How the Supreme Court rules on this one will say volumes about the culture of America. The Ten commandments are appropriate in all public settings as a fundamental foundation of our society, our Constitution, and our historical underpinnings as a Christian country. If the Court does not uphold their display in public/government owned places, we must move to appoint Supreme Court justices who support these principles. Those who oppose such displays are inimical to the best interests of a moral society.
Update: More this morning, 3/2/05, from NPR on the Ten Commandments case before the Supreme Court
Can't wait for the Times' editorial on this one.
"At the same event, Jay Sekulow, chief counsel of the American Center for Law and Justice, a law firm established by the Rev. Pat Robertson that litigates for evangelicals and other religious communities, offered a different perspective. The Ten Commandments have acquired secular as well as religious meaning, he said, and have come to be 'uniquely symbolic of law.'"
2 comments:
You are here suggesting that the Supreme Court should make a cultural ruling instead of a legal ruling. Talk about judicial activism.
The Constitution as the underpinning of our legal framework was based on an affirmation by the framers that a Supreme Being exists. Further, America's Constitution was formed on a Judeo-Christian system of morals and belief, not least of which was Man's free will. The Ten Commandments are merely a basic expression of some of the rules for living that form our Western legal framework. Perhaps some find objectionable what the Commandments themselves require of us. That's not a legal issue.
Their public display has been part of the American tradition since the founding. The Court agreeing to continue their display is not judicial activism. It is affirming our heritage and some, but not all, of the fundamental principles of morality on which our society holds together.
Post a Comment