The controversy over the Alabama Ten Commandments monument has led to a lot of emotional invective being tossed around by both sides of the issue. In the letter to the editors section of yesterday’s Post, a reader named Scott Miller (from St. Louis?) made some excellent, very rational points about one of the key arguements.
In all the stories about Alabama’s Supreme Court Chief Justice Roy S. Moore and his illegal monument to the Ten Commandments, no one has questioned Justice Moore’s basic argument — that the U.S. Constitution is based on the Ten Commandments. It’s just not true.
Only three of the Ten Commandments have parallels in U.S. law. Our Constitution says nothing about worshipping only one god, nothing about graven images, nothing about taking God’s name in vain, nothing about keeping the Sabbath holy, nothing about adultery, nothing about coveting stuff. Our Constitution is based on rules of civilization going back to ancient Greece and Rome and even longer ago.
Also, contrary to what Mr. Moore claims, no one is preventing him from worshipping or acknowledging his version of God. He simply can’t do it in his capacity as a representative of the government. He can stand on street corners and preach to his heart’s content. He just can’t use the government imprimatur to push his personal religious agenda.
Why is that so hard to understand?