Nativity Scene Stealers

People like O'Reilly seem to want it both ways: They want to freely express their religion in the public square, but as soon as someone else wants to crash the party they get all Jesusy on us and want only their religion represented.

It's all or nothing, folks. Any preference by the state to the exclusion of other faiths (or no faith) becomes a de facto endorsement.

For a nation that was founded (in part) to escape government sponsored religion, there are an awful lot of Americans (BillO, for example) that missed that fundamental part of the American tradition.

Regardless of your particular creed, I can't see any religion wanting itself associated with the Illinois State Government at the moment.

That's the thing about mixing government and religion. All it does is make both worse.

I completely agree. Watch while Pleasant View Utah loses in flames to Summum all the while asserting their victimhood and how righteous they are. Reminds me of the corrupt politicians and CEOs that are convicted by a jury of their peers and never have a clue about what they did wrong. If you are so deluded as to think that you have the one true religion, fairness to others goes out the window.
Kudos to Dan Barker.

When I was growing up in a small town in Virginia in the 1950's, there was zero government commemeration of Christmas; let me repeat: ZERO!

There was no Christmas pageant at school and no Christian displays in the court-house. There were some old tattered lights from the 1920's I think, strung over main street. That was about it.

But somehow, we managed to have Christmas.

Am I the only person who has this memory? How come everybody else remembers government celebration of Christmas? It just didn't happen that way! It just didn't!

They only true and real thing that happens around December 25th is the alignment of the sun and the earth in such a way as to signal more hours of sun for the next three months. Everything else is myth and legend.

We do know that JC was born in the Spring, not in December. We do know that the Romans appropriated dozens of Pagan solstice celebrations into one Christian holiday for empire-building reasons. What we don't know is why people need to insist that their fantasy is the one fantasy that everyone needs to submit to.

Keep religious celebrations away from Government. History has shown what happens when the two mix and it isn't pretty.

Illinois had the issue backward - they should have invited all groups to set up displays in the first place.

How about a Christmas tree? Looks nice, and has really nothing to do with any religion.

ASODERS22 says "Christmas" tree has nothing to do with any religion? What planet do you live on?

Quoting O'Reilly the Liar, even! "...kiss our holiday traditions goodbye." What nonsense! O! Ye of little faith! Who gives a rat's fury little kneecaps about your holiday tradition? Celebrate wherever you like, except that it it is your tradition to shove Christmas in everyone's face, whatever their bent. Keep your faith, but keep it out of my government, out of my schools, and out of my public spaces.

Calm down, Davoud. I'm an atheist, and I don't want to mix government and religion any more than you do.I suggested a Christmas tree because it actually is not a Christian symbol. It's a fairly recent European tradition, a pretty awkward one to tell the truth - but it looks nice. If you are Jewish you don't have one, but there is no reason for Christians to have it either. There were no Christmas trees around baby Jesus.

And there were no shepherds, no wisemen either and no star of Bethlehem. For details, see NT exegetes discuss the real nativity on the National Geographic Channel's Birth of Jesus presentation.(http://channel.nationalgeographic.com/episode/birth-of-jesus-2303/Overview

For those with cable TV and on-demand service, it should be available 24/7 for your viewing pleasure.

NG should set up a 200 inch HDTV in the Illinois Capital and run said show 24/7 during the X-mas season.

Don't forget that the day after our next presidents' inauguration is our country's National Day of Prayer. All praise be to the Flying Spagetti Monster!!!! ARGGGGH.

Asoders22

Yes. The christmas tree is an excellent symbol because it represents the secularization of Christmas. There are zero religious connotations to it, in fact it represents the movement away from the religiosity of the winter solstice.

Daniel,

"When I was growing up in a small town in Virginia in the 1950's, there was zero government commemeration of Christmas; let me repeat: ZERO!"

---> I'm reminded every year of the government's commemoration of Christmas - IT'S CALLED A NATIONAL AND STATE HOLIDAY.

Globalone

You are very smug and mocking, aren't you? I guess that makes you feel very big and superior.

So much for that.

"---> I'm reminded every year of the government's commemoration of Christmas - IT'S CALLED A NATIONAL AND STATE HOLIDAY."

Government isn't really "commemorating" Christmas. There's a legitimate secular purpose in declaring the day a federal and state holiday, because most government workers would otherwise take leave that day. That purpose would also apply to public schools in New York being closed on Jewish holidays. There would be no such secular purpose if government had the intention of honoring only some religions' holidays, excluding others solely because they weren't of the favored religions.

I don't know about y'all, but on the morning of December 25, I intend to be in my PJ's, sitting on the couch, drinking the best hot chocolate in the world and eating the best cinnamon roll in the world while the wife cries because her 17-year-old son has gone on an overseas Boy Scout adventure far far away and is missing Christmas at home for the very first (but probably not the last) time. Good times.

I agree with Thomas Brejcha's quote on the subject of religious displays. Christians are not the only people celebrating a holiday in December; there are many faiths doing so. Christians have Christmas, Jews have Hanukkah, Wiccans and Pagans have Yule (otherwise known as the Winter Solstice), African-Americans have Kwanzaa, and Muslims celebrate the Islamic New Year, to name a few examples of religious observances this month. Freedom of religion means ANY religion, and it also means freedom FROM religion as well. So the Freedom From Religion Foundation's message ruffles a few Christian feathers, so what? If you are going to put up a display honoring one group's beliefs, you'd better include everyone else's. All or nothing, people. What's it going to be? Public places are for everyone, regardless of religion, and should be all-inclusive. If you want to set up a display that shows only one religion, then do so in front of your house of worship, but quit trying to claim public space for your religious beliefs only. Blessed Yule, everyone!

The main issue that most people have with religious displays in the public square is that it is usually just Christianity that is represented, and that smacks of state preference of a religion. In this day of religious demagoguery and intolerance, the outreach effort of the Christian group was a really nice gesture and actually gives hope that some of the silly hot-button issues (10 Commandments in the courtroom, gay marriage, etc.) might be healed by people actually being reasonable.

Although I am libertarian and generally think that government and religion should be fully separate, I think that this was in really bad taste on the atheists' side. I don't think the Muslims would display an image of a suicide bomber or that the Christians would display an image of Mohammed in an unfavorable way. This was a nice opportunity where religious pluralism was actually being invited by Christians in the public square, and for the atheist group to create a display insulting all the others just serves to polarize people more and fuel the intolerance.

Religious people think atheists are offending just by existing. If they open their mouth too, it's just too much, I guess.

The whole thing is silly. Religious people, keep out of official buildings.

DILD, In my town in the 60's they had a nativity scene . Big deal.

The deal with atheists is that since they have nothing , believe in nothing, they feel a need to mock those that DO- if they wanted to put up a wreath that said- Happy (secular) solstice holiday, fine, but to make comments about the existence of God went too far.

Political correctness does not mean you have to be rude. If you don't want to believe, what the heck is the harm in the nativity scene. It hurts NO ONE.

Atheist strike me as having this big chip on their shoulder, thinking that everyone should have their ability to "reason" like they do.

Self delusional and not able to walk down the street without making insults.

Tyrants enforce. 40 days and 40 nights

Counterww:
A sign doesn't hurt anyone either, you asswipe.
Also, you have a magical, invisible friend, but WE'RE the delusional ones??? Wake up, you moron.
Magical, invisible friends are for idiots and small children.
Period.

But why do religious organizations want to put their displays on public property, as opposed to private property? Because it associates the state with their religion, giving the appearance of an endorsement, seemingly bolstering their (weak) case "this is a Christian country!"

Counterww wrot:

Atheist strike me as having this big chip on their shoulder, thinking that everyone should have their ability to "reason" like they do.

Self delusional and not able to walk down the street without making insults.

-------------------------------------

Neochristians strike me as having this big chip on their shoulders, thinking that everyone should have their ability to "reason" like they do.

Self delusional and not able to walk down the street without trying to jam their beliefs down others throats.

In Irish Catholic bigot Bill O'Reilly's Jesuslandia, there would be no pesky atheists, Muslims, libertarians, Democrats or Mexicans.

We would all be saying our Hail Mary's and singing praises to Saint Ronald Reagan by legal mandate. Thank God he is somewhat isolated to cable on RNC Fox News along with his equally evil twin Hannity instead of spewing his hate speech in the name of poor old Jesus over the public airways like Dobson and Limberger.

My own hope and desire is that we'd have a beautiful, multifaceted collection of celebratory displays of the deep meaning of all religions and none.

I leave the legalities to the constitutional lawyers.

On a personal level, if they asked (which they haven't) I'd advise the atheists to come up with a display that uses images as much as words, and celebrates and gives hope and meaning, rather than simply denying some of the other ideas.

When you start your display by saying "there is no X," whatever X is, you're throwing attention to the periphery of your world view. I don't know what atheists, humanists, naturalists, etc. talk about when they get together, but "There is no god" would get a bit tiresome after awhile--it isn't a unifying or inspiring statement.

What does unify and inspire people who don't believe in God? Start there, and you'll begin to draw people in.

There are some lovely non-theist quotations out there. Choose one of them, spend some time dreaming up appropriate imagery, ask artists to produce something that expresses the deepest and highest hopes and promises of the humanist, naturalist, or non-theist way of seeing the world.

“The world is not respectable; it is mortal, tormented, confused, deluded forever; but it is shot through with beauty, with love, with glints of courage and laughter; and in these, the spirit blooms timidly, and struggles to the light amid the thorns.”
--George Santayana

"The Humanist rarely loses the feeling of at-homeness in the universe. The Humanist is conscious of being an earth-child. There is a mystic glow in this sense of belonging. Memories of one's long ancestry still linger in muscle and nerve, in brain and germ cell. On moonlit nights, in the renewal of life in the springtime, before the glory of a sunset, in moments of swift insight, people feel the community of their own physical being with the body of mother earth. Rooted in millions of years of planetary history, the earthling has a secure feeling of being at home, and a consciousness of pride and dignity as a bearer of the heritage of the ages."
-- A. Eustace Haydon

Why are Christians upset that there are other religious, and non-religious displays on public property? Are they afraid that by merely seeing professions of differing beliefs that their 'own' followers may be tempted to stray? Are people really that concerned that their own faith is that weak, that they are projecting their fear upon others?

If you permit one, you permit all. Otherwise the government is improperly giving the message that one faith is preferred over all others. That may be what some people wish for, but that's another discussion.

If you really want to have your message constrained to your belief alone, isn't that what the fronts of your houses of worship are for?

"If you don't want to believe, what the heck is the harm in the nativity scene. It hurts NO ONE."

No harm at all, nor in a sign you just happen to disagree with. Nor would there be harm in installing little garden gnome statues, pink flamingos, mojo bags, burning bulls on altars, or rainbow gay pride flags.

Only one flush with enough arrogance to believe that an omnipotent creator of the universe actually cares about them as an individual would have the audacity to propose that they alone should be able to display objects of their faith on property co-owned by taxpayers who do not share that faith, and at the same time deny those co-owners that same opportunity to express themselves.

My, my. How positively fascist!

"...ask artists to produce something that expresses the deepest and highest hopes and promises of the humanist, naturalist, or non-theist way of seeing the world."

It's already been done, and it's already on display. It's called the "Stars and Stripes."

Christianity is so weak that even viewing a contrary worldview makes O'Reilly scream like a 12 year old girl.

Amusing.

I personally have no problem with having different displays in the same place. I am a Christian but I'm also an American, which means I support free speech. If I want my message of hope to go out to the people that really need it, then I have to be willing to let others do the same, even if their messages disagree with mine.

The Christian faith has lasted for two millenia. I doubt that a pithy little sign in the Washington state capitol spreading falsehoods is going to shipwreck my faith or the faith of billions of other people. The thing that people like Bill-O have to fear is that people have the audacity to DISAGREE WITH THEM. If the atheists want to resurrect a pagan tradition that pretty much died when the Christians took over Rome and had no real meaning to them before except to spread joylessness, misery, and woe, go ahead.

Just so they understand that just because someone has the right to free speech doesn't mean I have the right to read.

The issue is not whether a nativity scene offends non-Christians. The issue is that allowing only a Christian scene on government property, with no other religions allowed to put up their own scenes, represents government favoritism toward one religion. All religions should be invited to put up their own holiday scenes.

I guess I really am not that bothered by the christmas displays, as long as other religions or atheists/agnostics have the right to put up a display too. It ought to be an opportunity for us to all get together and show our solidarity despite our differences.

I do have to say that the so-called winter Solstice message is nowhere close to that idea. It's an intentional slap in the face to the religious and secular community both. It conveys no other message than antagonism- they could have used so many other words to express what they believe in, one that would attract people to their message or serve to help open a real dialogue. Instead they chose to express themselves in a petty, offensive and immature way. that's a shame. Why bother to present a message if it's not going to celebrate anything, nor present your point of view in a positive way?

That display should be refused until they can come up with one that serves the spirit of the season- because their present message does not speak for all of agnosticism, atheism or humanism. Unless you mean to sound like a 5 year old brat in a playground. That beautiful A. Eustace Haydon (thank you for posting that, Racje!) would have been perfect.

Enemy of the state-

It 's not about whether atheists have the right to express themselves- its the message and the antagonistic sign they put up. No one can accuse a manger with overt nastiness but the sign was just plain in your face.

You need some decorum classes dude. And some common sense.

RE"It 's not about whether atheists have the right to express themselves- its the message and the antagonistic sign they put up. No one can accuse a manger with overt nastiness but the sign was just plain in your face."
----------------
Right - as if Christians wouldn't raise a stink with Any message promoting non-belief, no matter how it was presented. You and I both know Christianity (and other religions) is, and has historically been, openly hostile to non-believers.

As to my manners - whatever.

I went to the county seat of where I grew up over Thanksgiving, and they had a nativity scene on the courthouse lawn. I don't believe any of it is true, or that Jesus even actually existed, but I could still appreciate it as part of the town's longstanding tradition. Throwing up a needlessly insulting poster next to it would serve no purpose other than a divisive one. If the atheist organization wanted a display, they should not have been so patronizing and kept it in the tradition of the good part of the holiday season.

Though, seeing the forces arrayed against the Washington state display, it seems that many christians are uninterested in anything other than political points, either.

"No one can accuse a manger with overt nastiness"

At least these atheists have the courtesy to be up front with their bigotry. Christianity so often presents its intolerant message with a treacly veneer of peace and love. If Bill O'Reilly wants to get all hot and bothered about the "War on Christmas" to up his ratings, fine. What we really have is a War on Hegemony. And I'm all for the breakdown of hegemony, whatever its form.

counterww:
Using government resources to promote idiotic fairy tales is an insult to all those who dare to actually use their brains.
Mainstream media sources have repeatedly cited FFRF Presidents Dan Barker and Annie Laurie Gaylor have repeatedly stated the reason they posted the sign, but apparently you have successfully avoided them.
So, counterww, here's what you missed:
Government should not engage in any religious activity, including promoting any particular religious point of view. Once the Washington State Government had authorized the creche in its capitol building, then it was obligated to allow any other religious point of view (or none) to have its say as well.
Whenever atheists protest the religious displays by the government, such as Ten Commandments sculptures that stand in many public (government-owned) places in America, Christians offer this argument: If you don't like what it says, you can just look away. Even Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia said that.
And I agree: If you don't like what the Winter Soltice/Atheist sign in Olympia says, JUST LOOK AWAY! There! Wasn't that easy?
(This is where I should probably include the phrase, "the shoe is on the other foot now," just to drive my point home.)
How ironic. Christians insisting on a position that forces them to eat crow. But instead of taking it like adults, they cry like babies. Waaa waaa waaa! Mommy I don't like the mean sign! Waaaaa!
Obviously, the solution is the exact one that the Freedom from Religion foundation recommends:
Let's keep all religious messages out of government. Period.
Isn't that a simple, elegant solution?
After all, you Christians have tipped your hand. We atheists know that you simply cannot stand having your infatile beliefs challenged, and as long as Nativities and other religious symbols are allowed to clutter up our State capitols, then we shall continue to post such messages every Christmas from now until the end of time. You cannot stop us.
Of course you could try. But that would mean more than just pontificating on a newspaper comment website, that would require you to file a lawsuit against the State of Washington for the removal of the Atheist sign. So, we're waiting. Come on, Christmas is coming soon, go ahead and file your lawsuit already.
What's that? You say you don't stand a chance in hell of winning such a case? And why is that? Is it because Satan controls the U.S. courts? Or is it because over two centuries of case law and judicial precedent support the opposite view?
It's very simple: You keep your pro-religion message out of government, and we'll keep our anti-religion message out, too. That's what grown-ups would do.
You are a grown-up, aren't you?

Say what you want about this debate, but please do not confuse Bill O'Reilly's views with those of Christianity. For whatever reason (probably ratings as there seems to be evidence from his past that he has held different views from those he now expresses on Fox), he spews hate and Christianity is the opposite of that. We celebrate the birth of One who said "love your enemies," "turn the other cheek." "turn your swords into plows," etc. But in the Christmas season, please know Christianity is not about criticizing signs, or putting up mangers, or any of a number of things. It is about how we love each other, forgiveness, etc.

Look Pierre- you just illustrated my point. Nasty, radical atheists want to make statements like "idiotic", and "infantile" (you spelled it wrong in your rush to rant about my post) and obviously have a chip on their shoulder(yours is rather large from my perch) . Again, they could have just made a secular comment without being nasty and in your face about religion, but that does not seem to be the M.O. for people like Barker or you for that matter. Most atheists have some decorum and are not so darn mean- at least the ones I have had face to face dialogue with. The internet emboldens people to be just so impolite.

Government is not involved in "religious activity" if they have a manger up there. It's just a manager, for goodness sake. It's a baby in some hay. It has no words or accusatory , inflaming statements. That was done by your buds up in Washington.
And from your rant, I don't think you qualify as an adult. Adults know they can and should critique and dialogue with respect and decorum. You, and that sign, have done neither.

All of you have carried this separation clause past the Founder's intent.

I guess it is in vogue these days with people like Hitchens and Dawkins. Being in your face and nasty that is.

Religious statues and symbols don't bother me. Still, I question the need for such displays in city squares and public buildings. Norman Jameson's comments quoted by David Walker deserve
consideration by those who feel strongly about the
issue. Or, think WWJD.

But it makes sense that those who wish to express their contrary view about god and religion should have the right to do so.

Like it or not, today's America is not the Judeo-Christian country that some people would like it to be.

You go Pierrejc2! Do you know why Christians are so worried about their precious holiday becoming a farce, a meaningless montage of ancient symbols mixed with relentless commerciality? Because they know that is how it has been for a long time now. Nothing survives in America that is not about buying and selling. And most of them actually believe that we live as a Christian nation!

Let us celebrate the solstice and the fact that then the days will begin to bring more light than darkness. Now that would be something to celebrate, a hope that someday we would have the cultural solstice so needed in this ill-educated, greedy, backward and dying nation.

I have absolutely no doubt that if the humanist's message was softened to something less confrontational, Christians would still object - it's just in their nature. They're convinced they own the country and every institution in it, so competing worldviews are not welcome in any venue.

The only reason non-Christians are even tolerated is due more to secular laws than to any spiritual restraint on the part of Christians.

Secularists being tolerated? really?

I don't think Christians think they "own the country"..that is just plain paranoia... what the truth is that for decades the country had and has a Judeo Christian theme sewed throughout its history. The great minds all had some belief in God or a higher power. So when atheists get in our face, we'll get right back in theirs. That sign was just a shot to stir things up, and it asserts something that millions of us find to be offensive. Especially during Christmas. It's mean spirited and illustrates the disdain some atheists have for believers.

David:

I think you make a good point at the end of your essay. Let the churches display the religious symbols for those who enjoy them and don't ask the government to do it. This keeps the government neutral towards religion so that government doesn't influence religion, e.g., persecuting minor sects, and religion doesn't influence government.

RE:"That sign was just a shot to stir things up, and it asserts something that millions of us find to be offensive. Especially during Christmas. It's mean spirited and illustrates the disdain some atheists have for believers."
----------------------
You know what? You're absolutely right, and I was wrong. I've re-thought it; the sign is gratuitously hurtful. Atheists will never win hearts and minds being like that.

enemyofthestate- that was really nice of you. I love december because its such a holiday season-since so many faiths do celebrate holidays this month, it would be a lovely idea to make it more about joyful things we all share in, not about the differences in what we believe (or don't believe). Atheists always get a bad rap- religious people should understand where their anger comes from- from always being put on the defensive. And while I do think the Solstice statement was really stupid, they have every right to celebrate to put up a display. Just didn't seem to help their cause by sounding like grinches instead of humanists.

I don't like having religion crammed down my throat either. I think churches should keep their hands off politics.

counterww:
You are such a pathetic crybaby.
Do you remember September 11, 2001?
Do you think I and every other human has a right to be sickened and infuriated by the actions of your fellow believers on that day? Or do you think that day showed the world the true beauty of religion?
Well, do ya, punk?
We atheists have every reason to be angry at so-called adults who indulge in infantile fantasies, then use the mechanism of government to shove those fantasies down everyone else's throats.
Magical, invisible friends are for idiots and small children.
Period.

We are the government. We are a diverse people. People of faith have just as much right as people without faith to display whatever on public grounds. We own them too. You do not have a right to take away ours. Until the Constitution is revised, it's Freedom of Religion not Freedom from Religion. If you don't like that, tough.

"There are no gods, no devils, no angels, no heaven or hell. There is only our natural world. Religion is but myth and superstition that hardens hearts and enslaves minds."
*****

While I firmly support the concept of free speech, this was a perhaps harse statement, which I feel was unnecessary and counterproductive to the message that atheists should be sending. First, if religions can post religious symbols on public grounds, then anti-religious groups should have the same right. The calls for those who oppose religion to "just shut up" is against the free spirit on which this country was founded. But I still feel that a softer, more gentle message would have been more appropriate here. Like it or not, people are quite sensitive regarding their religious views, and statements such as the above are only going to drive them further away from logic and reason. As the saying goes, you can catch more flies with honey than with vinegar.

"That's their right, and they should do it. The more public expressions we have of our different points of view, the better off our democracy will be."
Damn right!
And my point of view would be to display the religious rigmorol of of all faiths--from all times. We should be celebrating not only the Reformation, the Inquisition, the Crusades and the jailing of Galileo, but also the human sacrifices of Tezcatilpoca, the consumer of 25,000 virgins. Along with this worthy, his brother, Huitzilopochtia deserves reverence for spilling 10,000 gallons of human blood during his reign.
And then there's all those gods--some from the Old Testament--who ranked with Yahweh Himself:
Morrigu Tagd, Odin, Aa, Elali, Assur . . . dieties of the first order, commanders of armies that burned thousands of villages, butchered like numbers of women and children . . . spread fear and dread to every infidel on the planet before they were forgotten and replaced by our current crop of gods, ghosts, spirits and other heavenly bugaboo.
Yes, let's open up all of our civic structures, gas stations, fast food joints and business enterprizes to the worship and admiration of the ten thousand gods that have existed and continue to hold sway to this day.
Only in this way can we truly be considered a government of the people, for the people, and by the people . . . that shall never perish from this earth.

Poor Bill O'Reilly, gallant spokesman for the most oppressed group in the country--white heterosexual Christian males.

If you ask me Christianity has been waging war on rational thought and progress for humanity for centuries. It's long past time the forces of reason fought back.

I don't have a problem with the different displays. But don't use your display to attack someone else's beliefs. After years of complaining that people don't respect their atheist beliefs, they've become what they sought to dispel - bitter, partisan bickering naysayers. If Atheism has something positive to add to the discussion - by all means tell us about it. But just putting up a pointless sign attacking everyone else - what's the point?

The EDGE.org website has a World's Most Dangerous idea section that discusses the novel potentially far-reaching ideas that have been floated recently, which could pose the greatest danger to humanity. Transhumanism has rightly been listed as one of them. But I think that fundamentalist, furiously-miltant atheism belongs right there with transhumanism as the world's most dangerous idea. And the eminent physicist Werner Heisenberg (http://www.edge.org/3rd_culture/heisenberg07/heisenberg07_index.html) would heartily support me if he were around to witness what the disruptors of the Nativity Scenes are doing, purportedly in the name of rationality.

As a Muslim, I feel so strongly about the rage to disrupt nativity scenes, that I sometimes grit my teeth in my sleep thinking of the likes of Ricahrd Dawkins and his "atheists' bus".

When we don't even know how to define the Divinity, when we don't even try to attempt (as more modest but also more rational people such as Professor Steven Brams of New York University has done -- see his book "Superior Beings: If They Exist, How Would We Know?" ) to conceive of a procedure whereby we could go about mentally simulating the process of getting to know about Superior Beings if such existed, how dare we suppress the search of others to get to know the Divinity, as long as they don't oppress others or force others into their beleief systems?

I find what Norman Jameson (or his friends) said ironic although, he shows much more intelligence than most religious right wingers.

Complaining that Christmas is being taken over by businesses to sell merchandise and becoming increasingly secularized is funny to me; seeing as Christianity borrowed and stole all of its Christmas "traditions" from other faiths, most of them pagan, to create their own.

Although I'm not an athiest anymore, I can't help be amused that Christians who have fought so hard to tear down the wall of separation between church and state are now seeing the true repercussions of their crusade. It's particularly amusing to see the atheists accused of being theologically uppity, an area where Christianity's history is at least slightly less than spotless over the last two thousand years.

But, at root, none of those displays should be there, period.

One additional comment:

"No one can accuse a manger with overt nastiness"

Implicit in the manger scene is a message that strikes me as one that can reasonably be accused of nastiness: if you do not come to equate the figure born in the manger with God Almighty, then you are going to spend an eternity writhing in fiery torment. If there is something nastier than that, I can't think of it at the moment.

Yes, the manger scene shows the carrot, not the stick. But there is a hell (so to speak) of a stick. The State of Illinois should not be allowing these displays in the Capitol. Maybe Mary and Joseph slipped Rod Blagojovich a campaign contribution?

I love this time of year! The fake trees go up for sale in the box stores in September. In October, tacky little Santas begin to peek out from the shelves. November brings a nip in the air and mall guards get trampled underfoot greedy pre-dawn shoppers. But the season really doesn't begin until the fist volley on the WAR on CHRISTMAS!

What a joke. We've got millions of people out of work, children going hungry, and grandparents living in cold dwellings they can't afford to heat.

If BillO and the other so-called "Christians" lived their lives as Jesus taught us and helped their fellow man, I might have a little more sympathy.

God Help America.

anthony.dauer@gmail.com :

Sorry, Anthony. You need to actually READ the Constitution. The very first clause of the very First Amendment to the Constitution is the Establishment Clause, the freedom FROM religion guarantee. The freedom OF religion is the second clause. The order represents the Founding Fathers' belief in the relative importance of each to the people.

The reason for the season is the shortest day of the year, celebrated by all cultures far from the equator because it marks the wonderful reversal to longer days.

Anything that has to do with light and warmth or the return of life to the earth should be allowed in the public square: lights, pine trees, yule logs, candles, holly, poinsettias, etc.

Religious symbols should be for each person to use to decorate their own house.

I agree with MWCOB, who wrote, "I don't have a problem with the different displays. But don't use your display to attack someone else's beliefs."

The solistice display should simply read, "Celebrate the natural world," or "To every thing there is a season, celebrate the solistice," or some such.

Furthermore, I believe that celebrating the solistice IS a celebration of God, Who tilted our planet's axis 23 degrees so we can have a variety of seasons. It is a direct manifistation of God's work, not something written by men for (mostly) political reasons.

If Christians want religious displays the way they want, free from any sort of criticism, they are certainly free to do so in their own religious places.

Once they insist on putting their religious messages in public places that belong to everyone, they have no right to have any monopoly of the message.

Our Washington State Constitution clearly states that ALL religious cults (of which atheism is one)OR NONE may be displayed on government buildings!
Our governor is merely adhering to our Constitutional law, as she has sworn that she will do!
Also, our Federal Constitution prohibits government adoption of any particular religion.

Unfortunately, the atheistic placard placed for display in our Washington, wasn't merely a statement of belief. . .it was an arrogant attack, just as if the Nativity display had included a banner stating that all us non-believers are going to burn in Hell. The nativity scene is not aggressive.
The BEST religious and legal solution in my opinion is to display religious icons, etc. on property that you or your group own.
As our wise forebears wrote, Religion and State should be SEPARATE!

"The reason for the season is the shortest day of the year, celebrated by all cultures far from the equator because it marks the wonderful reversal to longer days."

You left out the sacrifice of virgins to appease the gods and to make sure spring and summer returns. But virgins have become rare and hard to find these days, so I suggest outsourcing. We could buy Indian virgins and sacrifice them with knives Made in China. All the yuletide bling seems to come from the Far East anyway - why not this too?

The European countries in which Christianity first displaced other rites as part of the established religio-political order and where the people are still paying to support such establishment - Britain, Germany, Iceland - are among the least religiously observant people on Earth.

Thomas Paine complained in 1775 about the use of religion to defend bad governance - and now we use governance to defend bad religion.

Mixing the two is never good for either - and worst of all for the people who wish either preservation or reform of either one.

Joyous Mithrastide, everyone.

Atheists will not hinder in the rejoicings of holidays of Christmas by their own writing that is not God.
This absolutely does not hinder. They have not chances in this fight. To look the article IHT in the internet edition in the present day
" As economy worsens, churches fill up in U.S." There hinders the imposition of the discordant law with the faith and the morals of the Church.

It's sad that the WaPo, consistently scooped by tabloids, publishes hate speech, from its own "religion" writers. Beyond that, not a word about Palin's church being torched. The WaPo pays ethnic Jew Weingarten to ridicule Christians, fail to report church arson, and carries the atheist's point of view. Bizarro.

The Church of the Flaming A-holes is the atheistic church. When does believing in nothing allow one to trash another's belief? Could you imagine a "Jews are evil" poster? But Christians are fair game. As always. Palin's church was burned down. Christians are mocked. Some "liberal" point of view, eh?

"t's sad that the WaPo, consistently scooped by tabloids, publishes hate speech, from its own "religion" writers. Beyond that, not a word about Palin's church being torched."
-----------------------
From today's Washington Post: "Palin's Church Severely Damaged by Arson".

Associated Press
Sunday, December 14, 2008; Page A02

"Religion is but myth and superstition that hardens hearts and enslaves minds."

Obsess over your enemy, become your enemy.

As an agnostic, I find both the Xtians and the Atheists to be toy-throwing children. I believe that religious displays as well as anti-religious displays should not be on government property. It's not political correctness that compels me to write this: it's for civility's sake. And Menorahs don't belong there either. Personally, I find all patriarchal religions offensive. Women have been victims of these system of beliefs for far too long. But to call spirituality and an acknowledgment of the mysteries of the great beyond to be the fantasies of the simple-minded is antagonistic and just as dogmatic a form of fundamentalism as the extremely religious.

If the primitive peoples of our domestic Taliban feel the need to put up worshipful displays to their mythical Volcano God, they need to do it on the front lawns of their own Christian Madrassas. THE CONSTITUTION EXPLICITLY STATES THAT MY TAX MONEY IS NOT TO BE USED TO PROMOTE THEIR MURDEROUS AND IGNORANT SUPERSTITIONS. Why is this so hard to understand? These religious nutcakes are every bit as objectionable as the regime our troops are fighting in Afghanistan. They should NOT get to ignore the Constitution just because they have a loudmouthed FauxNews commentator cheering for them.

RE:"The WaPo pays ethnic Jew Weingarten to ridicule Christians, fail to report church arson, and carries the atheist's point of view. Bizarro."
----------------------
1) I don't recall anything ever written by Weingarten that ridiculed Christians. Enlighten us with an example.

2) What do you mean "ethnic Jew" and what does that have to do with anything? Does that bother you and your Aryan buddies?

3) The Post DID report on Palin's church - I just read it. You might bother to do a little research before you post your blather.

I am an atheist and I'm saddened by the display and its mean spirited message. Yes, I find the "poor, discriminated Christian" line a little tiresome in light of Christianity's obvious dominance in our society, but in this case, they've got good cause to be offended. The only way this democratic experiment works is if we tolerate each other, even if we find our neighbors' beliefs baffling. No, I don't think Jesus is the only reason for the season, at least he's not the reason I celebrate over the holidays (yes, there is more than one, btw). However, there is no possible point to this display, other than to be inflammatory and provocative. And I'm willing to bet most humanists worthy of the label would be very uncomfortable with such a silly attack.

In that part of the Freedom from Religion sign was gratuitously hurtful and also proselytizing, that part was inappropriate for display in a government building. However, if a government agency does agree to allow people to put up exhibits of "show-and-tell" about what they believe in, then anyone and everyone should be permitted such a display, whether they are Christians, Wiccans, Jews, Zoroastrians, followers of Thor, Wotan, Zeus, Aten, L. Ron Hubbard or the Great Pumpkin, Buddhists, Druids, nothing in particular, Baal, Moloch, whatever.

It seems a lot of people are a little confused when it comes to the First Amendment. Nobody here has the authority to interpret the Constitution, only the Supreme Court has.

That particular body has made it quite clear, on more than one occasion, that the First Amendment protects both freedom OF religion, as well as freedom FROM religion.

Some of you fools need to have a look at the majority opinion of 'Board of Education of Kiryas Joel Village School District v. Grumet.'

Christians have long despised, pitied, stigmatized, and demonized non-believers. Now---when believers see their worldview come under fire, they cry foul.

And to say that atheists believe in nothing is an asinine assertion. Most "believe" in many of the same virtues that religious folks profess to value---only we don't need the threat of Hell to behave, and we don't fear inclusion of those different from ourselves.

Happy Holidays!

I want to make a pilgrimage to that atheist display. I also want to throw a pie in Bill O'Reilly's ugly mug.

Thank "god" the pendulum is swinging our way. I will die a happy man because the those of logical thinking will, by that time, outnumber the "believers." Once we free ourselves from these lies based on fairy tales, humanity will enter a new renaissance.

Liberal fascists are not a whit better than the the old-time version of fascists. The behavior of the immature leftwingers who cause disturbances around Christmas displays are a mere foretaste of what they are capable of. The Bolsheviks of Russia also displayed the same type of anti-Christian behavior and that led to mass killings of religious people, the looting of churches and the creation of countries that banned religion. Atheists are quite capable of acting like totalitarians- and they call themselves "brights"-
bah, humbug.

They’re at it again. Santa’s little helper, masquerading as conservative talk show hosts Bill O’Reily, is at it again. Mr. O’Reily and his team of “Merry Christmas” pranksters are rallying the troops once again to defend a holiday that has morphed from pagan ritual to celebrated religious event to secular “get out your credit card” spending spree akin to a shark’s feeding frenzy.

O'Reily and his elves use this bogus claim, not to defend the celebration of this now Christian holiday but to feed meat to the conservative base, making sure those support checks to continue to come their way.

Christianity isn't under any more attack than any other religion. These greedy few want to pretend there's a focused group trying to destroy Christianity by removing Christmas trees, banning the phrase "Merry Christmas" et cetera are simply trying to scare people into actions not necessary.

If there is a plot, it is by those who make their lucre off of the fears of regular folks - the more fear they can spawn, the more money they make.

Shame on all of them. Shame on them for perpetrating a lie for their own self-interest.

What was once a pagan festival was turned into the day of Christ’s birth by a group of Early Christian leaders who figured they could suck some pagans into the Christian fold if they linked their Christ to the winter solstice celebration.

It wasn’t the Grinch who stole Christmas, it was the Christians.

Now it’s the O’Reily, the PC Police and retailers.

Today Christmas is composed of two elements:

An economic orgy wrapped up in the packaging of Christian Christmas.

Christians who demand their faith be lifted up to he exclusion of all others.

Marketers and retailers use the guise of the Christian Christmas to hock their wares, using Christmas as their cover for people to spend excessively, get frantic over parties and celebrations and find theselves agonizing over finding the perfect gift. People line up in the dead of night, in freezing cold weather to get the goodies. This year one person was trampled to death during a customer stampede to get at some Christmas bargain.

Then there are these fearful Christians who believe that any attempt to include other faiths in the celebration are a direct threat to Christianity. How sad that these people are so unsure of their personal faith that the mear mention of another faith scars them to death.

People of all faiths deserve to have their religious festivals honored. As a non- - Christian, I do not object to you having a Nativity scene on some piece of public land. All I ask is that I have the same courtesy extended to my faith.

Just stop telling me my faith is irrelevant. Stop saying this is a Christian only nation. It isn’t.

One of the biggest problems today is a lack of respect for the beliefs of others. Segments of Christianity have fashioned themselves into a cudgel for Christ - willing and eager to pound into submission anyone who does not accept their beliefs as the only beliefs.

I find it interesting that these Christians abhor the violent streak of some Muslims, yet subscribe to the same philosophy - force the world to believe as I do. If you do not believe as I do, you are wrong, evil, conspiring to overcome me, to destroy my way of life and therefore, must be destroyed first.

I believe the world would be so much better if all of us showed a little more respect for the beliefs of others. In the end God or whatever Higher Power you subscribe to will be the final arbiter. Respect is the true key for religious co-existence.

I am so tired of these "do gooder" Christians who use their faith as a club against others. To me their actions show they are those type of people who can't listen to a different opinion (on any topic) because doing so would force them to think, to consider their belief structure and then formulate a response. Call if Faith Insecurity - your faith is only as strong as the number of people who believe exactly the same as you do. A different belief challenges the status quo and must be destroyed.

We are so egotistical in this country - we believe we have the right of might, the right of economics and the right of religion. how arrogant. If we as a nation spent a little more time listening instead of preaching - we'd be a lot better off.

It is time for American Christians to show my faith the same respect I show to theirs.

mhr614 Author Profile Page:

Liberal fascists are not a whit better than the the old-time version of fascists. The behavior of the immature leftwingers who cause disturbances around Christmas displays are a mere foretaste of what they are capable of. The Bolsheviks of Russia also displayed the same type of anti-Christian behavior and that led to mass killings of religious people, the looting of churches and the creation of countries that banned religion. Atheists are quite capable of acting like totalitarians- and they call themselves "brights"-
bah, humbug.

-Don't confuse Atheists with liberals and fascists. I'm surely socially liberal and find these antics to be counter productive and weak minded.

When given the opportunity to voice their message for the holidays the Atheist group decided to slap those with faith right in the face. Seems like a spoiled childish message to me.

Go for it. There's nothing holy about religion. Atheists are sort of one anyway.

MY take is similar to steveryhmer and others who note that people have "hijacked" Chritmas for their own means. O'Reilly uses this time to keep his tunnel-vision viewers and merchants use this time to balance thier books (Black Friday). In this country, we are blessed with the freedom of religion, or not, as you so choose. Take the religious symbols to your church or place of worship and practice what you preach.

WE ALL KNOW THAT ALL THIS GOD/JEZUS BS IS A TOTAL FRAUD A 24/7 MONEY GRABBING SCAM!! YOU CAN HAVE A GREAT HOLIDAY SEASON WITHOUT THIS HOKUS/POKUS I HAVE DONE IT FOR 73 YEARS SO PERHAPS YOU MAY WANT TO TRY IT AND BE A BETTER PERSON FOR IT!! HAVE A MARY XMAS!

I get the feeling from my free from mandatory religion, thankfully secular Canadian vantage point that religionistas down there would love to return to the good old days of burning heretics at the stake. Come to think of it it wasn't all that long ago. You guys really need to move on, heck it's the 21st century for goodness sake.

stephenrhymer: Thanks for a thoughtful and balanced comment. Among the others....

It's not about the sign but the words used to foster hatred and bigotry toward a constitutionally protected class of people. This billboard promotes and generates hatred and bigotry toward one's religious belief by stating that "Religion is but a myth and superstition that hardens hearts and enslaves minds." Take out the word Religion and use Gay Lifestyle in its place or how about "Islam is but a myth and superstition that hardens hearts and enslaves minds" Would the governor allow such a sign to be displayed? I don't think so! They'd be shaken in their boots afraid of offending those groups. But Christians are now open season for this society. While secular society can only offer relative moralism where everyone becomes their own god by choosing which laws, morals and values, they wish to uphold. Societies decline into secular humanism will only breed anarchy steeped in hedonism and narcissism. Moral corruption is spreading throughout society at an alarming rate. Suddenly you'll find yourself falling asleep one night in Bedford Falls only to wake up in Pottersville.

It's one thing that atheist are allowed to display a sign that simply states there is no God. But at this time of the year having a sign which attacks the beliefs of other religions celebrating at this time of year, Christians, Jews and Muslims, is crossing the line into hatred and bigotry.

Governor Gregoire of Washington shows complete hypocrisy when the governor in one breath makes a statement that we need to be sensitive to other religions and cultures by calling a Christmas Tree a Holiday Tree and then allows a sign that is so patently offensive to all religions....Pure Hypocrisy!

How does the term "religion," as used in the atheists' display, somehow reference Christianity more than it does Islam?

ya, because atheism is the cause of your imagined spread of moral corruption. How are you altar boys faring these days?

If we are to adhere to the Constitution of the United States then I have no problem with an atheist group supporting their belief. True Christians should not judge those who do not agree practice or agree with the followings of their specific church doctrine. I won't even say that God would judge them because to an Atheist it doesn't matter if they are to be judged. I believe it is your right as a US Citizen to pick and choose what you will and won't believe in... be it a God, Mother Nature, or Nothing.

As for Bill O'Reilly I have no idea what he is trying to do other than create a hatred for those who are "Non-Believers". Would he have us resurrect the Salem Witch Trials for all atheists? I used to think he was worth listening to but as time has gone on I have realized he sometimes just opens his mouth, inserts his foot, and chews vigorously.

I am a Republican (by party designation but I am more in line with the Libertarian Party) who was raised in an Episcopalian family, yet I no longer practice my religion by attending church regularly. I see no problem with people stating their beliefs. I too have realized most religions were developed to keep people fearful of acting in ways that were detrimental to the common good of human society. In essence, I look at the Ten Commandments not as a religious symbol but more as a Common Sense way we should all treat one another.

I am all for Freedom of Speech and Freedom of Religion. No where does it state in the Constitution that you have to practice any religion. It only states you have the right to practice any religion and that the Federal & State Governments are prohibited from declaring any one religion or church. Those rights came about because the Episcopal Church is the only recognized church in England, hence the reason it is called the “The Church of England”. You can practice any established religion in the United Kingdom but only the Episcopal Church is recognized by the monarchy and government. We fought the Revolutionary War to separate ourselves from an oppressive government; so therefore, unless we are to become what we fought to separate ourselves from over 230 years ago then I suggest we all reread the Constitution and Bill of Rights to insure this never happens again.

Merry Christmas

As for Bill O'Reilly I have no idea what he is trying to do other than create a hatred for those who are "Non-Believers". Would he have us resurrect the Salem Witch Trials for all athiests? I used to think he was worth listening to but as time has gone on I have realized he sometimes just opens his mouth, inserts his foot, and chews vigorously.
As a Republican (by party designation but I am more in line with the Libertarian Party) who was raised in a Episcopalian family, yet I no longer practice my religion by attending church regularly. I see no problem with people stating their beliefs. I too have realized most religions were developed to keep people fearful of acting in ways that were detromental to common good of human society. In essence I look at the Ten Commandments not as a religious symbol but more as a Common Sense way we should all treat one another.

The nice thing about being in a democratic society is that we must hear all voices, no matter how small or insignificant they seem. However "hear" and "listen to" are completely different.

I believe, that as a society that is based in the ideals of freedom and tolerance, we are obligated to let all religions be heard. I believe that we should hear and be heard respectfully.

We are very good at being divisive in this country we call the United States. It's a strange thing. We point fingers at each other and saying how different we are. We ridicule others for being different. We form factions and ostracize all others who are "too different". Perhaps it's time to change that.

We need to be more accepting and inclusive if we are to survive through the current century. Divisive tactics only lead to fear, hate, and introversion. We need to be more than previous generations were. We need to learn from their mistakes and not repeat them. We cannot justify our actions in the present by the actions of others in the past. That is no way to live.

Perhaps the sign was not all that appropriate. Perhaps it was. That is your judgment to make. But perhaps there is a reason why the people who put up the scene felt it was necessary to include those words. We, as a people, should look at the cause, not the symptom, and work to correct it. If they feel that they are not being heard, perhaps we should treat them with more equity in our society.

I am not a Christian. However, I still enjoy seeing nativity scenes by the road. I am not Pagan, however I still enjoy a Christmas tree. I am not Jewish, however I still enjoy the menorahs and the stories. I am not or African descent, however I still like the teachings in Kwanzaa.

May happiness follow you wherever you go.

If "believers" can have a nativity scene on public government property and state capitols, then "non-believers" should be able to put up displays of their own, along with every other brand of religion or non-religion. A pluralistic society is one that accepts and accommodates all of its citizens. Just because we don't believe what other's may think does not mean we should go out of our way to disrespect them. That is what is strong about America and unifies us as a people. When we start to discriminate because some views are totally divergent or different from our own, then we are violating our Constitution. On the other hand, I do believe that a place of worship or one's home is the most appropriate place for a nativity scene. It should not be placed on Government property since it can be perceived as favoring one religion over another. That's a no no.

kerryberger,

I fully appreciate the points you make.

However, I also believe that this uncompromising all-or-none philosophy is faulty.

Just like, in semantics, there are 'known knowns', 'known unknowns', 'known knowable unknowns', and 'kown unknowables', so, in morality/ethics, there are the moral universals (variants of 'unto others' that are generally acceptable, in all their formulations), there are context-relative standards of morality. For example, the ethics of behaviour in an elevator is at significant variance with the ethics of behaviour on Fifth avenue. Another example: democratic, ten-times-more-populous India's less favourable ranking, by ten points, on the Hunger Index tells a different governance story compared to war-torn and barely-democratic Pakistan's rather respectable index by the numbers. Morality is also evolutionary: the horrors of the American civil war to preserve the Union (which initially did not seek to abolish slavery but only to prevent from secession the northern states which had been denied the right to have the practice slavery extended to these states) may have been an achievement worthy of the most glorious moral acclaim for its time, but would have been unacceptable as a strategy to vanquish South Africa's apartheid regime in 1991 or 1994.

Hey, Davey-boy, the atheist sign is not a 'display' but a rude attack on religion. Of course, they would have to attack, because a 'display' would be simply an empty sign.
Nevertheless, for the ditsy governor to place the sign right next to the Nativity display is fightin' words and should get the 'signers' a poke in the nose!

I hope someone will form an equivalent of the "Minute Men" force to go around and torch all the so-called "Nativity" displays. Pagans!

Al Qaeda and the Taliban agree wholeheartedly with Segny, Ecoclimber, theobserver4, fuzzytruthseeker, and the rest of the christo-fascists. Religion is supreme. No one may challenge it. All must live by it.

Hence, 9/11.

We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union,
establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common
defence, 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.

Article 1.

Section 1
All legislative Powers herein granted shall be vested in a Congress of the
United States, which shall consist of a Senate and House of Representatives.

Section 2
The House of Representatives shall be composed of Members chosen every second
Year by the People of the several States, and the Electors in each State shall
have the Qualifications requisite for Electors of the most numerous Branch of
the State Legislature.

No Person shall be a Representative who shall not have attained to the Age of
twenty five Years, and been seven Years a Citizen of the United States, and who
shall not, when elected, be an Inhabitant of that State in which he shall be
chosen.

Representatives and direct Taxes shall be apportioned among the several States
which may be included within this Union, according to their respective Numbers,
which shall be determined by adding to the whole Number of free Persons,
including those bound to Service for a Term of Years, and excluding Indians not
taxed, three fifths of all other Persons.

The actual Enumeration shall be made within three Years after the first Meeting
of the Congress of the United States, and within every subsequent Term of ten
Years, in such Manner as they shall by Law direct. The Number of
Representatives shall not exceed one for every thirty Thousand, but each State
shall have at Least one Representative; and until such enumeration shall be
made, the State of New Hampshire shall be entitled to choose three,
Massachusetts eight, Rhode Island and Providence Plantations one, Connecticut
five, New York six, New Jersey four, Pennsylvania eight, Delaware one, Maryland
six, Virginia ten, North Carolina five, South Carolina five and Georgia three.

When vacancies happen in the Representation from any State, the Executive
Authority thereof shall issue Writs of Election to fill such Vacancies.

The House of Representatives shall choose their Speaker and other Officers; and
shall have the sole Power of Impeachment.

Section 3
The Senate of the United States shall be composed of two Senators from each
State, chosen by the Legislature thereof, for six Years; and each Senator shall
have one Vote.

Immediately after they shall be assembled in Consequence of the first Election,
they shall be divided as equally as may be into three Classes. The Seats of the
Senators of the first Class shall be vacated at the Expiration of the second
Year, of the second Class at the Expiration of the fourth Year, and of the
third Class at the Expiration of the sixth Year, so that one third may be
chosen every second Year; and if Vacancies happen by Resignation, or otherwise,
during the Recess of the Legislature of any State, the Executive thereof may
make temporary Appointments until the next Meeting of the Legislature, which
shall then fill such Vacancies.

No person shall be a Senator who shall not have attained to the Age of thirty
Years, and been nine Years a Citizen of the United States, and who shall not,
when elected, be an Inhabitant of that State for which he shall be chosen.

The Vice President of the United States shall be President of the Senate, but
shall have no Vote, unless they be equally divided.

The Senate shall choose their other Officers, and also a President pro tempore,
in the absence of the Vice President, or when he shall exercise the Office of
President of the United States.

The Senate shall have the sole Power to try all Impeachments. When sitting for
that Purpose, they shall be on Oath or Affirmation. When the President of the
United States is tried, the Chief Justice shall preside: And no Person shall be
convicted without the Concurrence of two thirds of the Members present.

Judgment in Cases of Impeachment shall not extend further than to removal from
Office, and disqualification to hold and enjoy any Office of honor, Trust or
Profit under the United States: but the Party convicted shall nevertheless be
liable and subject to Indictment, Trial, Judgment and Punishment, according to
Law.

Section 4
The Times, Places and Manner of holding Elections for Senators and
Representatives, shall be prescribed in each State by the Legislature thereof;
but the Congress may at any time by Law make or alter such Regulations, except
as to the Place of Choosing Senators.

The Congress shall assemble at least once in every Year, and such Meeting shall
be on the first Monday in December, unless they shall by Law appoint a
different Day.

Section 5
Each House shall be the Judge of the Elections, Returns and Qualifications of
its own Members, and a Majority of each shall constitute a Quorum to do
Business; but a smaller number may adjourn from day to day, and may be
authorized to compel the Attendance of absent Members, in such Manner, and
under such Penalties as each House may provide.

Each House may determine the Rules of its Proceedings, punish its Members for
disorderly Behavior, and, with the Concurrence of two-thirds, expel a Member.

Each House shall keep a Journal of its Proceedings, and from time to time
publish the same, excepting such Parts as may in their Judgment require
Secrecy; and the Yeas and Nays of the Members of either House on any question
shall, at the Desire of one fifth of those Present, be entered on the Journal.

Neither House, during the Session of Congress, shall, without the Consent of
the other, adjourn for more than three days, nor to any other Place than that
in which the two Houses shall be sitting.

Section 6
The Senators and Representatives shall receive a Compensation for their
Services, to be ascertained by Law, and paid out of the Treasury of the United
States. They shall in all Cases, except Treason, Felony and Breach of the
Peace, be privileged from Arrest during their Attendance at the Session of
their respective Houses, and in going to and returning from the same; and for
any Speech or Debate in either House, they shall not be questioned in any other
Place.

No Senator or Representative shall, during the Time for which he was elected,
be appointed to any civil Office under the Authority of the United States which
shall have been created, or the Emoluments whereof shall have been increased
during such time; and no Person holding any Office under the United States,
shall be a Member of either House during his Continuance in Office.

Section 7
All bills for raising Revenue shall originate in the House of Representatives;
but the Senate may propose or concur with Amendments as on other Bills.

Every Bill which shall have passed the House of Representatives and the Senate,
shall, before it become a Law, be presented to the President of the United
States; If he approve he shall sign it, but if not he shall return it, with his
Objections to that House in which it shall have originated, who shall enter the
Objections at large on their Journal, and proceed to reconsider it. If after
such Reconsideration two thirds of that House shall agree to pass the Bill, it
shall be sent, together with the Objections, to the other House, by which it
shall likewise be reconsidered, and if approved by two thirds of that House, it
shall become a Law. But in all such Cases the Votes of both Houses shall be
determined by Yeas and Nays, and the Names of the Persons voting for and
against the Bill shall be entered on the Journal of each House respectively. If
any Bill shall not be returned by the President within ten Days (Sundays
excepted) after it shall have been presented to him, the Same shall be a Law,
in like Manner as if he had signed it, unless the Congress by their Adjournment
prevent its Return, in which Case it shall not be a Law.

Every Order, Resolution, or Vote to which the Concurrence of the Senate and
House of Representatives may be necessary (except on a question of Adjournment)
shall be presented to the President of the United States; and before the Same
shall take Effect, shall be approved by him, or being disapproved by him, shall
be repassed by two thirds of the Senate and House of Representatives, according
to the Rules and Limitations prescribed in the Case of a Bill.

Section 8
The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and
Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general
Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be
uniform throughout the United States;

To borrow money on the credit of the United States;

To regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States, and
with the Indian Tribes;

To establish an uniform Rule of Naturalization, and uniform Laws on the subject
of Bankruptcies throughout the United States;

To coin Money, regulate the Value thereof, and of foreign Coin, and fix the
Standard of Weights and Measures;

To provide for the Punishment of counterfeiting the Securities and current Coin
of the United States;

To establish Post Offices and Post Roads;

To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited
Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings
and Discoveries;

To constitute Tribunals inferior to the supreme Court;

To define and punish Piracies and Felonies committed on the high Seas, and
Offenses against the Law of Nations;

To declare War, grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal, and make Rules concerning
Captures on Land and Water;

To raise and support Armies, but no Appropriation of Money to that Use shall be
for a longer Term than two Years;

To provide and maintain a Navy;

To make Rules for the Government and Regulation of the land and naval Forces;

To provide for calling forth the Militia to execute the Laws of the Union,
suppress Insurrections and repel Invasions;

To provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining the Militia, and for
governing such Part of them as may be employed in the Service of the United
States, reserving to the States respectively, the Appointment of the Officers,
and the Authority of training the Militia according to the discipline
prescribed by Congress;

To exercise exclusive Legislation in all Cases whatsoever, over such District
(not exceeding ten Miles square) as may, by Cession of particular States, and
the acceptance of Congress, become the Seat of the Government of the United
States, and to exercise like Authority over all Places purchased by the Consent
of the Legislature of the State in which the Same shall be, for the Erection of
Forts, Magazines, Arsenals, dock-Yards, and other needful Buildings; And

To make all Laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into
Execution the foregoing Powers, and all other Powers vested by this
Constitution in the Government of the United States, or in any Department or
Officer thereof.

Section 9
The Migration or Importation of such Persons as any of the States now existing
shall think proper to admit, shall not be prohibited by the Congress prior to
the Year one thousand eight hundred and eight, but a tax or duty may be imposed
on such Importation, not exceeding ten dollars for each Person.

The privilege of the Writ of Habeas Corpus shall not be suspended, unless when
in Cases of Rebellion or Invasion the public Safety may require it.

No Bill of Attainder or ex post facto Law shall be passed.

No capitation, or other direct, Tax shall be laid, unless in Proportion to the
Census or Enumeration herein before directed to be taken.

No Tax or Duty shall be laid on Articles exported from any State.

No Preference shall be given by any Regulation of Commerce or Revenue to the
Ports of one State over those of another: nor shall Vessels bound to, or from,
one State, be obliged to enter, clear, or pay Duties in another.

No Money shall be drawn from the Treasury, but in Consequence of Appropriations
made by Law; and a regular Statement and Account of the Receipts and
Expenditures of all public Money shall be published from time to time.

No Title of Nobility shall be granted by the United States: And no Person
holding any Office of Profit or Trust under them, shall, without the Consent of
the Congress, accept of any present, Emolument, Office, or Title, of any kind
whatever, from any King, Prince or foreign State.

Section 10
No State shall enter into any Treaty, Alliance, or Confederation; grant Letters
of Marque and Reprisal; coin Money; emit Bills of Credit; make any Thing but
gold and silver Coin a Tender in Payment of Debts; pass any Bill of Attainder,
ex post facto Law, or Law impairing the Obligation of Contracts, or grant any
Title of Nobility.

No State shall, without the Consent of the Congress, lay any Imposts or Duties
on Imports or Exports, except what may be absolutely necessary for executing
its inspection Laws: and the net Produce of all Duties and Imposts, laid by
any State on Imports or Exports, shall be for the Use of the Treasury of the
United States; and all such Laws shall be subject to the Revision and Control
of the Congress.

No State shall, without the Consent of Congress, lay any duty of Tonnage, keep
Troops, or Ships of War in time of Peace, enter into any Agreement or Compact
with another State, or with a foreign Power, or engage in War, unless actually
invaded, or in such imminent Danger as will not admit of delay.

Article 2.

Section 1
The executive Power shall be vested in a President of the United States of
America. He shall hold his Office during the Term of four Years, and, together
with the Vice-President chosen for the same Term, be elected, as follows:

Each State shall appoint, in such Manner as the Legislature thereof may direct,
a Number of Electors, equal to the whole Number of Senators and Representatives
to which the State may be entitled in the Congress: but no Senator or
Representative, or Person holding an Office of Trust or Profit under the United
States, shall be appointed an Elector.

The Electors shall meet in their respective States, and vote by Ballot for two
persons, of whom one at least shall not lie an Inhabitant of the same State
with themselves. And they shall make a List of all the Persons voted for, and
of the Number of Votes for each; which List they shall sign and certify, and
transmit sealed to the Seat of the Government of the United States, directed to
the President of the Senate. The President of the Senate shall, in the Presence
of the Senate and House of Representatives, open all the Certificates, and the
Votes shall then be counted. The Person having the greatest Number of Votes
shall be the President, if such Number be a Majority of the whole Number of
Electors appointed; and if there be more than one who have such Majority, and
have an equal Number of Votes, then the House of Representatives shall
immediately choose by Ballot one of them for President; and if no Person have a
Majority, then from the five highest on the List the said House shall in like
Manner choose the President. But in choosing the President, the Votes shall be
taken by States, the Representation from each State having one Vote; a quorum
for this Purpose shall consist of a Member or Members from two-thirds of the
States, and a Majority of all the States shall be necessary to a Choice. In
every Case, after the Choice of the President, the Person having the greatest
Number of Votes of the Electors shall be the Vice President. But if there
should remain two or more who have equal Votes, the Senate shall choose from
them by Ballot the Vice-President.

The Congress may determine the Time of choosing the Electors, and the Day on
which they shall give their Votes; which Day shall be the same throughout the
United States.

No person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at
the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office
of President; neither shall any Person be eligible to that Office who shall not
have attained to the Age of thirty-five Years, and been fourteen Years a
Resident within the United States.

In Case of the Removal of the President from Office, or of his Death,
Resignation, or Inability to discharge the Powers and Duties of the said
Office, the same shall devolve on the Vice President, and the Congress may by
Law provide for the Case of Removal, Death, Resignation or Inability, both of
the President and Vice President, declaring what Officer shall then act as
President, and such Officer shall act accordingly, until the Disability be
removed, or a President shall be elected.

The President shall, at stated Times, receive for his Services, a Compensation,
which shall neither be increased nor diminished during the Period for which he
shall have been elected, and he shall not receive within that Period any other
Emolument from the United States, or any of them.

Before he enter on the Execution of his Office, he shall take the following
Oath or Affirmation:

"I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the Office of
President of the United States, and will to the best of my Ability, preserve,
protect and defend the Constitution of the United States."

Section 2
The President shall be Commander in Chief of the Army and Navy of the United
States, and of the Militia of the several States, when called into the actual
Service of the United States; he may require the Opinion, in writing, of the
principal Officer in each of the executive Departments, upon any subject
relating to the Duties of their respective Offices, and he shall have Power to
Grant Reprieves and Pardons for Offenses against the United States, except in
Cases of Impeachment.

He shall have Power, by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, to make
Treaties, provided two thirds of the Senators present concur; and he shall
nominate, and by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, shall appoint
Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls, Judges of the supreme Court,
and all other Officers of the United States, whose Appointments are not herein
otherwise provided for, and which shall be established by Law: but the Congress
may by Law vest the Appointment of such inferior Officers, as they think
proper, in the President alone, in the Courts of Law, or in the Heads of
Departments.

The President shall have Power to fill up all Vacancies that may happen during
the Recess of the Senate, by granting Commissions which shall expire at the End
of their next Session.

Section 3
He shall from time to time give to the Congress Information of the State of the
Union, and recommend to their Consideration such Measures as he shall judge
necessary and expedient; he may, on extraordinary Occasions, convene both
Houses, or either of them, and in Case of Disagreement between them, with
Respect to the Time of Adjournment, he may adjourn them to such Time as he
shall think proper; he shall receive Ambassadors and other public Ministers; he
shall take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed, and shall Commission all
the Officers of the United States.

Section 4
The President, Vice President and all civil Officers of the United States,
shall be removed from Office on Impeachment for, and Conviction of, Treason,
Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors.

Article 3.

Section 1
The judicial Power of the United States, shall be vested in one supreme Court,
and in such inferior Courts as the Congress may from time to time ordain and
establish. The Judges, both of the supreme and inferior Courts, shall hold
their Offices during good Behavior, and shall, at stated Times, receive for
their Services a Compensation which shall not be diminished during their
Continuance in Office.

Section 2
The judicial Power shall extend to all Cases, in Law and Equity, arising under
this Constitution, the Laws of the United States, and Treaties made, or which
shall be made, under their Authority; to all Cases affecting Ambassadors, other
public Ministers and Consuls; to all Cases of admiralty and maritime
Jurisdiction; to Controversies to which the United States shall be a Party; to
Controversies between two or more States; between a State and Citizens of
another State; between Citizens of different States; between Citizens of the
same State claiming Lands under Grants of different States, and between a
State, or the Citizens thereof, and foreign States, Citizens or Subjects.

In all Cases affecting Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls, and
those in which a State shall be Party, the supreme Court shall have original
Jurisdiction. In all the other Cases before mentioned, the supreme Court shall
have appellate Jurisdiction, both as to Law and Fact, with such Exceptions, and
under such Regulations as the Congress shall make.

The Trial of all Crimes, except in Cases of Impeachment, shall be by Jury; and
such Trial shall be held in the State where the said Crimes shall have been
committed; but when not committed within any State, the Trial shall be at such
Place or Places as the Congress may by Law have directed.

Section 3
Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against
them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort. No Person
shall be convicted of Treason unless on the Testimony of two Witnesses to the
same overt Act, or on Confession in open Court.

The Congress shall have power to declare the Punishment of Treason, but no
Attainder of Treason shall work Corruption of Blood, or Forfeiture except
during the Life of the Person attainted.

Article 4.

Section 1
Full Faith and Credit shall be given in each State to the public Acts, Records,
and judicial Proceedings of every other State. And the Congress may by general
Laws prescribe the Manner in which such Acts, Records and Proceedings shall be
proved, and the Effect thereof.

Section 2
The Citizens of each State shall be entitled to all Privileges and Immunities
of Citizens in the several States.

A Person charged in any State with Treason, Felony, or other Crime, who shall
flee from Justice, and be found in another State, shall on demand of the
executive Authority of the State from which he fled, be delivered up, to be
removed to the State having Jurisdiction of the Crime.

No Person held to Service or Labour in one State, under the Laws thereof,
escaping into another, shall, in Consequence of any Law or Regulation therein,
be discharged from such Service or Labour, But shall be delivered up on Claim
of the Party to whom such Service or Labour may be due.

Section 3
New States may be admitted by the Congress into this Union; but no new States
shall be formed or erected within the Jurisdiction of any other State; nor any
State be formed by the Junction of two or more States, or parts of States,
without the Consent of the Legislatures of the States concerned as well as of
the Congress.

The Congress shall have Power to dispose of and make all needful Rules and
Regulations respecting the Territory or other Property belonging to the United
States; and nothing in this Constitution shall be so construed as to Prejudice
any Claims of the United States, or of any particular State.

Section 4
The United States shall guarantee to every State in this Union a Republican
Form of Government, and shall protect each of them against Invasion; and on
Application of the Legislature, or of the Executive (when the Legislature
cannot be convened) against domestic Violence.

Article 5.

The Congress, whenever two thirds of both Houses shall deem it necessary, shall
propose Amendments to this Constitution, or, on the Application of the
Legislatures of two thirds of the several States, shall call a Convention for
proposing Amendments, which, in either Case, shall be valid to all Intents and
Purposes, as part of this Constitution, when ratified by the Legislatures of
three fourths of the several States, or by Conventions in three fourths
thereof, as the one or the other Mode of Ratification may be proposed by the
Congress; Provided that no Amendment which may be made prior to the Year One
thousand eight hundred and eight shall in any Manner affect the first and
fourth Clauses in the Ninth Section of the first Article; and that no State,
without its Consent, shall be deprived of its equal Suffrage in the Senate.

Article 6.

All Debts contracted and Engagements entered into, before the Adoption of this
Constitution, shall be as valid against the United States under this
Constitution, as under the Confederation.

This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in
Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the
Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the
Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or
Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding.

The Senators and Representatives before mentioned, and the Members of the
several State Legislatures, and all executive and judicial Officers, both of
the United States and of the several States, shall be bound by Oath or
Affirmation, to support this Constitution; but no religious Test shall ever be
required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United
States.

Article 7.

The Ratification of the Conventions of nine States, shall be sufficient for the
Establishment of this Constitution between the States so ratifying the Same.

Done in Convention by the Unanimous Consent of the States present the
Seventeenth Day of September in the Year of our Lord one thousand seven hundred
and Eighty seven and of the Independence of the United States of America the
Twelfth. In Witness whereof We have hereunto subscribed our Names.

George Washington - President and deputy from Virginia

New Hampshire - John Langdon, Nicholas Gilman

Massachusetts - Nathaniel Gorham, Rufus King

Connecticut - William Samuel Johnson, Roger Sherman

New York - Alexander Hamilton

New Jersey - William Livingston, David Brearley, William Paterson, Jonathan
Dayton

Pennsylvania - Benjamin Franklin, Thomas Mifflin, Robert Morris, George Clymer,
Thomas Fitzsimons, Jared Ingersoll, James Wilson, Gouvernour Morris

Delaware - George Read, Gunning Bedford Jr., John Dickinson, Richard Bassett,
Jacob Broom

Maryland - James McHenry, Daniel of St Thomas Jenifer, Daniel Carroll

Virginia - John Blair, James Madison Jr.

North Carolina - William Blount, Richard Dobbs Spaight, Hugh Williamson

South Carolina - John Rutledge, Charles Cotesworth Pinckney, Charles Pinckney,
Pierce Butler

Georgia - William Few, Abraham Baldwin

Attest: William Jackson, Secretary

Amendment 1
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of 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.

Amendment 2
A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the
right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

Amendment 3
No Soldier shall, in time of peace be quartered in any house, without the
consent of the Owner, nor in time of war, but in a manner to be prescribed by
law.

Amendment 4
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and
effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and
no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or
affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the
persons or things to be seized.

Amendment 5
No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime,
unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising
in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time
of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense
to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any
criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life,
liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be
taken for public use, without just compensation.

Amendment 6
In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and
public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime
shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously
ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the
accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory
process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the Assistance of
Counsel for his defence.

Amendment 7
In Suits at common law, where the value in controversy shall exceed twenty
dollars, the right of trial by jury shall be preserved, and no fact tried by a
jury, shall be otherwise re-examined in any Court of the United States, than
according to the rules of the common law.

Amendment 8
Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel
and unusual punishments inflicted.

Amendment 9
The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed
to deny or disparage others retained by the people.

Amendment 10
The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor
prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to
the people.

Amendment 11
The Judicial power of the United States shall not be construed to extend to any
suit in law or equity, commenced or prosecuted against one of the United States
by Citizens of another State, or by Citizens or Subjects of any Foreign State.

Amendment 12
The Electors shall meet in their respective states, and vote by ballot for
President and Vice-President, one of whom, at least, shall not be an inhabitant
of the same state with themselves; they shall name in their ballots the person
voted for as President, and in distinct ballots the person voted for as
Vice-President, and they shall make distinct lists of all persons voted for as
President, and of all persons voted for as Vice-President and of the number of
votes for each, which lists they shall sign and certify, and transmit sealed to
the seat of the government of the United States, directed to the President of
the Senate;

The President of the Senate shall, in the presence of the Senate and House of
Representatives, open all the certificates and the votes shall then be counted;

The person having the greatest Number of votes for President, shall be the
President, if such number be a majority of the whole number of Electors
appointed; and if no person have such majority, then from the persons having
the highest numbers not exceeding three on the list of those voted for as
President, the House of Representatives shall choose immediately, by ballot,
the President. But in choosing the President, the votes shall be taken by
states, the representation from each state having one vote; a quorum for this
purpose shall consist of a member or members from two-thirds of the states, and
a majority of all the states shall be necessary to a choice. And if the House
of Representatives shall not choose a President whenever the right of choice
shall devolve upon them, before the fourth day of March next following, then
the Vice-President shall act as President, as in the case of the death or other
constitutional disability of the President.

The person having the greatest number of votes as Vice-President, shall be the
Vice-President, if such number be a majority of the whole number of Electors
appointed, and if no person have a majority, then from the two highest numbers
on the list, the Senate shall choose the Vice-President; a quorum for the
purpose shall consist of two-thirds of the whole number of Senators, and a
majority of the whole number shall be necessary to a choice. But no person
constitutionally ineligible to the office of President shall be eligible to
that of Vice-President of the United States.

Amendment 13
1. Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime
whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United
States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction.

2. Congress shall have power to enforce this article by appropriate
legislation.

Amendment 14
1. All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the
jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State
wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge
the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any
State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of
law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the
laws.

2. Representatives shall be apportioned among the several States according to
their respective numbers, counting the whole number of persons in each State,
excluding Indians not taxed. But when the right to vote at any election for the
choice of electors for President and Vice-President of the United States,
Representatives in Congress, the Executive and Judicial officers of a State, or
the members of the Legislature thereof, is denied to any of the male
inhabitants of such State, being twenty-one years of age, and citizens of the
United States, or in any way abridged, except for participation in rebellion,
or other crime, the basis of representation therein shall be reduced in the
proportion which the number of such male citizens shall bear to the whole
number of male citizens twenty-one years of age in such State.

3. No person shall be a Senator or Representative in Congress, or elector of
President and Vice-President, or hold any office, civil or military, under the
United States, or under any State, who, having previously taken an oath, as a
member of Congress, or as an officer of the United States, or as a member of
any State legislature, or as an executive or judicial officer of any State, to
support the Constitution of the United States, shall have engaged in
insurrection or rebellion against the same, or given aid or comfort to the
enemies thereof. But Congress may by a vote of two-thirds of each House, remove
such disability.

4. The validity of the public debt of the United States, authorized by law,
including debts incurred for payment of pensions and bounties for services in
suppressing insurrection or rebellion, shall not be questioned. But neither the
United States nor any State shall assume or pay any debt or obligation incurred
in aid of insurrection or rebellion against the United States, or any claim for
the loss or emancipation of any slave; but all such debts, obligations and
claims shall be held illegal and void.

5. The Congress shall have power to enforce, by appropriate legislation, the
provisions of this article.

Amendment 15
1. The right of citizens of the United States to vote shall not be denied or
abridged by the United States or by any State on account of race, color, or
previous condition of servitude.

2. The Congress shall have power to enforce this article by appropriate
legislation.

Amendment 16
The Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes on incomes, from
whatever source derived, without apportionment among the several States, and
without regard to any census or enumeration.

Amendment 17
The Senate of the United States shall be composed of two Senators from each
State, elected by the people thereof, for six years; and each Senator shall
have one vote. The electors in each State shall have the qualifications
requisite for electors of the most numerous branch of the State legislatures.

When vacancies happen in the representation of any State in the Senate, the
executive authority of such State shall issue writs of election to fill such
vacancies: Provided, That the legislature of any State may empower the
executive thereof to make temporary appointments until the people fill the
vacancies by election as the legislature may direct.

This amendment shall not be so construed as to affect the election or term of
any Senator chosen before it becomes valid as part of the Constitution.

Amendment 18
1. After one year from the ratification of this article the manufacture, sale,
or transportation of intoxicating liquors within, the importation thereof into,
or the exportation thereof from the United States and all territory subject to
the jurisdiction thereof for beverage purposes is hereby prohibited.

2. The Congress and the several States shall have concurrent power to enforce
this article by appropriate legislation.

3. This article shall be inoperative unless it shall have been ratified as an
amendment to the Constitution by the legislatures of the several States, as
provided in the Constitution, within seven years from the date of the
submission hereof to the States by the Congress.

Amendment 19
The right of citizens of the United States to vote shall not be denied or
abridged by the United States or by any State on account of sex.

Congress shall have power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation.

Amendment 20
1. The terms of the President and Vice President shall end at noon on the 20th
day of January, and the terms of Senators and Representatives at noon on the 3d
day of January, of the years in which such terms would have ended if this
article had not been ratified; and the terms of their successors shall then
begin.

2. The Congress shall assemble at least once in every year, and such meeting
shall begin at noon on the 3d day of January, unless they shall by law appoint
a different day.

3. If, at the time fixed for the beginning of the term of the President, the
President elect shall have died, the Vice President elect shall become
President. If a President shall not have been chosen before the time fixed for
the beginning of his term, or if the President elect shall have failed to
qualify, then the Vice President elect shall act as President until a President
shall have qualified; and the Congress may by law provide for the case wherein
neither a President elect nor a Vice President elect shall have qualified,
declaring who shall then act as President, or the manner in which one who is to
act shall be selected, and such person shall act accordingly until a President
or Vice President shall have qualified.

4. The Congress may by law provide for the case of the death of any of the
persons from whom the House of Representatives may choose a President whenever
the right of choice shall have devolved upon them, and for the case of the
death of any of the persons from whom the Senate may choose a Vice President
whenever the right of choice shall have devolved upon them.

5. Sections 1 and 2 shall take effect on the 15th day of October following the
ratification of this article.

6. This article shall be inoperative unless it shall have been ratified as an
amendment to the Constitution by the legislatures of three-fourths of the
several States within seven years from the date of its submission.

Amendment 21
1. The eighteenth article of amendment to the Constitution of the United States
is hereby repealed.

2. The transportation or importation into any State, Territory, or possession
of the United States for delivery or use therein of intoxicating liquors, in
violation of the laws thereof, is hereby prohibited.

3. The article shall be inoperative unless it shall have been ratified as an
amendment to the Constitution by conventions in the several States, as provided
in the Constitution, within seven years from the date of the submission hereof
to the States by the Congress.

Amendment 22
1. No person shall be elected to the office of the President more than twice,
and no person who has held the office of President, or acted as President, for
more than two years of a term to which some other person was elected President
shall be elected to the office of the President more than once. But this
Article shall not apply to any person holding the office of President, when this
Article was proposed by the Congress, and shall not prevent any person who may
be holding the office of President, or acting as President, during the term
within which this Article becomes operative from holding the office of
President or acting as President during the remainder of such term.

2. This article shall be inoperative unless it shall have been ratified as an
amendment to the Constitution by the legislatures of three-fourths of the
several States within seven years from the date of its submission to the States
by the Congress.

Amendment 23
1. The District constituting the seat of Government of the United States shall
appoint in such manner as the Congress may direct: A number of electors of
President and Vice President equal to the whole number of Senators and
Representatives in Congress to which the District would be entitled if it were
a State, but in no event more than the least populous State; they shall be in
addition to those appointed by the States, but they shall be considered, for
the purposes of the election of President and Vice President, to be electors
appointed by a State; and they shall meet in the District and perform such
duties as provided by the twelfth article of amendment.

2. The Congress shall have power to enforce this article by appropriate
legislation.

Amendment 24
1. The right of citizens of the United States to vote in any primary or other
election for President or Vice President, for electors for President or
Vice President, or for Senator or Representative in Congress, shall not be
denied or abridged by the United States or any State by reason of failure to
pay any poll tax or other tax.

2. The Congress shall have power to enforce this article by appropriate
legislation.

Amendment 25
1. In case of the removal of the President from office or of his death or
resignation, the Vice President shall become President.

2. Whenever there is a vacancy in the office of the Vice President, the
President shall nominate a Vice President who shall take office upon
confirmation by a majority vote of both Houses of Congress.

3. Whenever the President transmits to the President pro tempore of the Senate
and the Speaker of the House of Representatives his written declaration that he
is unable to discharge the powers and duties of his office, and until he
transmits to them a written declaration to the contrary, such powers and duties
shall be discharged by the Vice President as Acting President.

4. Whenever the Vice President and a majority of either the principal officers
of the executive departments or of such other body as Congress may by law
provide, transmit to the President pro tempore of the Senate and the Speaker of
the House of Representatives their written declaration that the President is
unable to discharge the powers and duties of his office, the Vice President
shall immediately assume the powers and duties of the office as Acting
President.

Thereafter, when the President transmits to the President pro tempore of the
Senate and the Speaker of the House of Representatives his written declaration
that no inability exists, he shall resume the powers and duties of his office
unless the Vice President and a majority of either the principal officers of
the executive department or of such other body as Congress may by law provide,
transmit within four days to the President pro tempore of the Senate and the
Speaker of the House of Representatives their written declaration that the
President is unable to discharge the powers and duties of his office. Thereupon
Congress shall decide the issue, assembling within forty eight hours for that
purpose if not in session. If the Congress, within twenty one days after
receipt of the latter written declaration, or, if Congress is not in session,
within twenty one days after Congress is required to assemble, determines by
two thirds vote of both Houses that the President is unable to discharge the
powers and duties of his office, the Vice President shall continue to discharge
the same as Acting President; otherwise, the President shall resume the powers
and duties of his office.

Amendment 26
1. The right of citizens of the United States, who are eighteen years of age or
older, to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any
State on account of age.

2. The Congress shall have power to enforce this article by appropriate
legislation.

Amendment 27
No law, varying the compensation for the services of the Senators and
Representatives, shall take effect, until an election of Representatives shall
have intervened.

Humans are aggressive, tribal, and highly territorial by nature. Religion can be a great thing when it comes to individuals, but when it involves two or more people it becomes the greatest source of evil on the planet.

"In essence I look at the Ten Commandments not as a religious symbol but more as a Common Sense way we should all treat one another."

You would have a point if we were talking about the second half of the Commandments. But the first half constitutes explicitly sectarian doctrine - not worshiping other gods, no graven images, not taking the god's name in vain, keeping the Sabbath. Those would seem to have nothing to do with human relations.

Since atheists believe there is no God, wouldn't an atheist display consist of nothing?

I see Bill O is at it again. What a tool.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5_sZuLzrTuU

Carstonio wrote: "In essence I look at the Ten Commandments not as a religious symbol but more as a Common Sense way we should all treat one another." You would have a point if we were talking about the second half of the Commandments. But the first half constitutes explicitly sectarian doctrine - not worshiping other gods, no graven images, not taking the god's name in vain, keeping the Sabbath. Those would seem to have nothing to do with human relations.

Yes. We can disregard that crazy stuff and keep the practical things.

O'Reilly's reaction is typical of right wing political pundits. They have appropriated the phrase "traditional values" to hurl about when what they really mean is "conservative political values". What O'Reilly and others like him--Limbaugh, Hannity and a legion of prominent religious conservatives like James Dobson and Pat Robertson--really are after is a sort of enforced belief system that favors conservative political values. And, part and parcel of this desire is to have government power reserved only for those who are of like mind with them.

All I can say is that they must have a weak faith if it cannot withstand the challenge presented by atheism or agnosticism.

"When the state of Illinois agreed to allow private citizens to place a Nativity scene inside the capitol this Christmas season, and the ACLU decided not to challenge to decision, Christian supporters were so elated they invited other groups to join in the free holiday expressions."

That's great! And you know, it's only taken 40 years of ACLU lawsuits to bring a sea-change in the attitudes of a few of the more progressive of this country's Christianists.

Typical that the pundits and right wing fundies scream for the right to display their symbols as religious freedom but dont want others to display as well. Freedom obviously counts only if you are Christian. Lets see some more religious and non-religious displays. Equal time for everyone!

I wonder why it is so important for certain athiests to denounce religion and the religious. There are many references here that suggest that Religion is bad for individuals and society, yet there is no reasonable data given to support those statements. In fact, the statement in the capital, "Religion is but myth and superstition that hardens hearts and enslaves minds." can not be substantiated. How can the athiests show that religion is only a myth or a superstition. Furthermore, where is the data that shows religion hardens hearts and enslaves minds? I, as a Catholic, would say that religion opens both my heart and mind to love others. Conversely, the athiest's statement here is in fact mean spirited. What is its purpose other than to protest and demean the beliefs of others? If they had love in their hearts, they would just accept the fact that the religious make up 90+% of the population and they want to celebrate their holy days. In the hypothetical, if you were a Yankee fan living in Boston, would you make a protest when the city of Boston expended considerable funds to celebrate the Red Sox world series championships or would you just acknowledge that the majority had a reason to celebrate?

I like Christmas trees and all the decorations, but it would feel so liberating to me to see the Freedom From Religion display! Makes me want to travel to Illinois. If only I had something like that to see when I was young, agnostic and religiously closeted to my over-the-top Catholic family. Yes, Virginia, I don't have to believe in Santa Claus and the "true meaning of Christmas." Freedom of religion indeed!

RE: " "Religion is but myth and superstition that hardens hearts and enslaves minds." can not be substantiated."
---------------
Do the Salem witch trials, the Spanish Inquisition, the subjugation and mistreatment of native peoples and the justification of slavery ring a bell? Of course the list of religiously-motivated hate crimes throughout history is too long for this forum. I'd need a book the size of, say, the bible to really catalog the atrocities perpetrated by the faithful.

And, yes, there have been plenty of similar deeds by non-religious governments. But your assertion is that there is no substantiation for the charge tha religion 'hardens hearts and enslaves minds.' I have just provided the examples.

PAULC2 said:

******"There are many references here that suggest that Religion is bad for individuals and society, yet there is no reasonable data given to support those statements."*******

A very incomplete list:

Islamic terror, the wars of religion, the crusades, the conflict in the former Yugoslavia, Jerry Falwell, and the murder of so-called Abortion doctors.
The basic problem with religion is that it gives people a set of rules to follow which are said to supersede the laws of a nation, and gives them license to maim, murder, rape, destroy, and harass those who are not of the faithful. Organized religion, while not necessarily evil in of itself, is a huge enabler of evil men and evil ideas. Whether it's the genocidal catholic-protestant butchery of the 17th century, the slaughter of innocents of all religions by islamic jihadists, or the hatred and intolerance of Jerry Falwell and Bill ORiley advocating oppression and cruelty toward non-christians or homosexuals, organized religion has long served as a convenient tool for evil. This is the case largely because the religious claim access to a higher truth, and religious leaders do not have to be accountable to the laws of men. Accordingly, if I say it's the will of god that evil be done, then my followers are very likely to carry out evil acts because the health of their immortal soul requires it, and even those who oppose my views may hesitate to move against me or my followers directly because of the authority a religious position affords me.
Is religion always a bad thing? No. But allowing even a shred of religion into public life is *always* a bad thing. Keep religion and politics separate, and we'll all be a lot better off.

I don't think that anyone should be able to put up Christmas Decorations that are directly related to religion. All aren't, so just put up some of them. As for the atheists, it seems like they are on a mission, which is a noble one, even if you don't agree with it. They are trying to enlighten and have people question their faith and beliefs (and if anyone says that questioning beliefs is wrong, they are ignorant/paranoid, and you can quote me on that), both of which are extremely important and necessary.

Saying that Religion is evil and saying that people do evil in the name of religion are two very different things. Evil people will exploit anything to get their way but they are not following their religion (at least not my Catholic faith) when they do so. The entire moral dogma of the Catholic Church can be summarized with the Great Commandment: Love God with all your heart and Love your Neighbor as yourself. When people do Evil in the name of Religion, you will always find under the covers that they did it for some other reason like for love of Power of love of Money.

Actually, for men to do large scale evil, they need a way to get people to band together. While religion can provide that ready made organization, so can other affiliations, like nationality, and race, unions, and political party. For instance, Hitler was able to rally his support, not on the basis of religion, but on the Arian race. Stalin used both "Mother Russia" and of course the communist party. This does not make all nations, races or political parties evil, any more than religions are evil. Its the people that exploit them that are evil.

Evil people can also manipulate people into organizing against Groups. In 64AD, Nero turned attention away from the burning of Rome by persecuting Christians. In this case it was the state propagating evil against Religion.

Religion is not necessarily bad for individuals or society. What is bad is any ideology that includes both absolutism and authoritarianism. While this describes many fundamentalist varieties of religion, it is by no means limited to religion.

RE: " "Religion is but myth and superstition that hardens hearts and enslaves minds." can not be substantiated."

It does not have to be substantiated. We are talking about beliefs here. Even though I am an atheist I do not believe the above statement, but the people of Freedom From Religion Foundation obviously do. Why should they be required to substantiate their beliefs when no one else is? Where is the proof behind other displays? I don't like that atheists are attacking religion with unsubstantiated statements, but it doesn't seem fair to disallow that as long as Christians are permitted to declare that non-believers are going to hell.

jackaroe : You wrote:
RE: " "Religion is but myth and superstition that hardens hearts and enslaves minds." can not be substantiated."

It does not have to be substantiated. We are talking about beliefs here. Even though I am an atheist I do not believe the above statement, but the people of Freedom From Religion Foundation obviously do. Why should they be required to substantiate their beliefs when no one else is? Where is the proof behind other displays? I don't like that atheists are attacking religion with unsubstantiated statements, but it doesn't seem fair to disallow that as long as Christians are permitted to declare that non-believers are going to hell.

==> Any time you disparage someone elses beliefs, you should have to substantiate what you say. A simple Creche or a lighted Menora is not making a negative statement about anyone's beliefs. Its simply there as a reminder to believers about their faith. If you see no value in it, you are free to ignore it with no harm done. When someone slaps a sign up next to one of these symbols saying that their faith harden's hearts and enslaves minds, it is mor difficult to ignore.

As for believers telling Athiests that they are going to Hell, this statement brings up many thoughts. One is the tone that a believer uses when telling an athiest this. Is it a cautionary one, out of real concern for the athiest's soul. Or was it mean spirited condemnation. If its the former, maybe if done with the right tone it causes the athiest to rethink their position. If its the latter, I think it would be easy for the athiest to brush off, since they don't believe in Hell anyway.

"If its the former, maybe if done with the right tone it causes the athiest to rethink their position. If its the latter, I think it would be easy for the athiest to brush off, since they don't believe in Hell anyway."

The issue isn't atheism, since Christianity and Islam teach hell for believers in other religions. Even when the concern for the person's soul is honest, what the Christian or Muslim is saying is that eternal suffering is warranted and deserved.