The Pledge of Allegiance

[TacitBlue]

I think as a moral code, "The Golden Rule" works quite well. "Do unto others as you would have others do unto you". Makes perfect sense to me, and what it all comes down to is sympathy, the ability to see a situation from another persons view point. I know that (for example) I wouldn't want someone to steal my stereo, so I wouldn't steal someone elses. It pretty much covers all of the important laws too.

[beefhole]

Philosophically, the golden rule is just as ambiguous and one-sided as the ten commandments-but I would agree it is a very good rule to live by.

[jordonj]

The reason the Ten Commandments are a bit of a problem in some courthouses is that they are a way of forcing your religion on others.  If you're not a bible-thumping christian like the rest of us, then don't expect any help from this court of God!

No, I'm not anti-christian...yes, I am well aware that not all christians think this way, but I've met plenty who do.

So there's the controversey.

And was me who mentioned that ultra-religious group protesting the restaurant who employed a lesbian...and I seriously doubt that anyone on either side of this discussion condones these extremists.

PS...that is an interesting point that the ten commandments are displayed in the Supreme Court building!  I would point out that George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, and Ben Franklin were not Christian...they were deists.

Deism holds that God is a benevolent being that wants only the best for Mankind, and any portrayal of God's Jealousy or Anger is Blasphemous.

Now I don't claim to be the ultimate authority on this, but every account I've heard points to this being the case (until a time machine is invented, we'll never really know for sure will we?)

[bbstackerf]

I was reading up on this doing a little research was amazed to find that out. In fact, 5 of the signers were not "practicing christians".

This is the quote from one article:
" Thomas Jefferson and Benjamin Franklin are good examples of men involved in the drafting of the Declaration of Independence who were influenced by ideas from the Enlightenment. Yet revisionists have attempted to make these men more secular than they really were. Jefferson, for example, wrote to Benjamin Rush that "I am a Christian . . . sincerely attached to his doctrines, in preference to all others." Franklin called for prayer at the Constitutional Convention saying, "God governs the affairs of men. And if a sparrow cannot fall to the ground without his notice, is it probable that an empire can rise without his notice?" While they were hardly examples of biblical Christianity, they nevertheless believed in God and believed in absolute standards which should be a part of the civil order. "

And on the separation issue, this:
"Contrary to what many Americans may think, the phrase "separation of church and state" does not appear anywhere in the Constitution. In fact, there is no mention of the words church, state, or separation in the First Amendment or anywhere within the Constitution. The First Amendment does guarantee freedom of speech, freedom of assembly, freedom of the press, and freedom of religion.

The phrase is found in a letter Thomas Jefferson wrote to Baptist pastors in Danbry, Connecticut in 1802 in which he gave his opinion of the establishment clause of the First Amendment and then felt that this was "building a wall of separation between church and state." At best this was a commentary on the First Amendment, from an individual who was in France when the Constitution and Bill of Rights were drafted. "

One more:

Deism is defined in Webster's Encyclopedic Dictionary, 1941, as: "[From Latin Deus, God.Deity] The doctrine or creed of a Deist." And Deist is defined in the same dictionary as: "One who believes in the existence of a God or supreme being but denies revealed religion, basing his belief on the light of nature and reason."

Google is an amazing thing.


keni

[H]

For example-I see no moral dilemna in cheating on a test at school.  Who the hell cares?  It doesn't hurt anyone around me, it simply benefits me.  I don't have to cheat because I'm smart, but I wouldn't mind doing it at all.

Your cheating would also encourage others to do so and, undoubtedly, you wouldn't be the only one doing so, anyway. Then, for example, your scholastic scores wind up higher than those classmates who, had you not cheated, would have had a substantially higher score. To those who are intending to further themselves, their overall placement (the graduating class is ranked in order of grade average) may have importance. I encountered this when I decided to transfer into a better school mid-term; if I hadn't had a high enough standing, they wouldn't have allowed me to do so; a half dozen successful cheaters would have killed that attempt.

[jordonj]

For example-I see no moral dilemna in cheating on a test at school.  Who the hell cares?  It doesn't hurt anyone around me, it simply benefits me.  I don't have to cheat because I'm smart, but I wouldn't mind doing it at all.

Cheat if you like...but I promise you, you won't like what you see in the mirror.  I speak from experience.

[beefhole]

H, I'll simply reply that I consider that flawed logic.  It doesn't really jive when I think about it-it ends when I consider two things

a) I consider cheating an isolated act

b) Generally, it will not raise your score substantially higher than those of other kids, if at all.  The vast majority of people who cheat do it because they couldn't remember a certain formula, or they blew off studying the previous night.  Cheating saves a fail and gives them a mediocre to good grade.  The ones who work hard nearly always get better grades than the cheaters.

[H]

IThis is the quote from one article:
" Thomas Jefferson and Benjamin Franklin are good examples of men involved in the drafting of the Declaration of Independence who were influenced by ideas from the Enlightenment. Yet revisionists have attempted to make these men more secular than they really were. Jefferson, for example, wrote to Benjamin Rush that "I am a Christian . . . sincerely attached to his doctrines, in preference to all others." Franklin called for prayer at the Constitutional Convention saying, "God governs the affairs of men. And if a sparrow cannot fall to the ground without his notice, is it probable that an empire can rise without his notice?" While they were hardly examples of biblical Christianity, they nevertheless believed in God and believed in absolute standards which should be a part of the civil order.

Contrary charges about Jefferson may have been propelled by the report that he physically cut phrases out of the Bible that he didn't agree with. Certainly, however, he had a Bible and read at least some of it -- elsewise he wouldn't have known what he wanted cut out -- which is more than many 'professed' believers actually do.

[H]

H, I'll simply reply that I consider that flawed logic.

I'll agree... it's your flawed logic. I was there when the school board was debating my entry and my high school grade standing was cited as a major factor in allowing me to transfer in.

a) I consider cheating an isolated act

If you're the only one to ever take the test and for no good earthly reason, I suppose you would say so.

b) Generally, it will not raise your score substantially higher than those of other kids, if at all.  The vast majority of people who cheat do it because they couldn't remember a certain formula, or they blew off studying the previous night.  Cheating saves a fail and gives them a mediocre to good grade.  The ones who work hard nearly always get better grades than the cheaters.

So you're not efficient cheaters; is that a saving grace? I only remember cheating twice (you, for certain, would only count one) and I am not proud of either. For the one even you would consider cheating, I got a "B" while, on the other, I not only got an A but no one else got higher than a B+.

[beefhole]

H, I don't consider your position on the subject flawed, I consider your argument flawed.  I do not conted you're wrong, I say I don't agree with the reasons you've given for having your position.  Saying "well this happened to me..." is NOT appropriate evidence.  If it happened to you and a bunch of people you know, fire away. (sorry, I'm extremely analytical and very, very good at arguments )

I would like to reiterate that I don't cheat.  It's disguisting,  I study for five minutes the night before the test and I get As and Bs.  Really sickenning.

[H]

H, I don't consider your position on the subject flawed, I consider your argument flawed.  I do not contend you're wrong, I say I don't agree with the reasons you've given for having your position.  Saying "well this happened to me..." is NOT appropriate evidence.  If it happened to you and a bunch of people you know, fire away. (sorry, I'm extremely analytical and very, very good at arguments )I would like to reiterate that I don't cheat.  It's disgusting, I study for five minutes the night before the test and I get As and Bs.  Really sickening.

You're not very good at this one; if my being there is NOT appropriate evidence, then NOT being there is. The tabloids must be printed just for you: you weren't there so whatever story they're pitching must be true!
Secondly, since I wasn't the only one in my high school class, I wasn't the only one to enroll and there were four staff members making up the acceptance board, there were quite a number of people involved. However, I also am not vying that using class standing is necessarily fair; it's basically just a means to sort out who gets accepted and who doesn't. Also, since it was referenced by percentage, someone from a smaller class will have their standing effected more. If you have (just for comparison) a class with only 30 but very dedicated and intelligent students, you could wind up on the lower end of the scale.
OK, I think we've way off the original topic to begin with so I'm cutting off midstream.

[beefhole]

I was saying that your personal experience=1 person and is not the best evidence concerning a general situation, as it is not readily applicable to all situations.

Come to think of it, I'm not really sure exactly what you're talking about.  Are you refering to getting into college?  

[H]

I was saying that your personal experience=1 person and is not the best evidence concerning a general situation, as it is not readily applicable to all situations.
Come to think of it, I'm not really sure exactly what you're talking about.  Are you refering to getting into college?  

There are exceptions to most everything so any evidence being applicable is moot, anyway, no matter how many say it's so. If it were othwerwise, there wouldn't be so many diversified beliefs. On this topic, very little could, or should, be be applied in all situations.
(I was transferring from Trade to Tech, just out of high school)

[Hagar]

This is all very interesting. I just wrote out a long reply only to lose the lot as it was too long & I can't be bothered to type it all out again.
[quote]PS...that is an interesting point that the ten commandments are displayed in the Supreme Court building!

[Fly2e]

8 pages and no problems!  ;)