Yahoo Answers is shutting down on May 4th, 2021 (Eastern Time) and beginning April 20th, 2021 (Eastern Time) the Yahoo Answers website will be in read-only mode. There will be no changes to other Yahoo properties or services, or your Yahoo account. You can find more information about the Yahoo Answers shutdown and how to download your data on this help page.
Trending News
Religious Monuments in Government Offices?
In the past decade, there's been a lot of discussion about people putting the 10 Commandments in government buildings. I understand there are some arguments about separation of church and state.
My question:
Would you be offended by a historical monument showing the laws/thoughts from different religions and cultures that were brought into our laws? If it showed more than just Jewish & Christian views? Would you be offended it if had specific quotes from the Torah, Koran, Bible & other religious documents?
Andre-
I believe you might have mistook my question. I don't mean put up all the 10 Commandments. I know not all of them are laws, but I'm pretty sure don't steal, don't kill and don't bear false witness are.
And I didn't mean only religious laws but from other historical laws as well ( Ancient Egyptian civil code, Ur-Nammu, Hammurabi, etc).
Honestly, I don't mean a monument that would promote any religion. I am wondering about a monument that would show the history behind laws which might include some references to various religions and cultures.
I hope this makes more sense....
2 Answers
- Anonymous8 years agoFavorite Answer
If it was new it wouldn't be historical would it? No. Old stuff that's been there hundreds of years, yes, it can stay.
- ANDRE LLv 78 years ago
In the US, the Constitution would be offended.
What part of the public sector is secular, so that NO religion gets ANY special public privilige do you just fail to grasp ?
Oh, and most of the 10 Demands are NOT in any current laws, and rightly so, so claims that they led to our modern laws are, well, flat out willfully ignorant lies.
-If one argues, as some deeply religious individuals do, that without God there can be no ultimate right and wrong - namely that God determines for us what is right and wrong - one can then ask the question: What is God decreed that rape and murder were morally acceptable ? Would that make them so ?
While some might answer yes, I think most believers would say no, God would not make such a decree. But why not ? Presumably because God would have some *reason* for not making such a decree. Again, presumably this is because *reason* suggests that rape and murder are not morally acceptable. But if God would have to appeal to *reason*, then why not eliminate the middleman entirely ?- Lawrence Krauss, A Universe From Nothing, Pgs 171-172.
