The legislature thought they could get away with placing the monument on government property by declaring it to be a historical monument instead of a religious one -- claiming that Western law had it roots in the 10 Commandments. They figured that would get by U.S. Supreme Court restrictions on religious monuments.
It was a laughable assertion, since the 10 Commandments is obviously a religious symbol -- and calling it something else doesn't change that. But it doesn't matter, because the case won't get to the U.S. Supreme Court. The lawmakers overlooked a provision in their own state constitution.
On June 30th, the Oklahoma Supreme Court ruled 7 to 2 that the monument violated Article 2, Section 5 of the Oklahoma Constitution. That provision reads:
“No public money or property shall ever be appropriated, applied, donated, or used, directly or indirectly, for the use, benefit, or support of any sect, church, denomination, or system of religion, or for the use, benefit, or support of any priest, preacher, minister, or other religious teacher or dignitary, or sectarian institution as such.”
The Attorney General and several lawmakers are furious over the court's decision, and the Attorney General has filed for a rehearing (which will delay the removal, but is unlikely to change the decision). Now, some are calling for the removal of the provision from the state constitution. But even if they do that, it is unlikely that the United States Supreme Court will allow the monument, which is obviously religious, to remain.
They should be thankful for the decision. The Satanic Temple was planning to put up a monument of its own on the capitol grounds -- and that could not have been prevented as long as the christian monument remained there. Now that can be prevented because ALL religious monuments are prohibited.
For the record, I think The Satanic Temple is absolutely fantastic, and not primarily because of its great advocacy and wonderful coloring book. Last year, I spent some time on its website and decided, Seven Tenets Beat Ten Commandments. In the article, I discussed the ridiculousness of the idea that the Ten Commandments is the basis of our laws. Christopher Hitchens used to note how offensive it was to think that the Jews of 2,500 years ago needed to be told that it was wrong to murder and steal. If the Ten Commandments are the best that Christians can come up with for a moral basis of law, it's pathetic. Of course, the Sermon on the Mount is better. I think they don't turn to it, however, because really what they are expressing is authoritarianism: laws are given and unchangeable, and they must be followed. Ugh!
ReplyDeletemakes me laugh
ReplyDelete