Another Ten Commandments Case

This time however it’s not Conservative Christians causing the problem, it’s the Church of Summum. Summum is a mix of philosophy and religion incorporated in Utah. It began in the mid 1970’s after its founder claimed encounters with “Summa Individuals” who presented him with concepts of nature and creation.

Anyway, these folks would like to establish a monument of what they call the Seven Aphorisms in a public park in Utah which already contains a display of the Ten Commandments and sued, claiming a Freedom of Speech infringement, to be able to do so. The original case was decided in favor of the city which didn’t want to do any such thing but an appellate court reversed.

The Ten Commandments monument was donated to the city by the Fraternal Order of Eagles and the Church of Summum would like to have the same privilege. The case revolves around the question of whether the Ten Commandments monument is private speech in a public forum or government speech.

If the former, which is the way the 10th Appellate viewed it, then the government cannot censor other public expression in the same forum because it must be by law open to all. If the latter, then as government speech it would not be open to all. But then if its government speech, is the display of the Ten Commandments a violation of the 1st Amendment? I couldn’t find any information as to whether other historical displays existed in the park as well.

So here we are again. If Christianity can display its icons on public property and teach its mythology in public schools, then why can’t everyone else? If you really believe in equality under the law, then either everyone can or no one can.

However we all know that we sort of wink at religious connotations in the public square which are Christian for several reasons. The first is that the overwhelming majority of people in the country claim to be Christian and it cannot be denied that Christianity has played a major role in the history of the country. Therefore often it’s hard to separate the history from the religion.

Will the Supreme Court have the integrity and the courage to finally stop the winking? I doubt it given the current make-up of the court. What it should do is declare the Ten Commandments display as government speech in order to avoid an avalanche of inappropriate display requests and then declare the display a violation of the establishment clause and order its removal from public property.

What I predict it will do is come up with a rationale that will prevent the Church of Summum display yet, at the same time, preserve the Ten Commandments display.