Should Religious Symbols be Displayed on Public Property?

Recommend (1) Comments (0)

According to the Bible, God gave the Ten Commandments to Moses, to serve as a summary statement of the theological, ethical, and moral obligations the Israelites were to fulfill. They have been held in high regard by both Jews and Christians and generally respected by many other people as well. Representations of the Commandments have often appeared in schools, courthouses, and other public spaces. Given the growing diversity of American life, those who oppose the public display of religious symbols have pointed out that several of the Ten Commandments specifically require adherence to Jewish and Christian beliefs: No other gods before the god of Israel, no graven images, taking the name of God in vain, keeping the Sabbath. They contend that a secular state, neutral among religions and between religion and non-religion, should not appear to endorse Judaism (and, by extension, Christianity) by displaying the Ten Commandments.

In general, the courts have agreed with the objectors, though without perfect consistency. In 2005, the Supreme Court ruled that county courthouses in Kentucky could not hang copies of the Commandments on their walls, but that a monument to the Ten Commandments could be allowed to stand on the grounds of the Texas capitol, mainly because it stands among numerous other monuments and markers. The apparent contradictory rulings were both decided by a 5-4 vote.

In perhaps the most famous Ten Commandments case, Roy Moore, Chief Justice of the Alabama Supreme Court, commissioned a 5300-pound granite monument representing the Ten Commandments and had it installed, under cover of darkness, in the rotunda of the state judicial building. After he refused a U.S. District Judge's order to remove it, eight associate judges of the Alabama Supreme Court overruled him. Despite angry and anguished protest by a large gathering, the monument was removed. Moore was forced off the court, but became a hero to many. Counting on the popularity his unconstitutional behavior had created, he ran for governor in 2006 but was handily defeated in the Republican primary.

Many Christians and perhaps some Jews have been troubled by Court decisions that the Ten Commandments should not be displayed in public schools or in other public settings, at least not in a singular fashion that implies government approval of their content. But those decisions are appropriate. Some American schoolchildren and their parents do have other gods before the god of Israel; some Americans make and worship graven images; some, including most Christians, do not observe the Sabbath. Should the state try to push any such explicitly religious belief or practice on those who do not share them? The Framers of the Constitution decided it should not. It was a wise decision.

Stealing, murder, and perjury are the only commandments upheld in our laws, and they appear in the legal and moral codes of virtually every known culture. Bearing false witness is forbidden in court, but not on grocery store newsstands. Honoring father and mother is a fine idea, but not required. And if we outlawed coveting, our financial system might collapse.

Americans United, a major advocate of church-state separation, has observed that "America is religiously diverse. The United States is home to nearly 2,000 different religions, traditions, denominations and sects. While many of these groups revere the Ten Commandments, many do not. If government officials put up the Decalogue, will they also post the Five Pillars of Islam, the Four Noble Truths of Buddhism, the Wiccan Rede and the Affirmations of Humanism?" This is not simply a rhetorical question. The 2008-2009 session of the U.S. Supreme Court is considering a case in which the Summum Church in Utah wants to erect a monument containing the Seven Aphorisms of the Summum religion in a park that contains a monument to the Ten Commandments. I agree with AU’s conclusion: "Government should never play favorites when it comes to religion."