« Google Goodies | Main | Why does Sandra day O�Connor hate America? »
June 29, 2005
Statuary Law
I see the Supreme Court has made yet another decision on the 10 commandments. I haven’t read it, I can’t really comment on it per se. But my training (so far) has been political theory, not legal scholarship. If you want that, take a look at Terminus, or The Talking Dog...
I admit to being of mixed mind about public displays of the Big 10. In the strictly philosophical sense, I am outraged, but in the actual personal sense, I don’t care a bit. Let me explain...
On the one hand
We have the government displaying religious iconography. Not only is it religious iconography, but it is iconography which is personally significant to a large segment of the population. Indeed, by and large it is being displayed precisely because it is significant to many people. This seems like an issue where the State is taking sides in a religious dispute-- something which is a big no-no...
On occasion, these icons try to sneak onto public grounds under the idea that they are an important part of our legal tradition, said legal tradition deriving from Judeo-Christian believes. This is utter nonsense. We do not have a Judeo-Christian-derived legal system; indeed, I am not sure that “Judeo-Christian” has any meaning whatsoever...
Every sect of both Judaism and Christianity have wildly different interpretations of what their book(s)(!) mean, with the Jews at least having the grace to admit that god will have to sort it all out when he gets around to it. Both groups have internal disputes over which basic Laws are still in effect-- they even differ as to which of Laws comprise the 10 commandments-- some Christians going so far as to say that Jesus replaced the 10 commandments with a mere 2...
Leaving the Judeo-Christian world, there is the fact that a good 10-20% of America simply doesn’t believe that these commandments are from God, or even that they are a good idea intrinsically. Not having graven images is kind of a big thing, though the meaning of this term is up for grabs: Islam takes this to mean that there can be no non-holy art; Jehovah’s Witnesses believe that a graven image is anything holy. Another commandment that may not be such a good idea is being forced to take a day off to worship god-- difficult for the atheists and football fans among us...
When the State allows statues of the 10 commandments, it takes sides on these disputes. If the 30 years war taught us anything, it taught us that religion is far too powerful for the state to take sides on. People will kill-- and die-- for their religious believes. Killing and dying over matters of politics are inimical to rational discussion of the Public Good...
On the other hand...
It’s just a statue. You know? I have more than likely walked past dozens of such and never noticed them. I certainly wouldn’t have noticed the Supreme Court building’s picture of Moses receiving the tablets had the tour guide not pointed it out to me. When all is said and done the statues are only important to those who make a big deal about them as long as they are ignorable, they should be ignored...
Posted by Andrew at June 29, 2005 12:14 AM
Trackback Pings
TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.punningpundit.com/cgi-bin/mt/mt-tb.cgi/734
Comments
I am somewhat skeptical of the notion of there being any such thing as "judeo-christian tradition." Yes there are some very broad values that most Christians and Jews share, and those values probably were generally kept in place by the uneasy agreement between various religious groups. But when you look at what those shared values mostly are--rule of law, respect for rights, etc.--they all look rather a lot like classical values shared by the Greeks and Romans and a lot of other religious groups.
It is also correct to note that "the 10 commandments" actually seem to number something like 8-14 commandments, depending on which version you're looking at and who's doing the counting.
All that aside: the truth of the matter is that for most of human history there was no clear separation of religion and state, and the broad tradition of law we come from has always included religious elements and trappings. Such things are also part of history, part of the long build up over thousands of years that has led to what we have today.
The notion that the 10 commandments on a courthouse wall is "establishment of a religion" is horse manure. It is not. Neither for that matter is a crucifix or a star of david or a crescent or whatever. That's not "establishment of a religion." It's a popular symbol that happens to have a religious basis.
The more the courts attempt to forcibly remove such things, the more a majority of Americans comes to feel that their own government is not just separate from their faith, but INIMICALLY HOSTILE TO IT. And that is definitely not a good thing.
Such strained interpretations of "establishment of a religion" help no one that I can see.
Posted by: Dean Esmay at June 29, 2005 10:56 AM