- Feb 5, 2002
- 190,199
- 70,385
- Country
- United States
- Gender
- Female
- Faith
- Catholic
- Marital Status
- Married
- Politics
- US-Others
As courts and legislatures across the country clash over whether the 10 Commandments can be displayed in public school classrooms, from Louisiana’s newly revived law to fresh rulings striking down similar efforts in Arkansas, the issue is quickly heading back toward the U.S. Supreme Court. What was once considered settled law is now an active national debate.
Yet these displays have sparked fierce legal and cultural battles nationwide. Critics claim the practice violates the Constitution and threatens religious liberty. In reality, the case against these displays is far weaker than many assume, and the case for them much stronger.
The constitutional objection largely rests on a 1980 Supreme Court decision, Stone v. Graham, which struck down a Kentucky law requiring public schools to post the 10 Commandments. The Court ruled that the “preeminent purpose” of such displays was religious and therefore unconstitutional.
But constitutional interpretation evolves, and recent Supreme Court decisions suggest that Stone rests on shaky ground. The Court increasingly interprets the Constitution according to its original public meaning — how the text was understood when it was adopted.
Under this approach, the Constitution is interpreted according to its original public meaning. That means asking what “establishment of religion” meant when the First Amendment was adopted in 1791, and when it was applied to the states through the 14th Amendment in 1868. At that time, “establishment of religion” had a specific meaning: government funding of a church, coercion in worship, or legal preference for one denomination over others.
Continued below.
www.christianpost.com
Yet these displays have sparked fierce legal and cultural battles nationwide. Critics claim the practice violates the Constitution and threatens religious liberty. In reality, the case against these displays is far weaker than many assume, and the case for them much stronger.
The constitutional objection largely rests on a 1980 Supreme Court decision, Stone v. Graham, which struck down a Kentucky law requiring public schools to post the 10 Commandments. The Court ruled that the “preeminent purpose” of such displays was religious and therefore unconstitutional.
But constitutional interpretation evolves, and recent Supreme Court decisions suggest that Stone rests on shaky ground. The Court increasingly interprets the Constitution according to its original public meaning — how the text was understood when it was adopted.
Under this approach, the Constitution is interpreted according to its original public meaning. That means asking what “establishment of religion” meant when the First Amendment was adopted in 1791, and when it was applied to the states through the 14th Amendment in 1868. At that time, “establishment of religion” had a specific meaning: government funding of a church, coercion in worship, or legal preference for one denomination over others.
Continued below.
10 commandments in public schools: Legal myths vs. reality
Simply acknowledging religion s moral influence was never considered an establishment of religion
www.christianpost.com
