The real reason that we can't have the Ten Commandments in a courthouse or in front of a state capital: You cannot post "Thou shalt not steal," "Thou shalt not commit adultery," and "Thou shalt not lie" in a building full of lawyers, judges, and politicians. It creates a hostile work environment.
I am shocked and dismayed that anyone could oppose a Ten Commandments monument. What will become of this country if we don't warn children about the colossal abomination of boiling a young goat in its mother's milk? It's the end of everything good and decent, I tell you!
Oh, wait, that's not the version of the Ten Commandments they're using? Well shucks, who ever knew that christians might pick and choose which bits of the bible they want to enforce? I guess instead of the bible they're following God's great prophet Cecil B. DeMille. Oh, well, what the hell...
The 10 Commandments? WRONG-O. This set was never called the 10 Commandments. This set of rules and regs for the Chosen People was never even put into use because it was smashed by Moses in a snit. Want the real 10 Commandments? Skip Exodus 20 and go to Exodus 34. Verse 28 even calls them the Ten Commandments by name. And they are vastly different.
But why have a monument at all? It's a graven image pure and simple. Ironically it violates the 2nd Commandment of THIS ersatz set.
"Rapert later claimed these comments from the lawyers were intended to “drag me personally through the mud.” That’s a lie. They were just quoting him verbatim."
This sort of case is what concerns me the most about the current makeup of the Supreme Court: the current court has been overturning allegedly established case law all over the place, and now, it's clear that they intend to install Christianity as the nationwide religion by means fair or foul - and mostly foul, from where I'm sitting.
To me, this is where the phrase "crisis of legitimacy" really packs its punch in. SCOTUS, as it currently stands, appears to be altering how laws work on a fundamental level without any sort of check on that power and doing so without consideration for how its decisions may effect future cases. If SCOTUS continues to overturn precedent after precedent the way it has been, the American legal system may well run into severe consequences as a result. I'm going to leave it to legal minds to determine what that might entail exactly, but even as a layman I can tell it's going to cause serious problems.
This particular case will undoubtedly wind up in front of SCOTUS at some point, and we all know what they're likely to decide. Several of the current crop of justices just don't seem to care about honesty, fair play, or rule of law if it means their 'favored' religion gets whatever privilege it's after this time. Good luck to the FFRF, TST, ACLU, and the other groups pursuing this case, they're going to need it.
"Rapert later claimed these comments from the lawyers were intended to “drag me personally through the mud.” That’s a lie. They were just quoting him verbatim.
But that's exactly what you do when you want to drag someone like this through the mud. You quote them.
But I have to agree with him: if someone called me that type of Christian, I would be yelling that they are dragging me through the mud, too
You would almost think that they almost never think their way through these things.
While I want to be hopeful, and I expect this ruling to go our way, I’m not going to get my hopes up. Not until I see congress and the president do something about the corrupt SCOTUS. It doesn’t matter what the circuit courts or the appellate courts rule, the right is doggedly persistent on fighting everything to their lapdogs on the Supreme Court and therefore get their way. I expect congress and the president will hold the corrupt on the court accountable when pigs fly, hell freezes over, and Andrew Tate finds a girlfriend to willingly stay over all at the same time. Aka never in a billion years.
Christian Privilege ... AGAIN. And of course, we have Sarah Huckabee Sanders, who, while she isn't mentioned here, is almost certainly in favor of maintaining the TC on the grounds of the state capital, never mind Jason Rapert who poses as a Christian Nationalist in sheep's clothing in the middle of this whole magilla. Shall we also mention that we've been through this before with Alabama and Judge Roy Moore? I really want to know how many more times are we going to have to go through this foolishness (which, don't forget, is ultimately a waste of taxpayer dollars!) before it can finally be recognized that religious iconography on public land is INAPPROPRIATE!!!
No, I'm NOT holding my breath. Still for some odd reason, I am hopeful in this case, even though it's Arkansas.
Just a thought but surely a Hindu monument would be even more historical than a Christian one, given that that religion is older? By about 1500 to 2000 years I think.
Who even designed that garbage? Look, if you want to make a two-slab pissmarking monument, then 𝘮𝘢𝘬𝘦 it two slabs. Don't make it one slab that looks like it 𝘸𝘢𝘯𝘵𝘴 to be two; it just makes the whole thing look like an upturned ass.
On second thought, nevermind; it's fitting. It made 𝘺𝘰𝘶 look like an ass, too.
"[Jason Rapert is] just hoping he can get this case in front of the right-wing Supreme Court… even though there’s no reason to think this court would go along with his shenanigans since they’re so clearly illegal."
There's plenty of reason. Presently, the Supreme Court is dominated by five corrupt, perjured Christian theocratic ideologues, and "led" by Chief Justice Roberts who is a weak, equivocating eunuch.
Take down the 10 commandments? Where's a drunk Christian in a car when you need them?
“even though there’s no reason to think this court would go along with his shenanigans since they’re so clearly illegal.”
I don’t know that that’s a given with this court. I expect the majority think they can say it -is- legal.
The real reason that we can't have the Ten Commandments in a courthouse or in front of a state capital: You cannot post "Thou shalt not steal," "Thou shalt not commit adultery," and "Thou shalt not lie" in a building full of lawyers, judges, and politicians. It creates a hostile work environment.
I am shocked and dismayed that anyone could oppose a Ten Commandments monument. What will become of this country if we don't warn children about the colossal abomination of boiling a young goat in its mother's milk? It's the end of everything good and decent, I tell you!
Oh, wait, that's not the version of the Ten Commandments they're using? Well shucks, who ever knew that christians might pick and choose which bits of the bible they want to enforce? I guess instead of the bible they're following God's great prophet Cecil B. DeMille. Oh, well, what the hell...
I think this is a good indicator of the lawmakers involved. Are they more dedicated to the laws of the land, or their chosen delusion; their religion?
We need more of the former and much fewer of the latter.
The 10 Commandments? WRONG-O. This set was never called the 10 Commandments. This set of rules and regs for the Chosen People was never even put into use because it was smashed by Moses in a snit. Want the real 10 Commandments? Skip Exodus 20 and go to Exodus 34. Verse 28 even calls them the Ten Commandments by name. And they are vastly different.
But why have a monument at all? It's a graven image pure and simple. Ironically it violates the 2nd Commandment of THIS ersatz set.
"Rapert later claimed these comments from the lawyers were intended to “drag me personally through the mud.” That’s a lie. They were just quoting him verbatim."
Bearing false witness? Tsk tsk tsk.
This sort of case is what concerns me the most about the current makeup of the Supreme Court: the current court has been overturning allegedly established case law all over the place, and now, it's clear that they intend to install Christianity as the nationwide religion by means fair or foul - and mostly foul, from where I'm sitting.
To me, this is where the phrase "crisis of legitimacy" really packs its punch in. SCOTUS, as it currently stands, appears to be altering how laws work on a fundamental level without any sort of check on that power and doing so without consideration for how its decisions may effect future cases. If SCOTUS continues to overturn precedent after precedent the way it has been, the American legal system may well run into severe consequences as a result. I'm going to leave it to legal minds to determine what that might entail exactly, but even as a layman I can tell it's going to cause serious problems.
This particular case will undoubtedly wind up in front of SCOTUS at some point, and we all know what they're likely to decide. Several of the current crop of justices just don't seem to care about honesty, fair play, or rule of law if it means their 'favored' religion gets whatever privilege it's after this time. Good luck to the FFRF, TST, ACLU, and the other groups pursuing this case, they're going to need it.
"Rapert later claimed these comments from the lawyers were intended to “drag me personally through the mud.” That’s a lie. They were just quoting him verbatim.
But that's exactly what you do when you want to drag someone like this through the mud. You quote them.
But I have to agree with him: if someone called me that type of Christian, I would be yelling that they are dragging me through the mud, too
You would almost think that they almost never think their way through these things.
While I want to be hopeful, and I expect this ruling to go our way, I’m not going to get my hopes up. Not until I see congress and the president do something about the corrupt SCOTUS. It doesn’t matter what the circuit courts or the appellate courts rule, the right is doggedly persistent on fighting everything to their lapdogs on the Supreme Court and therefore get their way. I expect congress and the president will hold the corrupt on the court accountable when pigs fly, hell freezes over, and Andrew Tate finds a girlfriend to willingly stay over all at the same time. Aka never in a billion years.
Christian Privilege ... AGAIN. And of course, we have Sarah Huckabee Sanders, who, while she isn't mentioned here, is almost certainly in favor of maintaining the TC on the grounds of the state capital, never mind Jason Rapert who poses as a Christian Nationalist in sheep's clothing in the middle of this whole magilla. Shall we also mention that we've been through this before with Alabama and Judge Roy Moore? I really want to know how many more times are we going to have to go through this foolishness (which, don't forget, is ultimately a waste of taxpayer dollars!) before it can finally be recognized that religious iconography on public land is INAPPROPRIATE!!!
No, I'm NOT holding my breath. Still for some odd reason, I am hopeful in this case, even though it's Arkansas.
“ And then the pandemic happened ….”
AHA!!!! The pandemic was the fault of atheists!!
Just a thought but surely a Hindu monument would be even more historical than a Christian one, given that that religion is older? By about 1500 to 2000 years I think.
Who even designed that garbage? Look, if you want to make a two-slab pissmarking monument, then 𝘮𝘢𝘬𝘦 it two slabs. Don't make it one slab that looks like it 𝘸𝘢𝘯𝘵𝘴 to be two; it just makes the whole thing look like an upturned ass.
On second thought, nevermind; it's fitting. It made 𝘺𝘰𝘶 look like an ass, too.
"[Jason Rapert is] just hoping he can get this case in front of the right-wing Supreme Court… even though there’s no reason to think this court would go along with his shenanigans since they’re so clearly illegal."
There's plenty of reason. Presently, the Supreme Court is dominated by five corrupt, perjured Christian theocratic ideologues, and "led" by Chief Justice Roberts who is a weak, equivocating eunuch.
$5 says we win the case and in an outraged snit-fit the Christians reelect DJT as president and we sit and cry in our beer over our Pyrrhic victory.
Oh D.A., will you never get out of your pessimistic funk?