Hindu Monument Proposed For Oklahoma Capitol [Pic+

Submitted by: paperduck 3 years ago in

Uh oh, can this be denied without being sued?
There are 25 comments:
Male 38,498

The JEDI Church should also get a monument.

0
Reply
Male 5,617
"Priapus should have a spot too."
St. Priapus Church
0
Reply
Male 7,123
Priapus should have a spot too.
0
Reply
Male 1,983
What people [i.e., Christians] don`t realize is that the majority of the displays of the 10 Commandments in front of government buildings has nothing to do with Christianity.

Cecil B. DeMille had 5000 if these monuments placed in prominent places [mostly courthouses] around the county in 1956 as a gimmick tied to the release of his new movie, you guessed it, "The 10 Commandments".

So you thumper fundie idiots are fighting to keep a 57 year old piece of commercial advertising on public display. LOL
0
Reply
Male 38,498

People keep pointing to the Pilgrims at Plymouth Rock, but that`s a misleading example. The Pilgrims were not founding a nation, they are NOT our beginning. The Pilgrims left England for Amsterdam because they didn`t like Liberal Georgian England. Amsterdam was even more liberal and they couldn`t get along there either so they left for the new world and isolation. They are religious fanatics who separated from the world. Jonestown Without the coolaid.

They didn`t found a nation. They weren`t the first settlement. They were the first to survive a winter here. They also made a pact with Indians to slaughter the neighboring tribe in exchange for agricultural tips. Their first bit of diplomacy was to slaughter the neighboring Indians.

But all anyone wants to remember is John Smith and Priscilla.
0
Reply
Male 5,617
"...to include medicloreans..."
That`s Ireland. I think about 10 years ago, it was said upward of 15% listed their religion as Jedi.
0
Reply
Male 5,617
"...The intention of the forefathers was to not established a state religion, not for preventing people from putting Christmas decorations on the courthouse..."
We have been desensitized, until recently, about what we allow the state to get away with in regards to supporting religious iconography.
-It is not okay to spend tax dollars on Christmas decorations. It happens because it`s not challenged strongly enough.
-It is not okay to attempt to replace "E Pluribus Unum" with "In God We Trust."
-It`s REALLY not okay to post the Ten Commandments on a government building.
All three are direct support for Christianity.

You may be a representative who lives by that rule set.
You may not force it on the rest of us.
0
Reply
Male 14,835
I think they should build a pantheon and don`t forget to include medicloreans and the flying spaghetti monster.
0
Reply
Male 1,448
@whodat6484 The US has never been a Christian Nation? I am an Atheist and a student of US History and even I would not make that statement. Of all the religions in the US, Christianity has had a far bigger impact on the US since day 1 on both Society and our laws. A lot of government buildings have religious symbols in them, especially the older ones. Ever notice a cross like design in the doors?

The intention of the forefathers was to not established a state religion, not for preventing people from putting Christmas decorations on the courthouse. If the majority of citizens want Xmas décor on the courthouse it should be ok since it`s their tax dollars paying it, if they want Hindu decorations instead - fine.

In regards to my Idiot comment it was directed at the negative reaction of some people to the monument. If it`s tasteful, who cares. To me it`s just a statue while to others it represents a god. In the end it makes no difference except to t
0
Reply
Male 38,498

US Constitution, Bill of Rights
Amendment I

[quote]"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of any religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."[/quote]
It`s not that hard to understand people.
0
Reply
Male 12,365
[quote]Apparently the author has never read the US Constitution. It merely states that the US Government shall not establish an official religion.[/quote]

And putting a religion in an official government building does exactly that. If you don`t want an official religion, you either have to have all of them in official government buildings or none of them. If you favour one over all others (or even just any other) in public display in an official government building, you are making an official government favouring of that religion.

We have an official state religion here and even we don`t do that.
0
Reply
Male 3,909
"It merely states that the US Government shall not establish an official religion. Nowhere does it state that the government cannot work with religions."

If they were to allow a monument that represents one religion and deny monuments for other religions then one could say they`re favoring one religion over another. That could be interpreted as them establishing the religion of the monument that`s allowed on the property as an official religion.

"I think the world is becoming a bunch of easily offended idiots."

No one said anything about being offended. Sounds to me like they`re trying to prove a point, and a very important point. Christianity may be the religion of the majority but as far as our government goes, we`re not a Christian nation and never have been.
0
Reply
Male 1,448
Apparently the author has never read the US Constitution. It merely states that the US Government shall not establish an official religion. Nowhere does it state that the government cannot work with religions. I think the world is becoming a bunch of easily offended idiots.
0
Reply
Male 3,909
Yup, like a few have said before, this is exactly why no religious monuments should be on state/federal land. Once they allow one they have to allow them all and you have a situation like this. They brought it upon themselves and deserve all the problems it`s creating hahaha!
0
Reply
Male 5,617
Beternal, you misunderstood.

The Christian monument caused the Satanists to apply to donate a monument, first.
Now, a Hindu group wants to donate one, also.

The point was, there aren`t supposed to be any religious icons on government property. It`s not even okay for icons/phrases to be on money.
0
Reply
Male 2,586
Best, most racist, politically incorrect line EVER!!!

"But this opened up the door for the Satanic Temple to ask for a memorial"

OMG!!! - Likening Hinduism to Satanism!

Sorry, that made me laugh and gasp at the same time...
0
Reply
Female 2,228
The natives of Jesuslandia sure are restless this season, no?
0
Reply
Male 38,498
0
Reply
Male 2,578
Maybe if Oklahoma were like 90% Hindu, it would make sense.

I`m not religious, but people have too much time on their hands. The 10 commandments don`t offend me. Especially considering the effect they`ve had on Western society`s development. Stop getting offended, people. Please. How much effort is expended on being offended, I wonder.
0
Reply
Male 5,874
Perhaps they could do a combo; with nativity scene, menora, beheading and whatever.
I`m going to the pub.
0
Reply
Male 4,746
Oh this is too good!

I really hope they are able to put it up...right next to the Christian one!
0
Reply
Male 510
and this is why NO religious monuments should be allowed. You put up one, you`d better damn well be ready to put up ALL of them.
0
Reply
Male 38,498
0
Reply
Male 418
Let the heated debate begin....
0
Reply
Male 1,745
Link: Hindu Monument Proposed For Oklahoma Capitol [Pic+ [Rate Link] - Uh oh, can this be denied without being sued?
0
Reply