Posted on 06/22/2005 8:55:03 PM PDT by Thinkin' Gal
Wed Jun 22,12:03 PM ET
WASHINGTON (AFP) - The US political, religious and legal establishments are braced for two critical Supreme Court rulings on the Ten Commandments, weighing heavily on the separation of church and state.
The decision, expected as early as Thursday, could inflame conservative evangelical groups or opposing civil liberties lobbies, and thrust the court squarely into partisan politics.
And both sides of the divide will use whatever judgment day brings in the two cases to whip up partisans ahead of a looming battle over what could be imminent vacancies on the court bench.
Each case is born out of the religious and cultural struggle raging in modern America between radical evangelicals and advocates of the secular state.
The conservative religious right, a strong backer of
President George W. Bush, argues that the country is a "Christian" state and decry attempts to deny that heritage.
Civil liberties advocates however fear a tide of evangelical Christianity is eroding the politically sacred separation of church and state, and endangering the principle that all Americans, whatever their religion, are created equal.
The more contentious question before the court, legal experts say, is a challenge to the display of framed copies in two Kentucky courthouses of the Ten Commandments, which Christians and Jews believe God handed to Moses on Mount Sinai.
"This case will answer whether or not the government may hew to a particular religious viewpoint and chose Christianity because there have been Christians in our heritage," said Marci Hamilton of the Benjamin N. Cardozo School of Law, Yeshiva University.
"Or whether the Supreme Court is going to take the heat, which it is going to get, and say there are some circumstances where the government cannot post the Ten Commandments despite their importance in our history and they must make it clear that every citizen is a citizen that is equal in the eyes of the law."
The second case surrounds the legality of a stone monument inscribed with the commandments and other religious symbols on the grounds of the Texas state legislature.
This may be easier to resolve than the Kentucky situation, as the monument was placed in a display of other historical monuments and was a private donation.
Therefore, justices could stake out a compromise position and argue that the display was not necessarily endorsed by the Texas state government, allowing it to fall within constitutional bounds.
The US Constitution's first amendment establishes the principle of separation of church and state, but how this should be interpreted remains unclear following numerous contradictory decisions by lower courts.
Justices may find a more delicate tightrope in the Kentucky case, as it was the government of McCreary County which put a plaque of the Ten Commandments in a courthouse, and defended the display through the courts.
It would be hard to argue therefore that the state government did not endorse the display, prompting some experts to believe the Supreme Court may come up with a split judgment on the Texas and Kentucky cases.
Differences over the cases were clear when the court took up the questions in March.
Appearing to endorse the displays, conservative justice
Antonin Scalia called them "the symbol that government derives its authority from God."
"I see nothing wrong with the government reflecting that. We're a tolerant society," Scalia said.
Liberal justice Stephen Breyer however countered that, although the US is a highly religious country, "we are also committed to secularism."
I'd rather NOT live next door to someone who believes murder is wrong ONLY because "God" said so. What if they wake up tomorrow and find they've received a special message from God telling them it's okay to kill and it's okay to steal? What is to stop them at that point? They've received permission from on high.
I am quite worried about how the court will rule after today's case.
We need BOTH Kennedy and O'Conner to win, and that seems to be very hard to get.
I also am worried they will rule next week to overturn the Betamax decision, ending your right to use VCR's etc. to tape tv etc. when they announce their file sharing ruling.
Those who abuse and uphold the abuse of eminent domain likely would not be keen on the public display of Commandment X, "Thou shalt not covet thy neighbour's house..."
Jezebel is alive and well and dancing on Naboth's grave (and vineyard).
Not likely as making a copy for private use has been ruled legal on numerous occasions. If you start giving it out or selling it then you run afoul of the law.
Jezebel seizes the vineyard (to which I add) Again!
How should the First Amendment be interpreted? I say let's interpret it exactly as it was written over 200 years ago:
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof;
I don't expect a favorable ruling by the Black Kings.
Were those ten points a quote of Pastor Evans? Been looking for the source. FRegards....
Outstanding artwork there! Sure beats the NEA. FRegards....
"Civil liberties advocates however fear a tide of evangelical Christianity is eroding the politically sacred separation of church and state, and endangering the principle that all Americans, whatever their religion, are created equal."
Nothing but liberal double speak.
How can you erode something that never existed.
This is no different than a budget increase of 3% when you wanted 10% being called a cut.
"If they do away with - Thou shalt not kill - isn't that grounds for overturning ever murder conviction in the country? What will law be based on, what feels good now?"
If you are destroying a threat to innocent life, you are saving lives. Keeping that threat around is just plain foolish. There's always the chance of escape, and even more likely, a chance the looney leftist judges will find an excuse to let a murderer or a bunch of murderers free.
Ironically, most of those who oppose the death penalty for murderers support killing innocent babies.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.