Federal Court Says Religious Monument At Oklahoma Courthouse Is Unconstitutional

[kpete]

Source: ACLU

Federal Court Says Religious Monument At Oklahoma Courthouse Is Unconstitutional (6/9/2009)

Ten Commandments Monument An Endorsement Of Religion

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
CONTACT: [phone]; [e-mail]

DENVER – A unanimous federal appeals court yesterday ruled that county commissioners in Haskell County, Oklahoma unconstitutionally sought to promote their personal religious beliefs by erecting a Ten Commandments monument on the front lawn of the county's courthouse. The decision by the U.S. Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals comes in a challenge filed by the American Civil Liberties Union and the ACLU of Oklahoma on behalf of a local resident.

"This decision is a victory for the cherished American value of religious freedom," said Daniel Mach, Director of Litigation for the ACLU Program on Freedom of Religion and Belief. "The government should not be in the business of promoting religious viewpoints. In our country, people should be free to express their faith – or to exercise their right to hold no belief at all – without government interference or favoritism."

In its decision, the court ruled that the monument violated the Establishment Clause of the U.S. Constitution because a "reasonable observer would view the monument as having the impermissible principal or primary effect of endorsing religion." The monument is unconstitutional, the court ruled, because the proposal to erect the monument, its approval by the Haskell County Board of Commissioners, and the commissioners' expressly religious defense of the monument "strongly reflect a government endorsement of religion."

"This is a significant ruling for the citizens of Oklahoma," said Joann Bell, Executive Director of the ACLU of Oklahoma. "Religion should not be something that should be allowed to divide the citizens of this state, which is what happens when the government endorses one particular set of religious beliefs. All Oklahomans, of all creeds – and not just the beliefs of those in power – should feel welcome at the county courthouse."

Read more: http://www.aclu.org/religion/public/39800prs20090609.html

[frebrd]

1. All right! K&R

[ayeshahaqqiqa]

2. especially Oklahoma

where there is a minority of folks who are practicing the Native American ways and see Christianity as just another form of white man's repression of their culture.

[Magleetis]

3. Send Roeder

over there with a sledge hammer to break up that MF'r.

[SkyDaddy7]

4. YES!!!!!!!

This makes me happy!! Proud to be an American!

[rosesaylavee]

5. The Rule of Law!

I remember that working in the past.

[LiberalFighter]

6. They need to read the Declaration of Independence to find out why we broke from England.

No where in the Declaration of Independence does it mention anything about religion as a dispute.

[sybylla]

7. K & R for separation of church and state!!!!!!

[yesphan]

8. I look forward to seeing some local response....

on the news about this. The majority will spew the usual anti ACLU crap and blame them.

Good on the appeals court is all I can say. I'm glad there are some that still want to uphold
the bill of rights.

[theblasmo]

9. State Capitol

Hopefully, they'll decide the same thing with the one the state legislature just set up for the capitol. The governor even signed off on this one.

[tomm2thumbs]

10. the court actually protected their butts - everyone would have clammered for their own monument

they'd be going through piles of applications, protests and have to deal with 'what about MY religious symbol?' lawsuits for years if this wasn't settled like that - guessing they will figure that out and not appeal because they don't have the stomach for what they did when they finally thought about its effects long-term.

[azureblue]

11. So typical

They want the monument, bu they don't want to live by the Ten Commandments.
I think the ACLU is going about this the wrong way: they should say "fine' let's leave it up. But make a law that says that any public figure who breaks any of the Ten Commandments shall be removed from office immediately, and can never hold office again." Let' see if those fundies are willing to put their butts where their dogma is..

[moggie]

12. Aren't you forgetting commandment number 1?

That, right there, is why this can't be allowed to stand, and why your suggestion is unthinkable.

[Deep13]

13. The so-called ten commandments are not especially good laws anyway.

The first two involve pissing off ones imaginary friend by flirting with other gods (which tacitly acknowledges their existence.)

The third is a prohibition on "taking" the LORD's name "in vain." As a side note, it reads the LORD is all caps, which is shorthand in English Bibles for the name of god: Yahweh, Tetragrammaton, Jehovah, I Am, Eloi or El Shadai. It is NOT synonymous with the generic word "god" even if capitalized or Jesus Christ or any of his synonyms. I suspect the reason for this speech crime is because back then people believed in magic words and they were afraid that 1. someone might use these powerful magic words to make a horrible curse or 2. someone might usurp the power of the priesthood by invoke the magic words without them.

The fourth is the one where one is supposed to be killed for picking up a stick or lighting a lamp on Saturday.

The fifth is a directive "to honor" ones parents. Well, good advice generally, but is this really a capital offense if disregarded? And frankly some of us have compelling reasons for not honoring. I suspect "honor" is synonymous with obedience too, thereby making the tribal society a matter of holy writ.

The six is an injunction not to steal. So at #6 we get the first real crime. And again, the penalty is death.

Number seven is an injunction not to murder, mistranslated in the KJV as "Thou shalt not kill."

Eight is adultery which back in the day included sex between unmarried persons. Again, death for this noncrime.

Nine is the prohibition on perjury and probably lying generally. By the way, "thy neighbor" means other Jews. There are no OT rules against harming foreigners.

Ten is the thought crime of jealousy, as if we can control our emotions. I suppose if that is such a big deal, one might ask god why he made us with that emotion in the first place? Anyway, the inclusion of wives and slaves along with pack animals says something about god's attitude toward women and slavery.


So, this definitive, divinely mandated ethical foundation does not include battery, rape, child abuse, misuse of power, arson or war crimes to name a few.

[Towlie]

14. I think public servants who knowingly defy our Bill of Rights should be tried and sentenced.

If the Bill of Rights is our highest law, why do lawmakers and other public servants never suffer any penalties for knowingly violating it, other than simply having their decisions overturned? Often, particularly when politicians have primarily conservative constituents who care little about the Bill of Rights aside from the Second Amendment, their failed efforts to override our Constitution actually contribute to their political benefit. That doesn't discourage future violations and it's just not right.

I think such deliberate Constitutional violations should be handled the same way violations of lesser laws are treated. Violators should be tried and sentenced in court. They should be penalized, and those penalties should, at the very least, consist of removal from office and disqualification from holding similar offices or positions of power.

[No Elephants]

15. Would the Roberts Court uphold this case? The Rehnquist Court

did, with Rehnquist in the majority (yes, Rehnquist) http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/8375948/, but Rehnquist and O'Connor are not on the bench anymore.