Is The Government Allowed To Promote Religion Display Of... Essay - 1,944 words

Is the Government allowed to promote religion display of the Ten Commandments within / without the bounds of the establishment clause. Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion the First Amendment. These words constitute the beginning of the establishment clause in the First Amendment. The motive behind the establishment clause created by the framers of the Constitution was to ensure that religion and government did not mix. The Constitutions framers were prompted by the situation that prevailed in Europe during that period where religious persecution and taxation to support governments was quite common, often at the expense of the personal and religious freedom of the individual (Cohn). Since the adoption of the first amendment on Dec.


15, 1791, the establishment clause has been the object of several debates and discussions regarding its role in keeping the government secular and ensuring separation of Church and State. In the years before 1947, the establishment clause was applicable only to the federal government. The stand of the Supreme Court has changed over the years, from supporting the separation of Church and State, Everson v. Board of Education (1947) to stating the Constitution doesnt require complete separation of church and state. Lynch v. Donnelly (1984).


The most frequently employed tool to ascertain if a display involving religion is in accord with the establishment clause is the Lemon Test, which was devised by Chief Justice Warren Burger. The case was regarding the subsidizing the salaries of parochial school teachers under a Rhode Island program. In order to clear the Lemon test, the government conduct (1) must have a secular purpose, (2) must have a principal or primary effect that does not advance or inhibit religion, and (3) cannot foster an excessive government entanglement with religion (Cohn). Justice Antonin Scalia is the sternest and most vocal critic of the Lemon approach. At various times, the Supreme Court has invoked the concept of ceremonial deism to deem certain practices as constitutional and not in conflict with the establishment clause. The two major cases concerning the establishment clause at present are Orden v.


Perry in Texas and McCreary County v. ACLU in Kentucky. The government has erected or maintained a monumental or framed display of a particular version of the Ten Commandments, outside of a secular program of educational or historical study or debate. Government is proclaiming a message, not inviting a discussion. Yet, that message is fundamentally inconsistent with governments role under the First Amendment. (Cunningham). This, according to him is the basic premise for the petitions against the state governments of Texas and Kentucky.


The petitioners argue that the display of the Ten Commandments is tantamount to the promotion of one religion at the expense of all other. In addition, the tendency of a secular government to present a homogenized version of the Ten Commandments is leading to a dilution of the very fundamentally divergent views in Judaism and Christianity. The use of the Ten Commandments or Decalogue to promote the notion of a common Judeo Christian legal heritage is incorrect because the Decalogue has been one of distinguishing elements of the differing legal traditions in these two religions. Over the ages, the Decalogue has been worded differently in Judaism and Christianity. Therefore, to promote a secular, uniform version of the Ten Commandments is to negate both Jewish and Christian history; at the same time, it implies totally ignoring the sentiments of other religions, such as, Hinduism and Islam. The rights granted in the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment are not well defined (Murray). He cites the presence of the words under God in the Pledge of Allegiance to buttress his claim. Going by the history of cases regarding the violation of the establishment clause, the likelihood of arriving at a permanent solution is low.


The background of the two cases in Texas and Kentucky suggests that the stance of the court has varied over the years and its judgment too is highly case-specific. (Mauro) The display of a 6-foot granite monument to the Ten Commandments at the State Capitol grounds in Austin, Texas is considered contrary to the establishment clause by the plaintiff, Thomas Van Orden. Supporters of the display such as Justice Scalia and Justice Kennedy point that since the monument is in an open setting surrounded by other unrelated monuments and artifacts, it cannot be construed as an example of the government promoting a particular religion. The defendants give the reference of Marsh v Chambers, 1983 in which the court approved the opening of a legislature session with a prayer. They also contend that the granite monument can be displayed as a historical artifact. On the other hand, Professor Erwin Chemerinsky of Duke University Law School states that the display in Austin is the only monument that is religious in nature, among all the monuments on display. It does not serve an educational purpose nor does it have a historical significance. He feels that the display of the Ten Commandments would have been contextual if they had been displayed in a manner similar to the frieze in the Court chambers, which depicts Moses with the Ten Commandments and other lawgivers such as Hammurabi and Solomon. Given that the frieze depicts lawgivers in a courtroom setting, the Ten Commandments can be considered appropriately placed and not contrary to the establishment clause.


The tablet inscribed with the words, I AM the LORD thy God is an undeniable testament to the monuments religiosity. (Boston) The defendants and the plaintiffs agree that the Ten Commandments are essentially a religious text; however, the interpretation of this fact by the two parties is very different. The supporters of the display argue that the country derives its ...................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................

...................You are reading a preview................... Visit our Blog and Unlock Full Access to this essay

Continue READING the FULL Essay by clicking HERE

Essay Tags: ten commandments, establishment clause, supreme court, commandment, first amendment

This is an Essay sample / Research paper, you can use it for your research of: Is The Government Allowed To Promote Religion Display Of