Ten Commandments case. [View All]

[Nicholas D Wolfwood]

http://www.cnn.com/2005/LAW/03/02/scotus.ten.commandments.ap/index.html
Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia on Wednesday challenged people seeking to ban displays of the Ten Commandments on government property, noting legislative proclamations invoking God's name are permissible.

"I don't see why the one is good and the other is bad," Scalia said from the bench as the high court waded through oral arguments embracing the legal thicket of church-vs.-state issues.
----snip---

I'll take that question for you. Invoking the vague and non-specific notion of "God" does not endorse any specific religion. In fact, I'd say every religion has a concept of "God", though the terms may be different. However, the Ten Commandments is a very specific invocation. It is quite specific, in the context in question, to Judaic and Christian teaching. Although Islam has references to the messages of the Ten Commandments, the Quran does not recognize them specifically as given to Moses and as questioned in this case. Certainly, none of the Eastern religions do either. Therefore, by displaying the Ten Commandments on public property, that is unquestionably tantamount to a government endorsement of a specific religion, and thus violates a separation of church and state.

Any comments or additions?