As you no doubt know by now, the Supreme Court split Monday on the display of the Ten Commandments on government property. It ruled in favor of a display in Texas, and against two in Kentucky. This is roughly what I expected (although I expected O’Connor and not Breyer to be the swing vote).

I haven’t read the rulings in detail yet (someone have a link?) but my understanding is that they basically said that such displays need to be judged on a case-by-case basis. Which sends a clear message to people who want to post the commandments: keep trying. The rulings also talk a lot about the context of such displays, basically saying that you have to do a good job pretending to have some non-religious purpose for placing such monuments. That’s silly, however, because everyone knows that it’s religious in nature. In fact, if it weren’t, it never would have gotten as far as the Supreme Court in the first place!

If I were a one-man Supreme Court, I would rule that existing displays must be judged on a case-by-case basis based on their historical context, but new displays are unconstitutional. This latter requirement precisely because everyone knows exactly why new displays are being put up. You want to post the Commandments? Feel free to do so at your churches and your homes. Heck, you can even lease billboard space and take out newspaper ads if you want, and nobody can stop you. No, the whole reason people want to post the Commandments at courthouses, schools, etc., is precisely because such displays give the appearance of state endorsement. If not for that, what would be the point? (And why else would the same people who support such postings oppose posting, say, the Five Pillars of Islam? Same reason. It would send a message that in the state’s eye, Islam is on the same level as the Judeo/Christian tradition.) [Note: By "displays" here, I mean any religious displays that are either (a) on government land; or (b) supported in any way by taxpayer dollars.]

I do, however, have a few questions:

  1. Doesn’t it bother some Christians, who are supposed to be not fond of lying, hypocrisy, and deceit, that some among their ranks are willing to make disingenuous statements about their intentions in order to get such monuments placed?
  2. What’s all the fuss over the Ten Commandments, anyway? Is it because the Charlton Heston movie — which bears almost no resemblance to the Bible, by the way — made them cool? Shouldn’t Christians be more interested in the Two Commandments?
  3. And why is it that some Christians feel the need to slap symbols of their faith all over everything, including government property? Is it insecurity? Are they that bothered by the fact that people still exist, even in their own neighborhoods, who don’t share their beliefs? What?
  4. Why doesn’t anyone ever try posting the other Ten Commandments (which, by the way, are the only ones the Bible explicitly refers to as the “Ten Commandments”)?
  5. Why doesn’t the fiscal responsibility wing of the GOP oppose such displays? Even if you think there’s no harm done by such displays, wouldn’t this at best constitute government waste?

I also have a few questions/comments for those who tout the idea that our legal code is somehow based on the Ten Commandments:

  1. Which law prohibits holding any God over the God of Exodus?
  2. Which law prevents idol worship?
  3. Which law prohibits taking the Lord’s name in vain?
  4. Should we really outlaw working on the Sabbath? And what day is the Sabbath, anyway? Sunday, like most Christians claim? Or Saturday, like the Jews and Seventh Day Adventists claim?
  5. I know the GOP likes “family values,” but would they really make it a crime to dishonor your parents?
  6. OK, murder I’ll give you.
  7. What exactly is adultery, anyway? You think the War on Drugs needlessly fills prisons, try criminalizing adultery (and enforcing it) and see what happens to our prison populations. There’d be more people in prison than out…
  8. Stealing I’ll give you, too.
  9. Ditto for perjury.
  10. Do Republicans really think that the tenth commandment should be codified into law? Our entire economy is based on people coveting stuff.

So if my count is correct, out of Ten Commandments, only three (or at best four, if you include our somewhat limited prohibitions on adultery) are currently illegal. And you’d be hard-pressed to find a non-Judeo/Christian society that hasn’t criminalized those few…

UPDATE: Points to Joe, an evangelical Christian who argues that we should NOT be worrying ourselves about Commandments displays. He suggests Christians should try to live by the Commandments instead of obsessing about posting them, and points out that they’re breaking two Commandments in their zeal to put them up:

Unfortunately, too many Christians are more concerned about winning a symbolic victory involving the Decalogue than they are in obeying the actual commandments. Because the only displays that are considered constitutional are those that have been denatured of their religious connotations, Christians are agreeing that the “god” in the text does not necessarily have to be the God of our faith. But accepting that claim is to violate the very first commandment. Are we willing to put a “graven image” before allegiance to the truth?