You’ve probably heard that somebody rammed a car into the Ten Commandments monument erected on government property in Arkansas.
I don’t condone destruction of property, not at all. What Mr. Reed did was wrong. But that monument should never have been there in the first place.
The Establishment Clause of the U.S. Constitution is clear–you cannot pass laws that allow an establishment of any particular religion. And a law that allows display of one religion’s monument on government property but restricts any other (i.e. a non-Christian one), IS an official endorsement of that religion, because it prioritizes it above the others.
From the Legal Information Institute website at Cornell University:
“The First Amendment’s Establishment Clause prohibits the government from making any law “respecting an establishment of religion.” This clause not only forbids the government from establishing an official religion, but also prohibits government actions that unduly favor one religion over another. It also prohibits the government from unduly preferring religion over non-religion, or non-religion over religion.”
The clause exists to preserve your religious freedom, not threaten it. You have a right to worship any way you choose, but you cannot put that into law, because then everyone is subject to it.
If you allow a religion to dictate legal matters according to its rules, then you no longer have religious freedom. You have opened the door to a takeover of whatever belief system happens to be the majority, and it may not always remain yours. I’m thinking in particular of Scientology, which has a lot of money and a lot of influence. What if Scientologists bought Congress and forced their beliefs into law? Would you like it if you were required to follow its tenets and pay for its e-meters and classes? No? I didn’t think so.
Religious freedom in the U.S. is not majority rule, and that was never its intent. The only way to be fair to everyone is to keep it separate, including prohibiting symbols of faith on government installations.
If you’re tempted to start Muslim bashing and scream about preventing Sharia law in the U.S., then perhaps you don’t know what it is. It refers to the scriptural guidelines in the Muslim religion, basically their rules for going to heaven. It’s the same thing as the Bible guidelines in Christianity.
In Muslim countries that follow a classical Sharia system, Sharia law is also the law of the country. Religious, not secular, rules dominate. Everyone has to follow them whether they like it or not. This is the system in Iran and Saudi Arabia. The Taliban also enforces it. The Islamic State takes it to extremist status, but neither they nor the classical system are the primary one. Whether it can exist in conjunction with democracy is a bone of contention in the Muslim world.
In our America, it’s fine for your church to buy land and build a sanctuary and erect a cross there, or a big stone representation of the Ten Commandments. Or a giant flowerbed in the shape of Noah’s Ark. Or a Nativity scene. That’s private property; they can do what they want with it. It’s also fine for Muslims to do the same, and Jews, and Buddhists. Its fine for anyone else who wants to have a church. The only thing they would have to worry about is zoning laws.
But religions are constitutionally restricted from interfering in government. We have separation of church and state because making your religion the law of the land is exactly the same thing Saudi Arabia does. And we don’t want that here. The Founding Fathers didn’t want that here. That’s why the Establishment Clause exists, folks. It’s why this rule should remain intact, and why we cannot permit any religious monuments on government property.
If a Buddhist, Muslim, Satanic, or Hindu statue does not belong on your courthouse lawn, then your cross or commandments can’t go there either.