Moses Image (With 10 Commandments) Adorns U.S. Supreme Court Building

Self ^ | 8/20/2003 | Angkor

[angkor]

With regard to today's refusal to hear the case against Alabama Chief Justice Roy Moore, the court has at least delayed a legal decision about defacing its own hallowed halls.

It is likely well-known to the justices that the East Pediment of the Supreme Court showcases the image of Moses bearing the two tablets upon which the 10 Commandments are enscribed. In fact, Moses is front and center and indeed the largest figure in the entire sculpture.

Ironically, the Chief Justice's offices are immediately behind this portico.

Moses center stage on the USSC East Pediment, brandishing his illegal "Ten Commandments."

The sculpture, "Justice the Guardian of Liberty" by Herman McNeil contains the following elements (in McNeil's own words):

Law as an element of civilization was normally and naturally derived or inherited in this country from former civilizations. The “Eastern Pediment” of the Supreme Court Building suggests therefore the treatment of such fundamental laws and precepts as are derived from the East. Moses, Confucius and Solon are chosen as representing three great civilizations and form the central group of this Pediment. Flanking this central group— left — is the symbolical figure bearing the means of enforcing the law. On the right a group tempering justice with mercy, allegorically treated. The “Youth” is brought into both these groups to suggest the “Carrying on” of civilization through the knowledge imbibed of right and wrong. The next two figures with shields; Left — The settlement of disputes between states through enlightened judgment. Right — Maritime and other large functions of the Supreme Court in protection of the United States. The last figures: Left — Study and pondering of judgments. Right — A tribute to the fundamental and supreme character of this Court. Finale — The fable of the Tortoise and the Hare.

[RonF]

Do you pull this out of a hat?

No, I pulled it from here and here. Solon subscribed to the classical religion of Greece, but that has nothing to do with his place in history. Said place was from writing laws for Athens. On what basis do you see Solon as a religious figure? I didn't see anything to merit that in the Google search you suggested.

[RonF]

If you see Solon as a religious figure, such as Mohammed or Moses, perhaps you have a personal definition of religious.

[cornelis]

Did you Google Solon + Zeus?

[cornelis]

Solon subscribed to the classical religion of Greece

Well, that settles that then.

[MHT]

Oops--Better tear down that piece of classical architecture and replace it with a typical government building, an unaesthetic modern "temple" of steel and concrete.

Would love to hear Anne Coulter's opinion on this act of treason, threatening the core of the law itself.

[wardaddy]

wow Byron ....that was mean...lol

[tophat9000]

So this order violates equal protection under the 14th amendment... ... If the U.S. Supreme Court can have the ten commandments why can a state court?

[Robert_Paulson2]

Actually I am not sure Byron is actually a citizen of a free republic per se? Australia has a national religion, by law, the Christian Church eh? It is understandable how he or other socialist nations might gaze with wonder on our national repudiation of sectarian displays of specific faiths... after all, if it's good enough for a monarchist it ought to be good enough for a former colony like the USA.

Canada is this way to is it not? Neither nation Canada NOR Australia REVOLTED against the head of the Anglican Church, King George... they were GRANTED their freedom, without much real bloodshed... and their citizens have a very limited concept, it seems of how much Americans LOVE GOD, but HATE auhtorized state religions.

Canada and Australia...
Not quite the same thing as a secular republic that tolerates all religions equally now are they?

I love our cousins... but they give up their guns too easily and kow tow to a state sponsored religion, far too much for my tastes as a rebellious american yankee... in the west.

[general_re]

If the U.S. Supreme Court can have the ten commandments why can a state court?

I assume you mean "can't". Anyway, they can have the Ten Commandments. What Moore can't do is use the platform of the state to promote his own personal beliefs, and exclude other viewpoints. If he allowed other displays besides this one, this would have been resolved quickly and in his favor. But, of course, he won't do that, since that would wreck the utility of having the floor all to himself. And so down it comes...

[tpaine]

The only thing our boy 'by' has ~ever~ done on FR is play silly games & disrupt discussions.

[Southack]

"All Moore's got to do is put Confucius and Solon alongside the 10 Commandments, and he'll likely be OK. But, of course, Moore won't do that, which is why there's a problem."

But not the only problem.

Moore's opponents aren't suing him to add their own images in, but rather to supress his freedom of expression.

[cornelis]

exclude other viewpoints

They are suggesting a spot for Zeus and equal time for flash mobs.

[Southack]

"To say "There is a display of Moses with the 10 Commandments at the Supreme Court" makes it sound like a religious display. To say "There is a display of various personages all concerned with law-giving at the Supreme Court" makes a different impression entirely."

The Supreme Court itself has displayed purely religious scriptures, such as Leviticus 25:10 engraved in copper and bronze, circa 1790...

Leviticus 25:10, as incribed upon the Liberty Bell, as displayed in the U.S. Supreme Court chambers at Independence Hall, 1790.

[tpaine]

How many times must it be said?

-- Moore is not enpowered to express his 'freedom' by erecting religious monuments on state property.

[general_re]

I presume then that you will have no objection when the next justice replaces the Ten Commandments with a few suras from the Koran, suggesting submission to the will of Allah, and then informs the public that no other displays will be permitted...

[sinkspur]

Moore's opponents aren't suing him to add their own images in, but rather to supress his freedom of expression.

But they would have no case if Moore agreed to include the Hammarabic code, and Solon, and Confucius in his display.

Moore, of course, will not do this,because he believes these expressions to be inferior to Christianity, and therein lies the problem.

The state cannot prefer one religious expression over another.

[Southack]

"Moore is not enpowered to express his 'freedom' by erecting religious monuments on state property."

So he can't have a cross on his grave if he's buried in a state or federal cemetary?!

Help me out here, what is the specific law that denies Judge Moore his personal religious freedom of expression?

[cornelis]

Almost. There will also be equal time for various constitutions as well. A few moments of Draco balanced by a few moments with the Gracchi, maybe a week of ol' Charlemagne and a bit of Bismarck.

[TheOtherOne]

Moore's opponents aren't suing him to add their own images in, but rather to supress his freedom of expression.

The intentions of Moore's opponents are not the issue. His refusal to allow other images is what makes his case and argument legally distingishable from just his right to have a display. That point is not at issue, at issue is his right to display only his chosen religius symbols and exclude all others - that is what Moore is fighting for. That is unAmerican

[Southack]

"The state cannot prefer one religious expression over another."

No, the state can't pass a law respecting one establishment of religion over another.