Posted                      

quote:

---

Could the Ten Commandments be reduced to six, a federal judge asked Monday.

Would that neutralize the religious overtones of a commandments display that has the Giles County School Board in legal hot water?

That unorthodox suggestion was made by Judge Michael Urbanski during oral arguments over whether the display amounts to a governmental endorsement of religion, as alleged in a lawsuit filed by a student at Narrows High School.

After raising many pointed questions about whether the commandments pass legal muster, the judge referred the case to mediation - with a suggestion:

Remove the first four commandments, which are clearly religious in nature, and leave the remaining six, which make more secular commands, such as do not kill or steal.

---

Posted                      

quote:

---

Originally posted by Hairy Biker:
Well you don't really need to honour your parents once you're grown up. And coveting hurts no one but yourself; so what about cutting it down to 4?

---

Posted                          

quote:

---

Originally posted by PaulBC:
This would be hersey .IMHO

---

Posted                       

quote:

---

Originally posted by Mark Betts:
Within the one Holy and Apostolic Church, to reduce the 10 commandments to 6 (or 4) would most definitely be heresy - for it diminishes God and changes the very nature of religion to mere humanism.

---

Posted                      

quote:

---

Originally posted by Lamb Chopped:
Speaking for the moment not as a Christian but as an American, we'd do better to simply omit the whole thing rather than mutilate it in such a fashion. It suggests that a) we're scared of large chunks of our own heritage, b) we haven't learned the fine art of ignoring silent items of decor we don't agree with (it's not grabbing anybody by the lapels, is it?), and c) we are bloody nitpickers.

---

Posted                          

quote:

---

Originally posted by GreyFace:
I don't really see the point of reducing the Ten to the Three That Paranoid Secularists Won't Object To. If you're going to reject them on the grounds of religion then you have to also reject their religious history as bad too, and then what would you want any of them for? A guide to good behaviour? Write a summary of the modern law in that case.

---

Posted                       

quote:

---

Originally posted by GreyFace:
Recent convert to Orthodoxy, Mark? Just guessing...

---

Posted                      

quote:

---

Originally posted by The Great Gumby:
The point, as I see it, is that in general, people who want to justify the display of the 10Cs in public buildings (especially courtrooms) tend to claim that they're important because they're a founding moral code, or a common moral understanding, but not divisive or controversial. 1-4 pose a tricky problem in this context, as they're not reflected in legislation, and are explicitly and divisively religious. So why not drop them, if it's about a common, inclusive code?

---

Posted                      

quote:

---

Originally posted by PaulBC:
OK shipmates I withdraw heresey for how I would term a rewrite of the 10 commandments . However I would state that such a rewrite is an very bad idea . It would be a case of if I don't like what Scripture says I will ignore or omit it . That is is an error.

---

Posted                          

quote:

---

Originally posted by Crœsos:

quote:

---

Originally posted by The Great Gumby:
The point, as I see it, is that in general, people who want to justify the display of the 10Cs in public buildings (especially courtrooms) tend to claim that they're important because they're a founding moral code, or a common moral understanding, but not divisive or controversial. 1-4 pose a tricky problem in this context, as they're not reflected in legislation, and are explicitly and divisively religious. So why not drop them, if it's about a common, inclusive code?

---

It isn't just that they're "not reflected in legislation", enacting them as law would be blatantly contrary to the U.S. Constitution.

---

Posted                          

quote:

---

Originally posted by Beeswax Altar:
Urbanski is wasting his time. The Supreme Court will decide the display is constitutional. The 10 commandments, including the first four, had an impact on federal and state law. Would Judge Urbanski also like the phrase "endowed by their Creator" removed from the Declaration of Independence? I suspect he wouldn't mind the 10th Amendment being removed from the US Constitution.

---

Posted                       

quote:

---

Originally posted by Beeswax Altar:
Urbanski is wasting his time. The Supreme Court will decide the display is constitutional. The 10 commandments, including the first four, had an impact on federal and state law. Would Judge Urbanski also like the phrase "endowed by their Creator" removed from the Declaration of Independence? I suspect he wouldn't mind the 10th Amendment being removed from the US Constitution.

---

Posted                      

quote:

---

Originally posted by Adeodatus:
This is part of a "Commandments display", yes?

Then there's no need to omit anything. Simply extend the display to include pithy ethical summaries from other world faiths, or other civilisations, or whatever. Go for inclusion, not exclusion.

---

quote:

---

At the time, no one was clamoring for more historical documents in the schools. They were furious about the removal of the Ten Commandments, the ACLU argues, and the school board appeased the masses and violated the First Amendment with the same vote.

Urbanski noted how one board member thanked the crowd for turning out to support the commandments.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Beeswax Altar:
The 10 commandments, including the first four, had an impact on federal and state law.

---

Posted                       

quote:

---

XXXV. That all persons living in this province, who confess and acknowledge the one Almighty and eternal God, to be the Creator, Upholder and Ruler of the world; and that hold themselves obliged in conscience to live peaceably and justly in civil society, shall, in no ways, be molested or prejudiced for their religious persuasion, or practice, in matters of faith and worship, nor shall they be compelled, at any time, to frequent or maintain any religious worship, place or ministry whatever.

XXXVI. That, according to the good example of the primitive Christians, and the case of the creation, every first day of the week, called the Lord's day, people shall abstain from their common daily labour, that they may the better dispose themselves to worship God according to their understandings.

XXXVII. That as a careless and corrupt administration of justice draws the wrath of God upon magistrates, so the wildness and looseness of the people provoke the indignation of God against a country: therefore, that all such offences against God, as swearing, cursing, lying, prophane talking, drunkenness, drinking of healths, obscene words, incest, sodomy, rapes, whoredom, fornication, and other uncleanness (not to be repeated) all treasons, misprisions, murders, duels, felony, seditions, maims, forcible entries, and other violences, to the persons and estates of the inhabitants within this province; all prizes, stage-plays, cards, dice, May-games, gamesters, masques, revels, bull-battings, cock-fightings, bear-battings, and the like, which excite the people to rudeness, cruelty, looseness, and irreligion, shall be respectively discouraged, and severely punished, according to the appointment of the Governor and freemen in provincial Council and General Assembly; as also all proceedings contrary to these laws, that are not here made expressly penal.

---

Posted                      

quote:

---

Originally posted by Belle Ringer:
If the ten commandments are to be posted as an historical document, shouldn't the Jewish numbering be used, which I read somewhere differs from the Protestant numbering which differs from the Catholic numbering? There being no clear distinction in the scripture with items are separate and which are two thoughts on one topic, one might best justify "it's not sectarian" by using the most historical version of the document.

---

Posted                          

quote:

---

Originally posted by Crœsos:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Belle Ringer:
If the ten commandments are to be posted as an historical document, shouldn't the Jewish numbering be used, which I read somewhere differs from the Protestant numbering which differs from the Catholic numbering? There being no clear distinction in the scripture with items are separate and which are two thoughts on one topic, one might best justify "it's not sectarian" by using the most historical version of the document.

---

Yeah, I'm pretty sure the "let's be non-sectarian by favoring one sect over the rest" argument has a pretty gaping flaw in it.

---

Posted                       

quote:

---

Originally posted by Crœsos:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Lamb Chopped:
Speaking for the moment not as a Christian but as an American, we'd do better to simply omit the whole thing rather than mutilate it in such a fashion. It suggests that a) we're scared of large chunks of our own heritage, b) we haven't learned the fine art of ignoring silent items of decor we don't agree with (it's not grabbing anybody by the lapels, is it?), and c) we are bloody nitpickers.

---

Like most bits of "American heritage", the Ten Commandments are borrowed from someone else. On the other hand, the idea that governments shouldn't be in the business of decreeing who the One True God™ is or the proper ways to worship Him is very American.

---

Posted                       

quote:

---

Originally posted by Crœsos:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Belle Ringer:
If the ten commandments are to be posted as an historical document, shouldn't the Jewish numbering be used?...one might best justify "it's not sectarian" by using the most historical version of the document.

---

Yeah, I'm pretty sure the "let's be non-sectarian by favoring one sect over the rest" argument has a pretty gaping flaw in it.

---

Tee hee, some local friends want ten commandments posted in government buildings and schols, but when I ask whether the Protestant, Catholic, or Jewish numbering of the commandments should be used, they look confused and change the subject.

Posted                       

quote:

---

Originally posted by Horseman Bree:
ISTM that a particular person about 2000 years ago stated that those ten commandments (along with the other 603 or whatever number) could be summed up in just TWO statements, one of which is just the basis for belief in just about every theistic religious group/sect/cult/denomination/... and the other is the basic statement of belief of every religious group/yada, yada, and of just about every nontheistic and atheistic statement of how to live in a scoiety of more than one person.

Maybe that latter statement should be put up on ALL public buildings, since it would be hard for anyone to deny it's desirability.

Of course, that would destroy the hate-monger, fear-monger, money-grubber and political classes, but even that might be desirable. The only thing left to fight over would be whether God had a part in it or not.

---

Posted                       

quote:

---

Originally posted by tclune:
And yet, within the ranks of the Holy and Apostolic Church members, there is probably not one in ten who could take the original text and parse it into 10 commandments...

--Tom Clune

---

I was thinking the same thing. I can list all the content of the 10Cs but can never remember where the divisions lie for Jews and Christians.

The suggestion in the OP is ludicrous. The 10Cs begin with God as the subject of all the commands. If we cut out the first 4 then we have a one actor play where we have just shot the only character.

Posted                      

quote:

---

Originally posted by OliviaG:
Remind me again: how many of the original 13 colonies were founded by people trying to get away from the established church? OliviaG

---

Taking a rhetorical question seriously, five out of thirteen

--------------------
Ken

L’amor che move il sole e l’altre stelle.

Posted                         

quote:

---

Originally posted by Adeodatus:
Simply extend the display to include pithy ethical summaries from other world faiths, or other civilisations, or whatever. Go for inclusion, not exclusion.

---

And the last one would be attributed "21st century IT corporation - "Don't be evil" "?

Best wishes,

Russ

--------------------
Wish everyone well; the enemy is not people, the enemy is wrong ideas

Posted                      

quote:

---

Originally posted by Beeswax Altar:
Urbanski is wasting his time. The Supreme Court will decide the display is constitutional. The 10 commandments, including the first four, had an impact on federal and state law. Would Judge Urbanski also like the phrase "endowed by their Creator" removed from the Declaration of Independence? I suspect he wouldn't mind the 10th Amendment being removed from the US Constitution.

---

Posted                      

quote:

---

The board voted unanimously to replace the commandments with a copy of a page from a history textbook that mentions the Ten Commandments in conjunction with American government and morality. The commandments themselves do not appear on the page; they are represented by a drawing of two tablets.

The move could prove controversial among Giles County residents who have shown up en masse at earlier meetings in support of the commandments display.

A motion approved today by the board reads: “In light of the recent controversy, and legal proceedings, and the substitution of this Roots of Democracy document in the place of the text of the Ten Commandments, this board will not approve the posting of the text of the Ten Commandments in our schools unless and until the courts provide further clarification of the law in this area.”

---

• Put up a Ten Commandments display to please fundamentalist voters
• Take down Ten Commandments display after conference with lawyers along the lines of "you will get sued and you will lose, very expensively"
• Re-install slightly altered Ten Commandments display after a whole bunch of angry fundies show up at school board meetings to protest removal of display
• Lather
• Rinse
• Repeat

Posted                       

quote:

---

Originally posted by Crœsos:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Hairy Biker:
Well you don't really need to honour your parents once you're grown up. And coveting hurts no one but yourself; so what about cutting it down to 4?

---

As general suggestions those might or might not work. However, they're not really related to the kind of Establishment Clause argument being considered by Judged Urbanski. There's no clause of the U.S. Constitution that relates to coveting or parent-child relations.

---

Posted                       

quote:

---

Originally posted by Crœsos:
As a quick update, the Giles County School Board has voted to (once again) remove the Ten Commandments from their display.

quote:

---

The board voted unanimously to replace the commandments with a copy of a page from a history textbook that mentions the Ten Commandments in conjunction with American government and morality. The commandments themselves do not appear on the page; they are represented by a drawing of two tablets.

The move could prove controversial among Giles County residents who have shown up en masse at earlier meetings in support of the commandments display.

A motion approved today by the board reads: “In light of the recent controversy, and legal proceedings, and the substitution of this Roots of Democracy document in the place of the text of the Ten Commandments, this board will not approve the posting of the text of the Ten Commandments in our schools unless and until the courts provide further clarification of the law in this area.”

---

The dynamic at work seems to be along the lines of:

• Put up a Ten Commandments display to please fundamentalist voters
• Take down Ten Commandments display after conference with lawyers along the lines of "you will get sued and you will lose, very expensively"
• Re-install slightly altered Ten Commandments display after a whole bunch of angry fundies show up at school board meetings to protest removal of display
• Lather
• Rinse
• Repeat

The board's actions are oscillating like this because they seem to be trapped between two contrary interests. They want to be re-elected, for which the Ten Commandments display is useful, and they want to not lose a potentially very expensive lawsuit, for which the display is a detriment.

---

Posted                      

quote:

---

Originally posted by Alogon:
One of my learned friends made a convincing case (to me, anyway) that, properly understood, the Ten Commandments (originating as they did with a people fleeing tyranny and slavery) actually place valuable limits on the role of civil government. Trouble is, I doubt that many readers without the benefit of his erudition are likely to see them that way when posted in a court house.

---