Arkansas new Ten Commandments monument at Capitol destroyed
Source: Associated Press
31 minutes ago
LITTLE ROCK, Ark. (AP) Officials say Arkansas new Ten Commandments monument was destroyed by someone driving a vehicle into it less than 24 hours after the monument was placed on state Capitol grounds.
Secretary of States Office spokesman Chris Powell says Capitol Police arrested the male suspect early Wednesday. The suspects name and motive havent been released.
The stone monument fell to the ground and broke into multiple pieces.
The privately funded monument was 6 feet tall (1.8 meters) and weighed 6,000 pounds (2,721 kilograms). It was installed Tuesday morning on the southwest lawn of the Capitol with little fanfare and no advance notice. A 2015 law required the state to allow the display near the Capitol, and a state panel last month gave final approval to its design and location.
Read more: https://apnews.com/cd6d8a4529a246819288a765f74f0e08/Arkansas'-new-Ten-Commandments-monument-at-Capitol-destroyed
______________________________________________________________________
Short article. No more at link.
winetourdriver01
(1,154 posts)I guess someone doesn't like blending church and state?
Roy Rolling
(6,853 posts)I disagree with the placement, but cheering a moron who provokes a public fight is equally stupid. It disrespects others' beliefs and will turn this act into near-martyrdom. Religious nuts are irrational.
This is NOT the way to fight religious intolerance, it is the way that has led the Middle East into turmoil.
docgee
(870 posts)Demonaut
(8,909 posts)never forget the late great Gilda Radner
toddwv
(2,830 posts)First, this isn't violence. Nobody got hurt.
Putting the statue up is a HUGE disrespect to anyone who isn't a fundie. Hell, it should even be considered disrespectful by the Christian extremists since that particular set of "10 Commandments" isn't the true set.
This isn't an act of religious intolerance, it's a reminder that we have Constitutional proscriptions against the State supporting one particular religion. The Arkansas legislature specifically banned a statue requested by the Church of Satan but allows this fake Decalogue monument to be set up.
So I don't know if I'd call this man a hero, but patriot does definitely come to mind.
Missn-Hitch
(1,383 posts)yellowcanine
(35,692 posts)Violence is directed at human beings, vandalism is directed at objects. Yes it can be a fine line, but one could argue that erecting the object in the first place was as much an act of violence as knocking it down. I agree that knocking it down is the wrong approach but I am not willing to consider it violence.
Doug the Dem
(1,297 posts)We're talking civil disobedience here, something this country needs more of!
Orrex
(63,085 posts)CurtEastPoint
(18,550 posts)mountain grammy
(26,571 posts)Judi Lynn
(160,217 posts)Shell_Seas
(3,319 posts)Unless they throw the book at him (in Arkansas, they might), hopefully he'll get a good attorney.
appal_jack
(3,813 posts)A good lawyer could argue 'necessity,' as the state seems absolutely committed to willfully violating the 1st Amendment here.
I wish I could contribute a few $$$, but I'm the brokest I have been in ~20 years.
-app
Bradical79
(4,490 posts)Apparently he does have very serious mental health problems and has been in a mental health facility before.
Orrex
(63,085 posts)He moves in mysterious ways, etc.
SkyDaddy7
(6,045 posts)However, it seems like they only play that card when it works to their benefit or if they need to excuse God for a natural disaster. They will just blame this on whoever did it was guided by, could it be...SATAN!?!?
haele
(12,581 posts)"Thou shalt have no graven images?"
It's a supposed representative of the "Word of GaWD" - and it's just the draft 10 Commandments (not the final GaWD approved version, BTW). Nor is it the final representation of the Laws of Gawd Jesus supposedly said was most important to follow - because most of these "10 Commandments" BS memorials always forget the final "And above all, Love thy Neighbor as You would Yourself" Commandment.
(So, they really should have either 6 or 11 Commandments if they're supposedly devout Christians, right?)
It's all highly flawed and an obvious show of hypocritical Vanity - the "I'm more GaWDly than you" crap.
...And if I remember the various Sunday Schools I went to just because my friends did correctly, "GaWD" doesn't like the holy Name spoken, not to mention taken in vain, and mis-representing the final GaWDly words and decisions is serious fire and brimstone blasphemy.
Haele
logosoco
(3,208 posts)Doesn't look like it was made very well, either. Almost like they knew it was not meant to last long!
PaulRevere08
(449 posts)What would the prosecution try to comeback with?
- You're a liar, god does not speak to people
- You're insane if you hear voices in your head that you think are god
- You can;t break the law even if you think god wants you too
Maraya1969
(22,441 posts)Augiedog
(2,541 posts)Augiedog
(2,541 posts)Perseus
(4,341 posts)Best post
Kleveland
(1,257 posts)The 9th being the most flagrant.
A fine bunch of "Christians" they are.
In God we trust indeed!
More like minions of the Antichrist!
shenmue
(38,501 posts)Achilleaze
(15,543 posts)Girard442
(6,059 posts)I'm trying to imagine the massive mental turmoil among the fundies if it had been and our automotive vandal had destroyed BOTH structures.
Cryptoad
(8,254 posts)made the 10 commandments disappear off the Capitol grounds back in 2012........
Igel
(35,197 posts)It's just a thing. At least the plinth with the 10 words carved on it said things like "don't kill" and doesn't consume energy or require cutting down a tree.
rgbecker
(4,806 posts)With all the crap coming from Washington and our doofus so-called president I usually dread my morning coffee and time to catch up on the news. This story shows there is still a reason to get up in the morning.
Archae
(46,262 posts)The guy who hit it was either:
1. Certifiably nuts
2. Drunk or stoned out of his gourd
3. Absolutely stupid, if only for the damage to his own vehicle
Now, may I make a suggestion to Arkansas' "holier than thou" bunch?
Give it up.
Before you end up looking as stupid as that driver.
MousePlayingDaffodil
(748 posts)The perpetrator, now arrested, has a history with this sort of thing.
"The Tulsa World reported in 2015 that a letter from Reed claimed he was inspired by 'a Dracula movie, thinking Michael Jacksons spirit was in meat, believing he was the incarnation of an occult leader and attempting to contact Lucifers high priestess he called Gwyneth Paltrow.' He also made threats against then-President Obama, set money on fire and spit on pictures in a federal building."
http://www.koco.com/article/ten-commandments-monument-installed-at-arkansas-capitol/10227654
* * * *
I don't think that such a "monument" should have been established on the courthouse grounds, by I wouldn't myself want to be seen as aligned with someone like this.
pangaia
(24,324 posts)politicat
(9,808 posts)I hope this gets him the care he needs.
Am also relieved that my Bible Belt non-theist friends are not going to take the heat for this one.
(In general, nontheists have lawyers who enjoy a challenge. We prefer to use the courts instead of our trucks. If nothing else, lawyers are a renewable resource. Trucks aren't.)
HopeAgain
(4,407 posts)Guy was going to get arrested again for something, might as well protect our First Amendment freedoms in the process. Unfortunately the righties will be all over this and fake news it into being an attack against religion by the liberals...
WhoWoodaKnew
(847 posts)just more fuel for the crazy CEC to use for decades.
Nash Teeth
(57 posts)spooky3
(34,302 posts)rzemanfl
(29,540 posts)Noodleboy13
(422 posts)Did an actual spittake.
Welcome to DU
peace,
Noodleboy
Judi Lynn
(160,217 posts)HAB911
(8,811 posts)keithbvadu2
(36,367 posts)HAB911
(8,811 posts)Igel
(35,197 posts)Normal life in LA with all the crazy drivers.
Or Houston.
Or Phoenix.
Gamecock Lefty
(698 posts)I always like when local municipalities promote great works of fiction!
Juliusseizure
(562 posts)Driver Michael Reed yelled "freedom" and ran into it. [link:http://www.dailymail.co.uk/video/news/video-1492041/Driver-shouting-Freedom-crashes-Ten-Commandments-monument.html|
BruceWane
(345 posts)Braveheart FTW!
paleotn
(17,781 posts)Progressive dog
(6,862 posts)I'm not sorry to see it go.
sinkingfeeling
(51,276 posts)keithbvadu2
(36,367 posts)jmowreader
(50,452 posts)...that it's the one which doesn't know "Thou shalt not make for yourself any graven images" means "don't make a concrete Ten Commandments monument and put it in front of your state capitol."
karynnj
(59,475 posts)The right way to handle it was via the courts. This is something that will then be flung at the left as something we did. I guess he can claim that he was reenacting Moses destroying the first set of tablets because he saw the Jews worshipping a golden calf.
jmowreader
(50,452 posts)The religion they followed had a very long list of transgressions complete with the kind of animal you had to slaughter to apologize for each one. I feel confident in saying this practice is ripe for abuse: it would have been VERY easy for someone who wanted your land without paying for it to run you out of town by making up enough "sins" about you that you leave town before your entire herd winds up as burnt offerings.
By building a calf statue, they could have modified this hideous religion enough to get rid of the abuses. But no, that's not good enough; we gotta kill all your animals to make you atone for your misdeeds.
MuseRider
(34,058 posts)will be surrounded by iron fencing and gun turrets.
It isn't like they understand these commandments are for them too, killing in the name of their religion seems to be as common as breathing.
Bayard
(21,805 posts)It's not like any Rethugs follow those commandments anyway.
RussBLib
(8,984 posts)Perfect!
tclambert
(11,080 posts)1. Id Really Rather You Didnt Act Like a Sanctimonious Holier-Than-Thou Ass When Describing My Noodly Goodness. If Some People Dont Believe In Me, Thats Okay. Really, Im Not That Vain. Besides, This Isnt About Them So Dont Change The Subject.
2. Id Really Rather You Didnt Use My Existence As A Means To Oppress, Subjugate, Punish, Eviscerate, And/Or, You Know, Be Mean To Others. I Dont Require Sacrifices, And Purity Is For Drinking Water, Not People.
3. Id Really Rather You Didnt Judge People For The Way They Look, Or How They Dress, Or The Way They Talk, Or, Well, Just Play Nice, Okay? Oh, And Get This In Your Thick Heads: Woman = Person. Man = Person. Samey Samey. One Is Not Better Than The Other, Unless Were Talking About Fashion And Im Sorry, But I Gave That To Women And Some Guys Who Know The Difference Between Teal and Fuchsia.
4. Id Really Rather You Didnt Indulge In Conduct That Offends Yourself, Or Your Willing, Consenting Partner Of Legal Age AND Mental Maturity. As For Anyone Who Might Object, I Think The Expression Is Go F*** Yourself, Unless They Find That Offensive In Which Case They Can Turn Off the TV For Once And Go For A Walk For A Change.
5. Id Really Rather You Didnt Challenge The Bigoted, Misogynist, Hateful Ideas Of Others On An Empty Stomach. Eat, Then Go After The B*******.
6. Id Really Rather You Didnt Build Multimillion-Dollar Churches/Temples/Mosques/Shrines To My Noodly Goodness When The Money Could Be Better Spent (Take Your Pick):1. Ending Poverty 2. Curing Diseases 3. Living In Peace, Loving With Passion, And Lowering The Cost Of Cable I Might be a Complex-Carbohydrate Omniscient Being, But I Enjoy The Simple Things In Life. I Ought To Know. I AM the Creator.
7. Id Really Rather You Didnt Go Around Telling People I Talk To You. Youre Not That Interesting. Get Over Yourself. And I Told You To Love Your Fellow Man, Cant You Take A Hint?
8. Id Really Rather You Didnt Do Unto Others As You Would Have Them Do Unto You If You Are Into, Um, Stuff That Uses A Lot of Leather/Lubricant/Las Vegas. If the Other Person Is Into It, However (Pursuant To #4), Then Have At It, Take Pictures, And For The Love Of Mike, Wear a CONDOM! Honestly, Its A Piece of Rubber. If I Didnt Want It To Feel Good When You Did It I Would Have Added Spikes, Or Something.
niyad
(112,434 posts)the smiles!!
Loryn
(941 posts)njhoneybadger
(3,910 posts)AtheistCrusader
(33,982 posts)Prescott v. Oklahoma Capitol Preservation Commission, 2015 OK 54 (Okla. 2015)
Green v. Haskell County Board of Commissioners, (10th Cir. 2009)
McCreary County v. ACLU of Kentucky, 545 U.S. 844 (2005)
Glassroth v. Moore, CV-01-T-1268-N, 229 F. Supp. 2d 1290 (M.D. Ala. 2002)
Stone v. Graham, 449 U.S. 39 (1980)
I need to buy this man a beer.
Vogon_Glory
(9,085 posts)Some Catholic and Orthodox churches can breathe a sigh of relief that he didn't go after their statuary or icons.
Thunderbeast
(3,383 posts)It will be Obama's fault.
Watch FOX for details.
left-of-center2012
(34,195 posts)Snake Plissken
(4,103 posts)Trump and the GOP controlled Congress have ensured that Michael Tate Reed's 2nd Amendment rights will not be violated due to his mental instability, so we can all breathe a sigh of relief knowing he can still purchase as many firearms and as much ammo as he desires
http://www.rawstory.com/2017/06/bonkers-video-shows-repeat-offender-destroying-arkansas-brand-new-10-commandments-monument/?comments=disqus
yellowcanine
(35,692 posts)jamesatemple
(342 posts)I don't particularly mind other folks making some sort of public presentation of their philosophy, beliefs, myths, and superstitions. But only under the condition that any and all others have the opportunity and the right, with no reservation, to express their sentiments in the same public forum. And that none of those presentations can be funded by anything other than private donations of labor and monies. I'm just guessin' that the twentieth or so application for a spot to display some edifice to ignorance would probably elicit the command, "Oh, Jeez. Just get rid of all that shit." I reckon old Texans think a bit differently than "normal" folks.
Response to Eugene (Original post)
haele This message was self-deleted by its author.
Flaleftist
(3,473 posts)I'll donate to anyone who does this.
oswaldactedalone
(3,489 posts)Suck it Fundies!
qwlauren35
(6,112 posts)that with all of the important issues in play from health care to global warming to police brutality to the new War on Drugs, there is all of this whooping, hollering and jumping for joy over an act of vandalism. That monument wasn't hurting anyone. It wasn't oppressing anyone. And if anyone was actually offended, that's a personal choice.
And people offering to pay for the defense lawyers of someone who clearly broke the law and committed an act of vandalism, that's just sad.
Please consider giving your money to more worthy causes.
TomSlick
(11,034 posts)that this guy is guilty of anything. The suggestion is that he has a long history of mental illness.
That being said, if the guy is mentally responsible, then we have a long and storied history of civil disobedience in this country. This particular act of civil disobedience didn't hurt anyone and (assuming mental competence) was in protection of the First Amendment - a noble goal. I am not convinced that vandalism is an appropriate response to the abomination of erecting an idol on the State Capitol grounds. I think recourse to the Courts would have been far superior - if nothing else, the State would incur some attorney's fees (attorney's fees being a great and noble good).
Nevertheless, if DUers support this act of civil disobedience, contributing to his defense seems appropriate. If this guy is competent and if he really wants to make his point, he needs to put up a good defense with a lot of press coverage.
I'm betting the Arkansas ACLU could make a recommendation for a good criminal defense lawyer. Failing that, there's arkansasfindalawyer.com, the Arkansas Bar Association website for finding lawyers.
qwlauren35
(6,112 posts)who don't know exactly what the First Amendment says.
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
It says nothing about separation of church and state. That's a concept that some of the founding fathers believed in, but it was not codified into law. It's not in the Constitution, it's not in the Bill of Rights. Now some people INTERPRET the Bill of Rights to mean Separation of Church and State, but that is an interpretation.
According to the Bill of Rights, anyone can establish a religion, and the government cannot contest it, or punish those who follow it. But it does not say "the government can't put up a statue of the Ten Commandments on the Capitol lawn". It's just not there. Putting up that statue doesn't stop anyone from establishing a religion of their own. Perhaps, some people interpret it as the government endorsing a religion. But is that any different from "In God We Trust" on our pennies, or "under God" in our Pledge of Allegiance. The majority of Americans in our nation are of either Jewish, or Christian/Catholic backgrounds. It does not surprise me that they feel under attack when they choose to express their beliefs and get shut down. It contradicts Freedom of Speech, or the right to peaceably assemble.
So. I am still not convinced that Separation of Church and State, and specifically defending someone who vandalizes a statue - no matter where it is - is up there with Climate Change, Police Brutality and Health Care.
I would add - I am pro-abortion, and I detest the pro-life people who stand outside of clinics and harrass those who need to get an abortion. But if some pro-choice lunatic let go and punched a pro-life person in the face, I'm not going to pay for his or her defense. If the pro-life people erected a giant statue of a fetus, I'm not going to defend someone who takes it upon his/herself to burn it to the ground. Violence is violence. Vandalism is vandalism. And please, if you're going to compare sitting at lunch counters or marching through a town or going on a hunger strike with an act of vandalism, then your definition of civil disobedience needs some fine tuning.
TomSlick
(11,034 posts)The First Amendment prohibits the government from establishing a religion - that is making it the official state religion. For example, the Church of England is an "established" Church - it is the official church of England. The First Amendment was in reaction to the "established" churches of Europe and some of the American colonies.
A couple hundred years of SCOTUS decisions has taken the establishment clause to prohibit the government from favoring one religion (or denomination) over another (or none). For a good discussion of establishment history in the U.S., see https://www.americanbar.org/groups/public_education/initiatives_awards/students_in_action/colonial.html.
When the Arkansas General Assembly authorized the erection of the version of the Ten Commandments favored by State Senator Rapert, it favored his particular version of Protestant Christianity - it "established" that religion.
At this point, I hesitate to predict what SCOTUS will do on anything. I worry that most of what I learned about constitutional law is likely to become obsolete. However, I am reasonably certain that the federal courts in Arkansas and the Eighth Circuit would find the erection of Senator Rapert's idol on the State Capitol grounds to be unconstitutional. My assumption has been that the ACLU was waiting for the money to be spent on the monument before filing the inevitable law suit.
qwlauren35
(6,112 posts)I can deal with "unconstitutional" based on Supreme Court interpretation.
But OFFENSIVE???
The words that are being used to describe this monument truly confound me. The idea that vandalism is "civil disobedience", well, maybe that term is not the same as "passive resistance", but since it was not passive, I cannot see how anyone can be proud of it. Win by suit. Take it up the chain. Have it taken down in such a way that it can't be re-erected. But knocking it over with a car? That's just stupid. Anyone who defends it, goes down a slippery slope. How would you feel if someone drove a car into the National Vietnam Veterans Memorial just because they didn't believe in the war? That's vandalism. If they knocked over the statue of Martin Luther King because they believed that King was an agitator who got undue recognition? That's vandalism.
And now:
One group will send money to defend the perpetrator.
Another group will send money to build another statue.
Money that could have gone to fighting so many worthy causes. But instead, going to justify a crime.
I need to let this go. It really, really, really bothers me. But I have to let it go.
TomSlick
(11,034 posts)Sen. Rapert and his ilk think that God is so small and powerless that he needs the help of the State of Arkansas - that cannot even maintain its own roads - in order to advance his message. Moreover, I hold to the "old-school" Baptist tradition that insisted on a strict separation of church and state because of the history of Baptists as "dissenting congregations" that suffered under an established Congregational Church in the American colonies. From the outside, Baptists saw that the government will inevitably take over an established Church and make it loose its moral authority.
When I see fundamentalist protestants trying to get more and more support from the state they endanger not only other religious traditions (and those with no faith) but also themselves. So yes, it's offensive.
I do not approve of vandalism as a form of civil disobedience. It does, however, have a tradition in this country - e.g. The Boston Tea Party.
6000eliot
(5,643 posts)Missn-Hitch
(1,383 posts)Personal choice? Offended? IMO, this is a principle. A very important one. I see what they are up to. The Kentucky bible classes, these monuments. There will be more of this and when Pence becomes President, well - I suspect you know where this is going.
Yes, I certainly do choose offense.
leftyladyfrommo
(18,816 posts)Those monuments have never bothered me. If people enjoy them, fine.
Destroying one like that is such a petty act.
Talk to me about refunding Planned Parenthood . Or destroying our national park's.
RhodeIslandOne
(5,042 posts)Lololol
dalton99a
(81,068 posts)Plentiful, easy to replace. Idiots