So have you all heard about the judge who posted the Ten Commandments on his wall, along with his own thoughts on morality? If not, here's the link to the article I read: http://www.politicsdaily.com/2011/02/02/judges-ten-commandments-display-in-courtroom-ruled-unconstituti/?icid=maing|aim|dl4|sec3_lnk3|41080.
I've seen some comments on it online, and mostly they speak about the separation of church and state, and how it is not in the U.S. Constitution (which is true). This judge posted the Ten Commandments and his own notes on morality in the courtroom, and it was ruled unconstitutional. I think it's one thing to put them in his own office, where he can look at them and be constantly reminded of his values and morals so that he will do the best he can to uphold the law. But when he hung them where all who come into his courtroom can see, it basically is like saying, "If you're not Christian, you're amoral and you're wrong and I'm going to be biased against you."
Anyway, that whole thing isn't really what bothers me the most. The thing that really got me is a part of one of his notes that he hung up along with the Commandments. He stated, "Because morality is based on faith, there is no such thing as religious neutrality in law or morality." Now this is what pushes my buttons. Yes, I realize that, for many people, their own morality is based on faith. But not all morality is based on faith.
I believe in God. I was raised Lutheran, but I'm more Agnostic. A lot of things about organized religion don't make sense to me. But I really can't believe that all we do when we die is simply turn to dust. Therefore, I believe in a higher power and some type of afterlife. However, I do not make choices because of those beliefs. I choose to do the things that I do, to believe in the things that I believe in, simply because I think they are the right things to do. I am kind to all people. I am kind to animals. I believe in things like equality and peace and selflessness simply because I think that it is the right thing to do. I don't make the choices I make, or do the things that I do, because of an idea of an afterlife. I don't do things because a book told me that some man thousands of years ago said that I should do it.
Look, I'm not trying to dog on religion, or anyone who bases their morality on their faith. To each his own. I'm not trying to make anyone mad or think that I think I'm better than someone else. I don't think that way at all, and I'm not trying to upset anyone or offend anyone. All I'm saying is that morality is not always based on religion. Not for everyone. And to say that all people who don't have faith, or don't believe in the Ten Commandments, are amoral is wrong.
I do understand HOW this guy made the statement, however I DO NOT agree! I understand the logic he used to make the statement even though I believe (and most people would believe) it is very poor logic. And it is a very weak argument for allowing yourself to post the Ten Commandments in your courtroom.
ReplyDeleteHowever, I am bias because any argument about the Ten Commandments is going to get me heated! I mean in raged! I mean if you bring up the Ten Commandments around me you'll see steam coming out my ears!
Good post. And as a (Christian) historian, I must note that many conservative Christians today have placed their faith in phony history.
ReplyDeleteChurch state separation is central to America's founding principles and faith heritage. In 1644, Baptist Roger Williams (persecuted by "Christian" colonial theocrats, who considered Baptists heretical) called for a "wall of separation" between church and state. Baptists' "wall of separation" would prevent government from interfering with the free exercise of religion, and prevent government from incorporating religion into governance.
Generations of Baptists were persecuted, and shed blood, in the fight (against colonial theocracies) to separate church and state. Their triumph finally came in the enactment of the First Amendment to the U. S. Constitution, establishing the Baptist vision of a "wall of separation" between church and state.
Deniers of church state separation often respond that the phrase "wall of separation" is not in the U. S. Constitution. Well, neither is the word "Trinity" in the Bible, but most deniers of church state separation probably believe in the Trinity.
More importantly, Christians of the late 18th and early 19th centuries clearly understood that the First Amendment wording - "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof" - separated church from state. Their testimony bears much more weight than the fabricated history loved by many modern conservative Christians and politicians.
Make no mistake: denying church state separation mocks our nation's founding principles and faith heritage. Church state separation was good for America in 1791, and it is good for America now. To see the problems of merging church and state, look to the Middle East, where conservative religious law (Sharia Law, based on the biblical Old Testament) rules.
Church state separation is a liberal, and American, moral value of which we all can be proud.
Bruce Gourley
Director
Baptist History & Heritage Society
www.baptisthistory.org
Yeah. What he said.
ReplyDeleteThis country was founded on freedom FROM religion just as much as it was freedom OF religion.
There are people who have not one whit of religious upbringing who are very moral individuals. They still know right from wrong, and the worship of a deity and ritualistic practices don't even factor in at all.
And I have also encountered the opposite; all righteous religious candy shell on the outside, stinking corruption on the inside.
The Ten Commandments are a pretty good set of guidelines if you choose to abide by them, though I've always wondered why the list is so heavily weighted with the don'ts instead of the do's. And why didn't "love they neighbor" make the cut? Mel Brooks might be on to something with his skit from History of the World Part I...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4TAtRCJIqnk