TexasCHLforum.com

I am with carlson1, put the 10 commandments back. Not sure there is a “freedom from religion” in the first amendment. Again, not sure I loved SB 1515 mandating the 10 commandments; maybe allowing would have been better.

I see the flaw in that the topic author started the conversation based on a violation of the First Amendment to the Constitution but the topic author does not believe in the Constitution. I quote:

Re: TX: Lt Gov Patrick says not enough Senate votes to pass Con Carry
#57
Post
by oohrah » Sat Apr 24, 2021 10:39 am
I do NOT support Constitutional carry. There are no bars to carrying a handgun already. Texas is a "shall issue" state. Any law-abiding citizen without a criminal record can buy and carry a handgun if they demonstrate proficiency and knowledge of the law. They cannot be denied. Rights sustained.
I believe with rights comes responsibility. I also believe carrying a gun in public without training or knowledge of the law is irresponsible. I know I will get a lot of pushback on this, so don't expect me to respond to your arguments. Just wanted you to know that there are responsible gun owners out there who do not support this.
search.php?st=0&sk=t&sd=d&sr=posts&author_id=15653

Obviously he carries but he does not believe in Constitutional carry. The operative word there is Constitutional. So finding SB1515 as a violation of the Constitution while not believing in the Constitution would be problematic.
I am of the opinion that SB1515 is not all it was cracked up to be, but posting the 10 Commandments is “not just wrong”.
I really would like to see the 11 Commandment posted as well and believe it even speaks to this topic.

The post stated SB 1515 is just wrong. The topic author went on to explain this is a violation of the first amendment. I am assuming the wrongness is due to violation of the Constitution.

“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.”

Further individuals made the comment that posting the Ten Commandments is wrong; basically going further than stating SB 1515 is wrong.

Additionally, the different versions of the Ten Commandments were mentioned; initially breaking it down to Christian v. Jewish Ten Commandments. The topic author then actually stated that the Christian Ten Commandments are actually the 2 Commandments (I am Christian and still believe in the Ten Commandments). We do not have to guess which version would be placed, the wording is in SB 1515.

According to Encyclopedia Britannica there are several numberings. Some include the prologue and first utterance as the first commandant (Jewish tradition) and others consider the final commandments on coveting as one commandment.
https://www.britannica.com/question/How ... traditions Wikipedia also has an interesting table that can reference the Ten Commandments to scripture in the Quran https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ten_Commandments

It appears that the SB1515 Ten Commandments is Identical to the State Capitol Ten Commandments which is stated as secular (as opposed to religious I suppose).

I feel the removal of numbers, changing of commas, etc. is not the real issue of the Ten Commandments. Kind of sounds like anti-second amendment types who try to say that the founding fathers did not want us to own guns and try to use punctuation to make their case.

You can actually read Senator King’s intent and rationale (https://trackbill.com/bill/texas-senate ... s/2386016/)

Now, you can make a First Amendment argument against SB 1515, but to make that argument against the display of the Ten Commandments might be interpreted as “prohibiting the free exercise thereof”. If making that argument, I think it is incumbent to scrub all government edifices of the Ten Commandments including the Texas State Capitol and the US Supreme Court.

I would not say SB 1515 is wrong, I would say it is controversial. It may be misguided (and there is usually a discussion and amendment process to bills). I am not sure that the law might not be better to allow the display of the Ten Commandments. Regardless, maybe Senator King is attempting a direct shot against the Democrats.

Now transgender flags and other like symbols in the classroom are wrong.

If the Ten Commandments were displayed in the classroom, I believe that would be a good thing. To mandate it, I am less enthused but do not find it completely objectionable. I consider myself a Constitutionalist (not everyone on the board is). I believe SB 1515 might be problematic, but it is not wrong to display the Ten Commandments.

I would finally say in a historical context and not religious,

“Woe unto them that call evil good, and good evil; …” Isaiah 5: 20

Is this wrong?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ten_Comma ... in,_Texas)

https://texaschlforum.com/download/file ... &mode=view

srothstein wrote: ↑Tue May 02, 2023 7:59 pm

EP45 wrote: ↑Tue May 02, 2023 6:01 pm "I can't believe anyone would support having the government tell us what religion we should be posting. This a clear violation of the 1st Amendment."

This one stumped me. I am in the process of looking up the the author's intent for SB1515 (Senator Phil King maybe). Why exactly is SB 1515 "wrong"?

As was pointed out, there are different versions of the Ten Commandments for different religions. In addition, there are a lot of religions that do not believe in the Ten Commandment. Whichever version you post in a government building (like a school) is establishing a specific religion as the state religion. This is a violation of the exact wording of the First Amendment.

About the only way I could see it being legal is if you posted it with things like Hammurabi's Code, the Magna Carta, and the Constitution, making it a display on the history of law.

Which specific religion?

"I can't believe anyone would support having the government tell us what religion we should be posting. This a clear violation of the 1st Amendment."

This one stumped me. I am in the process of looking up the the author's intent for SB1515 (Senator Phil King maybe). Why exactly is SB 1515 "wrong"?