Thursday, March 03, 2005
These are accepted and touted rights, yes? So how can there be any argument about the placement of the ten commandments on government property? The ten commandments come from where? The Bible. Courthouses and state capitals are what? Government property. So nary the two shall meet. Or so the law says.
This article is all about the tizzy being created by folks wanting the commandments posted in the Texas State Capital. Last I checked that’d be a government building, right? Seems clear-cut to me.
Clearly reluctant to adopt a blanket ban, the current justices wrestled with the role that religious symbols should play in public life — right down to the Ten Commandments
Isn’t there already a blanket ban, in the Constitution? They should play no role. Separation of Church and state. Pretty damn clear. If you want religious symbols, go to church, a mosque, a synagogue, etc.
If an atheist walks by, he can avert his eyes," Justice Anthony Kennedy said… Banning the Texas display might "show hostility to religion," he said.
You have got to be kidding me! A Supreme Court Justice is saying this? An atheist’s ability to avert their eyes is not the point. The point is that it’s against the law to bring the two together. What about all the other religions that don’t worship a faith whose basic principles are the 10 commandments? Wouldn’t such a display be seen as hostile and un-accepting of all these other faiths? Playing favorites, if you will?
Opponents of the displays, smaller in number, waved signs reading "Keep Government and Religion Separate" and "My God Does Not Need Government Help." According to an AP-Ipsos poll, 76 percent of Americans support such displays, a fact that was not lost on some of the justices during arguments.
"It's a profoundly religious message, but it's a profoundly religious message believed in by a vast majority of the American people," Scalia said.
I didn’t realize that faith decisions were up for a vote. I coulda sworn these decisions are Constitutionally protected. Scalia is correct. It is a religious message. Which is why it should not be entertained by the country’s court system, much less the Supreme Court! The intent of this ‘message’ is to ignore a Constitutionally accepted freedom.
This debate (debacle?) continues to frustrate me. If so many people want the US to become a Christian state, then put it to a damn vote and be done with it. Quit this ‘religious equality’ pandering bullshit.
How would these folks pushing the 10 commandments on everyone react if some other religion, say Islam, wanted to post sharia in a state capitol? Or if any other religion demanded some of their tenets be put on display? Maybe atheists want a plaque posted with the simple message: “There is no god”. My guess it that there would not be this furor and indecision; the request would be denied and greeted with a speech about religious freedoms.
For all this posturing to the rest of the world about supposed freedom to worship in the US, our attempts to push Christianity on our own people must make us look silly. Many people around the world feel that the US is trying to force Christianity on them, especially in the Muslim world (thank you, Dubya). If news from abroad is accessible, it can be seen that it’s a fight being waged at home as well as abroad.
Perspective. It’s about perspective. Take a gander at a situation from a personal point of view, then try and see it from a different point of view. This is difficult, especially when concerning a belief system and way of life. But people believe differently and basic life building blocks are not universal. When trying to force one message, try to imagine being the receiver instead of giver.
Not to mention equality. This is why the separation of church and state was put into our country’s founding documents. People believe and live differently. Remaining secular helps to maintain the freedom to choose your own way of life. And that is what makes our country great. Freedom.
If we begin to lose our freedom…..