The Battleground: Separation of Church and State

By Erin Lindgren

When Alabama Chief Justice Roy Moore refused to remove a 5,300 pound replica of the Ten Commandments from the rotunda of his courthouse, his decision was met with both fury and fervor. Secular Americans were angered by the monument, which many feel violates the separation of church and state, and appalled by Moore's direct disobedience to the ruling of the nation's highest court. Religious groups, conversely, rallied by Moore's side and defended his belief that the Ten Commandments were paramount in the creation of American government, including the Declaration of Independence and the Bill of Rights. Many expressed fear that America's Christian heritage was under attack.

Although the case of Roy Moore vs. Judicial Inquiry Commission was perhaps the most publicized case over the tenuous relationship between the display of religious material on public property, it is not the only one. Similar cases exist all over the country; near a public park in Maryland, a police headquarters in Ohio and a proposed ballot initiative in Idaho. This year the Supreme Court has agreed to hear two Ten Commandments cases, their decision in these cases will reexamine the establishment clause, decide whether these displays are religious or historical and set a precedent for all future cases regarding the display of religious documents in public arenas.

Lindsay Martin is on the defense team for Liberty Counsel, a morally conservative, Florida-based litigation group. Liberty Counsel is representing 13 of the 25 Ten Commandments cases that are currently in the courts and will be counsel for the Kentucky counties when their case is heard before the Supreme Court.

"Our motivation is to make sure that the integrity of America's history is preserved," Martin said, "Groups like the ACLU (American Civil Liberties Union) try to deny that the 10 Commandments was a formative document for the framers of the constitution and anyone who has studied legal history knows that that is wrong."

Martin agreed that the First Commandment, Thou shalt have no other Gods before me, is not reflected in American law but said that others are, "States like Florida and Mississippi still have the Blue Laws on the books. You can't sell alcohol on Sunday, things aren't open on Sunday and those are based on the commandment that we honor the Sabbath Day," Martin said.

She said that the relevance of the document does not change its historical importance. "To have history rewritten because it might be offensive is ridiculous," Martin said. She noted that Washington D.C. has religious quotes and bible-references all over its public and governmental buildings. "The most ironic thing is that when we go to try this in the Supreme Court we will walk through double wooden doors that have the Ten Commandments engraved in them, and then decide whether or not those documents should be displayed in courthouses and public buildings."

The watchdog group, Americans United for the Separation of Church and State, opposes the display of the Ten Commandments as a historical document, unless it is placed with other legal and historical documents. "The Supreme Court display is not just the Ten Commandments; it also honors other legal systems from European countries, and original Greek and Byzantine law. This display is designed to educate people on the evolution of law and legal proceedings over many centuries," said Rob Boston, the Assistant Director of Communications for Americans United.

Boston said that each case is different and that his group does not universally condemn the display of religious documents, "It depends on the context and the motivation. If it was intended for education, that may be one thing, but if they are displayed because it is ‘God's law and we all have to follow it,' which is what happened in that Alabama courthouse then that is not alright," Boston said.

He disagrees with a conservative argument that says that the "separation of church and state" is not in the Constitution. He said that phrase is not in the constitution but was used frequently as a succinct means of describing the First Amendment by both James Madison and Thomas Jefferson. "That is the strongest tenet of the First Amendment, telling us that the government cannot endorse or interfere with religion," Boston said.

Sue Hoffman is a retired high school teacher from the Seattle area. She has extensively researched the public display of the Ten Commandments all across America. Her research began with the Fraternal Order of the Eagles, who decided in the early 1940s to promote the display of giant stone tablets of the Ten Commandments.

Their decision hinged on the opinion of a Minnesota judge, he felt that the juveniles who came before his court would lead more moral and law-abiding lives if the Ten Commandments were available to them. This decision helped create the Minnesota Youth Guidance Commission which believed that the words of God could guide young people better than the legal system.

Hoffman said this belief is reinforced in the Proverbs chapter of the bible which says, "My son, forget not my law, but let thy heart keep my commandments." The committee decided to design a huge tablet of the Ten Commandments to be used as a template for areas across the country, Hoffman said they originally planned to make them out of metal but decided that "God did it in stone, why don't we do it in stone?"

These giant stone monoliths once existed in at least 2,000 locations across the country, but many have been moved, destroyed or lost because of lack of public funding or secular outcry.

Hoffman's research has lead her to take a strong stand in support of the public display of the 10 Commandments. Her support comes not from the historical implications of the document itself, rather from the history behind the Ten Commandments displays. "They are really community displays," Hoffman said, "little towns raised their own money, holding bake sales, selling thousands of $1 Ten Commandment pins. And when the monuments were installed it was a celebration, the community had parades and picnics and under the Eagles there was always a Priest, a Rabbi and a member of the Protestant clergy present."

Hoffman said that the sentimental meaning and "old Americana" sense of community that informed the creation of these monuments in small-town America needs to be respected for the original intent and reasons. "You wouldn't go to Egypt and demand they take down the pyramids," Hoffman said and added that any historical display should be treated the same way.

Manjit Singh does not agree. He is the Executive Director of the Sikh Media Watch and Resource Task Force. As a member of a minority faith in America, Singh said that he is offended by the association between the American legal system and the Ten Commandments.

"It violates the separation of church and state, if I went to a courthouse with those [the commandments] on display I would feel very uncomfortable because there is no reason for it to be there and I might not get a fair trial because these judges are using morality and not the law as their guiding principles," Singh said.

Singh said he appreciates the historical value of the Ten Commandments, "Religious history is important, but it belongs in the Smithsonian or another museum, not in a public square," Singh said. He worries that these displays establish America as a Judeo-Christian nation.

* * *