So, if the first four commandments came into effect today, they would be mere violations of the Constitution. This is an extremely strange and tense argument that supports the primacy of the Ten Commandments as the true source of American law when the first four simply cannot be implemented because they would conflict with our Constitution. The first four prove that the commandments are religious rules, not civil law. Thus, as a starting point, only the last six potential candidates could be possible sources of our current laws. This leaves us with only two commandments that are reasonably accurately reflected in the current law: the rule against murder and the rule against theft. And even the rule against murder is not exactly the same as the commandment: we recognize exceptions, such as self-defense, which the command simply does not do. The Ten Commandments have been that basic standard set in America since their inception. As Nightline host Ted Koppel explained in an inaugural address at Duke University in 1987, “What brought Moses down from Mount Sinai was not the ten propositions. These are commandments.
Are, were not. The brilliance of the Ten Commandments is that they codify acceptable human behavior in a handful of words, not only for yesterday or now, but forever. Language evolves. Power passes from one nation to another. Messages are transmitted at the speed of light. Man extinguishes one border after another. And yet, we, our behavior, and the commandments that govern that behavior remain the same. (Ted Koppel, The Last Word, Opening Remarks at Duke University, Durham, North Carolina (May 10, 1987). Quoted in Robert H. Bork, The Tempting of America: The Political Seduction of the Law (New York: The Free Press, 1989), 164.Ted Koppel, The Last Word, Commencement Address at Duke University, Durham, North Carolina (May 10, 1987). Quoted in Robert H.
Bork, The Tempting of America: The Political Seduction of the Law (New York: The Free Press, 1989), p. 164. Without the explanation of the first two commandments, there can be no definitive justification for the following commandments, including those against murder (sixth), theft (eighth), and perjury (ninth). There is no moral absolute in the face of the operational assumptions of materialists who advocate something out of nowhere that has the origin of life and the survival of the most apt worldview. Of course, it is obvious that this is a theological proposal. There is nothing secular about it, and the government has no authority to support such a view. It is probably even a sectarian theological suggestion because it highlights the Ten Commandments for special treatment as coming from “outside humanity,” a position that traditional Jews would not accept because they believe that the entire Torah is of divine origin. If that`s what people mean when they say the Ten Commandments are the basis of American law, then putting the commandments on government property is an invalid reason. Why has Alabama been singled out while Pennsylvania has been displaying the Ten Commandments in its state Supreme Court building since 1927? The sixteen murals were designed and painted by Violet Oakley.
They are massive, most measuring 10` by 8`, eclipsing Judge Roy Moore`s granite monument. The series of murals is entitled “Divine Law,” as in God and the Law. Panel V is “The Decalogue … the Hebrew idea of the revealed law”. It shows how the Ten Commandments are carved in stone. Under the striking image, the offers are written down so that everyone can see and read them. Some claim that the first table of commandments consists of religious edicts that are useless for laws that are taken for granted. A 1922 decision of the Iowa Supreme Court stated the opposite: When Justice Roy Moore ran for Chief Justice of the Alabama Supreme Court, he promised to restore America`s moral foundation. He began to keep his promise when he placed a 5,280-pound granite monument from the Ten Commandments in the rotunda of the state`s judicial agency.
The monument also contained the statement of independence phrase, “The Laws of Nature and the God of Nature,” the national motto “In God we trust,” the oath of allegiance, “A Nation Under God,” and the judicial oath “So help me God.” During the monument`s brief dedication ceremony, Justice Moore made these remarks summing up: “May this day mark the beginning of the restoration of the moral foundation of the law for our people and the return to the knowledge of God in our country.” ((Stan Bailey, “Moore puts Commandments monument in court building,” Birmingham News (August 8, 2001), 1A.)) 3rd Committee Promote Constitution and Christianity 5, from Ariz Capitol Times (20 October 1995). 32. Chilton, Bradley S., Clioberntics, Christianity mid the Common Law 83 L Library J 355, 358–61 (1991)Google Scholar; Goebel, , King`s Law and Local Custom at 423, n 14 (cited in note 23) Google Scholar. 2. You will not make an engraved image or an image of something that is above the sky or that is in the earth below, or that is in the water below the earth. Again, this is a theological proposition that the U.S. government does not endorse or support. That may or may not be true, but it is not an issue on which the government can take sides. If that`s what people mean when they say the Ten Commandments are the basis of American law, then publishing them on government property is still invalid. The only way to assert that “they are the basis of American law” is a reason to publish the Ten Commandments on Government Property when there is a non-religious connection between the two – preferably a legal one. Another way to interpret this position is to view the Ten Commandments as the “moral” basis of the general legal order of the West.
In this interpretation, the Ten Commandments are treated as God-dictated moral principles and serve as the ethical basis for all laws, even if they cannot be directly traced back to a particular commandment. So while most individual laws in America do not flow directly from the Ten Commandments, “the law” as a whole does, and this deserves to be acknowledged. 113. People v Hoym, 20 How Prac 76, 78-79 (NY Super, 1860); Campbell vs. Int`l Ins Co accord, 4 Bos 312 (NY Super, 1859). The basis of the laws of this nation was given to Moses on the mountain. The foundation of our Bill of Rights comes from the teachings we receive from the Exodus and from St. Matthew, Isaiah, and St. Paul. I don`t think we understand that enough these days. Your email address will be used to notify you when your comment has been reviewed by the moderator and if the article author(s) or moderator should contact you directly.
– No HTML tag allowed- Website URLs are only displayed as text- Lines and paragraphs are automatically interrupted- Attachments, images or tables are not allowed The Supreme Court has, in a widely admired opinion, West Virginia Board of Education v.
