter of time …………

    • TheKingOfRhye

      It wouldn’t be a Christian News Network comment thread without an irrelevant headline from you, I guess.

      • Amos Moses – He>i

        lawlessness is lawlessness …… once a person intent is to violate Gods law ….. they do not really much care how far it goes …….

  • robert boe

    Most of Gods laws protect the atheist to. The reason why secular laws mirror the Second table of God’s Ten commandments is God wrote them in human hearts. So the atheists are never really going to be able to do away with Gods commandments. Neither his first table or the second no matter what they think.

    • W2.718281828stl2.718281828y

      No, your god’s laws don’t protect me, US laws do.

      The reason why secular laws mirror the Second table of God’s Ten commandments is God wrote them in human hearts.

      No, it’s because every society has rules against murder and stealing.

      • Billy Pilgrim

        And where did those laws come from?

        • W2.718281828stl2.718281828y

          English common law. And, by the way, laws against murder and stealing predate Christianity and Judaism, so they don’t get credit, either.

          • Billy Pilgrim

            But where did those laws come from?

            Look, I know you are trying to push the idea there’s no God. I also know you should not be allowed to post such stupid hokum at a Christian website.

          • W2.718281828stl2.718281828y

            I see you don’t want your opinion biased by facts.

            PS: I’d be fine not being allowed to post on a Christian website as long as the favor was returned and Christians were not allowed to post their religious laws on courthouses.

          • Billy Pilgrim

            The fact is you are an atheist troll that doesn’t belong here.

          • W2.718281828stl2.718281828y

            You don’t know what a “troll” is. I’m actually arguing. Your responses are far more troll-like than mine, e.g. “ROTFL”

          • Amos Moses – He>i

            No they do not ….. they come directly from God ………

          • W2.718281828stl2.718281828y

            No, they don’t. Purported gods never show up, just people who claim to speak for them.

          • Amos Moses – He>i

            God has spoken for Himself …. you reuse to listen …………..

          • W2.718281828stl2.718281828y

            People don’t agree on what gods exist or what they want.

          • Amos Moses – He>i

            sure … SO WHAT …… so you are here with your SUPPOSED “NON-religious”, “NON-god” “secular” system, which BTW is far MORE religious and FAR MORE DOGMATIC …… and YOU seek to impose it on EVERYONE …… and somehow you think YOUR ideas are superior …… and they AINT …. as they have ALL been tried before ….. AND FAILED MISERABLY …….. but you think you have some special insight i guess that will assist you in success …… and i have bad news for you …… YOU AINT GOT IT ……….

          • W2.718281828stl2.718281828y

            KOOKY CAPITALS don’t make an ARGUMENT.

          • Amos Moses – He>i

            ignorant statements do not make yours …… your line of thought is asinine …….. and lacks any foundation in fact whatsoever ………….

          • W2.718281828stl2.718281828y

            I pointed out that laws against murder and steal preceded your religion, which is true.

          • Mr. Chips

            If god really existed it’s doubtful she’d want people like “KOOKY CAPITALS” to be her earthly representative.

      • Amos Moses – He>i

        LOLOLOLOLOL ………. you must have been asleep for the past 16+ years …….

        • W2.718281828stl2.718281828y

          Did you have a point?

          • Amos Moses – He>i

            yup ….. that you have been asleep ………..

          • W2.718281828stl2.718281828y

            No, that’s not a point.

          • Mr. Chips

            He rarely does.

    • MCrow

      Key word: “most.” Which means not all. What are claimed as God’s laws have changed a lot over time. Slavery, equality of women, permissible worship, etc. However, when blasphemy and heresy become legally punishable…well, we have a lot of instances of that in history. The Inquisition. Salem. Modern day we have places where being gay is punishable by death. Choose a country where Sharia law is practiced. Theocracies are bad

  • Guzzman

    The Hibbing municipal court realized its mistake in posting the Ten Commandments and a Bible verse on government property and took corrective action by removing the religious display – another win for the Constitution.

    “The settled opinion here [in the United States] is, that religion is essentially distinct from civil Government, and exempt from its cognizance; that a connection between them is injurious to both.” (Letter to Edward Everett, Montpellier, March 18, 1823).

    • Billy Pilgrim

      The Hibbing municipal court realized its mistake in posting the Ten Commandments and a Bible verse on government property

      What mistake?

      another win for the Constitution.

      Positively Orwellian.

      • Guzzman

        Yes, Hibbing court officials realized they had committed a constitutional violation and removed the religious plaque from government property. Did you even read the article?:

        “The county attorney’s office researched applicable law including relevant federal Supreme Court decisions on this topic, which contributed to the decision to direct property management to remove the [religious] plaque earlier this week.”

        • Billy Pilgrim

          Yes, Hibbing court officials realized they had committed a constitutional violation

          What constitutional violation?

          • W2.718281828stl2.718281828y

            Violation of the no establishment clause.

            Why post foreign religious laws on a courthouse? They aren’t US laws.

          • Billy Pilgrim

            Red herring.

          • W2.718281828stl2.718281828y

            No, it’s not a “red herring”, that’s what the 10 commandments are — foreign religious laws.

          • Billy Pilgrim

            ROTFL

          • W2.718281828stl2.718281828y

            They really are. They’re not American, and they’re religious.

          • Billy Pilgrim

            Not relevant

          • W2.718281828stl2.718281828y

            Of course that’s relevant. Why post laws that are not US laws on US courthouses?

          • Amos Moses – He>i

            guess we should repeal all laws based on them … like murder and theft ……… Got It …………

          • W2.718281828stl2.718281828y

            Nope, but you don’t understand the argument.

          • Amos Moses – He>i

            YUP … i do understand …… that you do not know what you are talking about ….. so you have no argument …… just your opinion ….

          • W2.718281828stl2.718281828y

            Are you saying the 10 commandments aren’t religious law?

          • Amos Moses – He>i

            first, why do you now CHANGE what you have said …… YOU SAID ….. “foreign religious laws” …. well if it existed BEFORE ……. and those societies were against murder and theft BEFORE the OT and NT ….. and those societies had and were built on RELIGION ….. then guess what bucko ….. it is STILL “foreign religious laws.” …….

            and you have NO ARGUMENT ….. and you do NOT know what you are talking about ……………

          • W2.718281828stl2.718281828y

            first, why do you now CHANGE what you have said …… YOU SAID ….. “foreign religious laws”

            Because you seem to have a hard time understanding words, so I thought I’d keep it simple.
            In any case, the 10 commandments are, clearly, foreign religious laws.

            But you don’t understand the problem — the 10 commandments has religious laws, like telling you what god to worship. The US government can’t do that. But laws against murder and stealing aren’t religious laws.

          • Amos Moses – He>i

            nope … you want to change your argument because it is a lie ……… and so you lie …..

          • W2.718281828stl2.718281828y

            No, they really ARE “foreign religious laws”. I haven’t changed my argument.

          • Stephen1015

            The basis for the three branches of government is the Bible. The Founding Fathers of the United States got the ideas for the court system, the state and federal legislatures and the offices of the state governors and the presidency from Isaiah 33:22. The Bible is also the basis for the division of power among the three branches. The scripture reference for that is Psalm 139:23-24 and Jeremiah 17:9-10.

          • W2.718281828stl2.718281828y

            The basis for the three branches of government is the Bible.

            No, it isn’t

            The Founding Fathers of the United States got the ideas for the court system, the state and federal legislatures and the offices of the state governors and the presidency from Isaiah 33:22.

            Got a cite for that?

            That still wouldn’t justify posting the 10 commandments in a US courthouse. They aren’t US laws.

          • Stephen1015

            The establishment clause in the first amendment is meant to prevent the Federal legislature from setting up a state religion. It doesn’t apply to the cities, states, or individual citizens. That’s right, if the citizens want the Ten Commandments to be displayed on public property, well the government has no choice but to oblige.

          • W2.718281828stl2.718281828y

            The establishment clause in the first amendment is meant to prevent the Federal legislature from setting up a state religion.

            Madison and several supreme court opinions disagree with your limited interpretation; it prevents much more than that.

            It doesn’t apply to the individual citizens, cities, counties, or states.

            It applies to cities, counties, and states now, because of incorporation rulings. Do keep up.

            That’s right, if the citizens want the Ten Commandments to be displayed on public property, well the government has no choice but to oblige.

            Wrong — Roy Moore’s 10 commandments were removed. The 10 commandments in Oklahoma City were removed just a few years ago. They’ve been removed from public schools.

          • Stephen1015

            That maybe. However, the judges who ordered the displays to be removed broke the law. They ignored what the people wanted. This completely goes against the preamble to the U.S. Constitution. As such, the judges who did that need to be forced to put them back.

          • W2.718281828stl2.718281828y

            However, the judges who ordered the displays to be removed broke the law.

            You simply don’t know how the law works.

            They ignored what the people wanted.

            The people can’t vote to allow the constitution to be violated.

            As such, the judges who did that need to be forced to put them back.

            By whom? Who has the authority to “force” the supreme court to reverse itself?
            Like I said, you simply don’t know how the law works.

          • Stephen1015

            No, W2.71828182stl2.718281828y, you’re the one who simply doesn’t know how the laws of the United States work. The thing is that the judges are the ones who violated the U.S. Constitution. The preamble makes it very clear as to who the boss is. That’s right, the preamble to the Constitution contains the words “We the People of the United States. If you don’t believe me, well then you need to look it up on Wikipedia. I already have done so. I have also done some research regarding the Farewell Address of President Ronald Reagan. He said that the American Revolution is the first in the history of mankind that truly reversed the course of government, and with three little words: “We the People.” According to President Reagan, Our Constitution is a document in which “We the people” tell the government what it is allowed to do.

          • W2.718281828stl2.718281828y

            The thing is that the judges are the ones who violated the U.S. Constitution.

            Not by giving opinions you disagree with, no. Even if a higher court reverses the opinion, that isn’t violating the constitution.

            According to President Reagan, Our Constitution is a document in which “We the people” tell the government what it is allowed to do.

            We DID that. You can’t vote to violate the constitution.

          • Stephen1015

            Exactly, you can’t vote to violate the Constitution and yet the judges are doing just that. A representative in Georgia agrees with me that the Supreme Court is indeed overstepping its boundaries and gotten involved with social engineering and violating the basic premise of separation of powers and the will of the people. Mr. Barry Loudermilk mentioned this on June 26, 2015. Mr. Loudermilk’s statements can be found by typing the courts ignored the will of the people into a search.

          • W2.718281828stl2.718281828y

            Exactly, you can’t vote to violate the Constitution and yet the judges are doing just that.

            No, they aren’t. They are judging what laws are within constitutional limits, and which ones are not.

            A representative in Georgia agrees with me that the Supreme Court is indeed overstepping its boundaries and gotten involved with social engineering and violating the basic premise of separation of powers and the will of the people.

            “separation of powers” and “will of the people” aren’t literally in the constitution.

  • Amos Moses – He>i

    Well, if that does not just put the cherry on the parfait ……

    WELL KNOWN ATHEIST Richard Dawkins says we should get over our ‘yuck’ taboo against cannibalism

    and this is who we should be listening to for sound scientific and CULTURAL advice …….. REALLY …

  • Mr. Chips

    If they allow the ten commandments to be displayed at the courthouse then they’d also have to allow Muslims to display parts of their text. You know that, right?

  • BabyDoll

    Why are people so intimidated by this small minority of atheists?

  • Reason2012

    The perversion activists discriminate against Christianity while claiming to be against discrimination. Search on public school islam and see how these same atheists activists defend islam being force fed on everyone else’s kids, while Christianity is censored. These “atheists” will defend it by pretending it does not happen, or claiming it’s “ok” to “educate” kids about islam. This shows they’re not really atheists, but islamists using atheism as a tool to eradicate Christianity while islam is taught in more and more public schools.

    • W2.718281828stl2.718281828y

      Oh hey, have you ever found an actual school that teaches Islam? You keep telling other people to google it, but it seems like you never have the time and just insist that they exist, somewhere…

  • W2.718281828stl2.718281828y

    Actually, according to the site BeyondTheShadesOfGray, the Bible is the basis for America’s legal system.

    A random website isn’t a cite. The 100th congress passed a resolution (331) recognizing “the confederation of the original thirteen colonies into one republic was influenced by the political system developed by the Iroquois Confederacy, as were many of the democratic principles which were incorporated into the constitution itself.”

    • Stephen1015

      According to Wikipedia, the Iroquois did not have anything to do with starting the American Revolution. Although they were affected by it.

    • Stephen1015

      According to the Wikipedia article on the American Revolution, the Iroquois did not have anything to do with inspiring it. Quite the opposite, they were on the side of the British. Also, the war caused the Iroquois to flee.

      • W2.718281828stl2.718281828y

        According to the Wikipedia article on the American Revolution, the Iroquois did not have anything to do with inspiring it.

        So what? We (or at least I) have been talking about how the government is organized. You seemed to be talking about that too (“The basis for the three branches of government is the Bible”). So why are you changing the subject?

        I have a congressional resolution; you have websites written by random people with an agenda.

  • W2.718281828stl2.718281828y

    Snopes says this quote is not found in any of Madison’s writings. Do you have a cite for where and when he wrote that? It appears to be another David Barton fraudulent quote.

    Plus, notice that 10 commandments displays really HAVE been taken down after court rulings.

  • Guzzman

    The James Madison quote saying our future is staked on the Ten Commandments was not from Madison. The curators of the James Madison Papers at the University of Virginia were asked if they could verify the quote. They replied that they could not.

    Wrote Curators John Stagg and David Mattern, “We did not find anything in our files remotely like the sentiment expressed in the extract you sent us. In addition, the idea is inconsistent with everything we know about Madison’s views on religion and government, views which he expressed time and time again in public and in private.”

    Here is an authentic quote from Madison regarding his view about the proper relationship between religion and government:

    “The civil Government, though bereft of everything like an associated hierarchy, possesses the requisite stability, and performs its functions with complete success, whilst the number, the industry, and the morality of the priesthood, and the devotion of the people, have been manifestly increased BY THE TOTAL SEPARATION OF THE CHURCH FROM THE STATE (Letter to Robert Walsh, Mar. 2, 1819).

  • Stephen1015

    The preamble to the U.S. Constitution is as follows. It can be found on Wikipedia as can several of the other things that I have mentioned. We the people of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, Establish justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America. Also, there was a poll taken on April 12, 2005 that says that the majority of the population was in favor of allowing the Ten Commandments to be displayed on public property. I found this by typing Thou Shalt Not Remove the Ten Commandments into a search.

    • W2.718281828stl2.718281828y

      Also, there was a poll taken on April 12, 2005 that says that the majority of the population was in favor of allowing the Ten Commandments to be displayed on public property.

      If you’ll bother to read that constitution, you’ll know that the majority can’t vote to ignore the constitution.

      I found this by typing Thou Shalt Not Remove the Ten Commandments into a search.

      What do you find when you look up “court orders ten commandments removed”?