Ten Commandments part of our culture
Mark Livingood wrote a 9/26/12 letter to the editor in HeraldStandard.com titled “Take monument down.” It succinctly outlined opinions held by many. His question was, “Why has the monument remained there for as long as it has?” He wrote that “the courts settled the issue decades ago with regard to preference of one religion over another in publicly financed schools. Religious dogma belongs in church. …”
The 9/28/12 edition ran a letter to the editor from Patty Ann Dull, who supported the monument. Meanwhile, the headline on page one was “Monument’s removal demanded.” It was a story about two Jane Does suing the Connellsville Area School District. Doe No. 5 charged that “The display of the Ten Commandments usurps her parental authority over religious or non-religious education.”
The 9/28/12 edition also carried a small, largely overlooked piece in the religious briefs. It reported that the German government passed a 9 percent religious tax on registered Catholics, Protestants and Jews for the benefit of religious communities.
I would like to answer Mr. Livingood’s question and address the Ten Commandment issue from a different perspective. The monument has remained there for so long because the Ten Commandments are intricately woven into the fabric of western culture. They stand with the law codes of Solon, the Code of Hammurabi and the Magna Carta as symbols in the evolution of jurisprudence, but more importantly, as symbols of human freedom.
Elevating the tag of religious dogma over the 10 Commandments is an error. They are perhaps the greatest declaration of independence ever written. A slave people labored over 400 years under despots. Upon their release from bondage they were given this declaration of nationhood to assume their rightful place in the political world.
Laws make peoples nations. The Commandments were given in that capacity. They formed an unincorporated people into a nation. The people’s religious dogma did not have the capacity to do that. Religious dogma formulated their worship, not their citizenship.
If anyone wishes to explore their religious dogma, one must research their dietary laws, sacrificial laws, purity laws, holy feast days and seasons. This religious dogma does not attach itself to the Commandments.
Here is a good time to reread the first Amendment. “Congress shall make no law respecting the establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech or of the press; or the right of the people to peacefully assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.”
In reference to preference of one religion over another the Founding Fathers faced the Church of England whose head was the King of England. American religion offered the moral sanction for the revolution. That should never be overlooked. Preference of religion was not an issue.
The working model opposed by the framers of the Constitution was the relationship of the state to the Church of England. This was not to be tolerated in America. The current situation of the German state religious tax is another model the framers would have opposed.
While on jury duty some time ago, one of the judges advised us upon weighing the evidence presented in cases. One term used was “The reasonable man concept.” In other words, what would a reasonable person do when confronted by the situation faced in the trial? In a similar fashion, would a reasonable person see the display of the 10 Commandments rise to the level of the state of Pennsylvania establishing an organized religion with the governor as the chief priest, and taxing portions of the populace to support the religion or usurping parental authority?
The plaintiff in the above law suit states that the Ten Commandment monument “places coercive pressure” on her and her student daughter to adopt a certain religious view. Likewise am I not also at liberty to fear that the state’s forceful removal of the monument intimidates my free exercise of religion and coerces my right of free speech and association? Just asking.
In fact, I feel no intimidation or coercion from Jewish Americans considering that the Ten Commandments were their commandments 1,400 years before they became Christian Commandments.
What symbolic message would removal send? Thou shalt not kill. Is that really religious dogma? I think of Columbine and weep. Perhaps you remember a cartoon. A young girl cried to God, “Where were you when this was happening?” God responded, “I am not allowed in public schools.”
Thou shalt not steal or bear false witness. High grades land good jobs. A student can work hard for that grade or instead lie, cheat and steal for it. Both options are valid in a Ten Commandment-free zone. The sub-prime meltdown is proof of that.
Thou shalt not commit adultery. Students are to realize that they may have multiple sex partners. By extension, multiple partners within marriage is acceptable. Adultery and fornication are only religious dogma and of no consequence in school.
Just as Andes Serano’s 1987 work “Immersion” is viewed as art and protected under free speech likewise the Ten Commandments monument may validly be viewed as cultural history and retain its rightful place as a gift by free citizens to the school district which serves them.
I want to assure the Jane Does that, properly understood, the Ten Commandments assure them more freedom than they could ever imagine and much more than any declaration of state’s rights, which may change at the whim of the judiciary or electorate.
Freedoms found umbrellaed under the Ten Commandments are inalienable and eternal and universal. That includes the freedom to reject them.
Let me close with perhaps two of the most inflammatory statements possible in the public forum. Hear O Israel, the Lord our God is one. And my personal favorite, I love you Jesus.
George Relic is a resident of Masontown.