ACLU Files Federal Lawsuit Over Placement Of Ten Commandments MonumentAside from some of the silly grammar mistakes (run-on sentence in 2nd paragraph, "sighting" instead of "citing", no comma after "However", "a type of religious depression" should probably be "a type of religious oppression") I was actually impressed by the article's attempt at balance. Yes, they put "liberal activists" in there, but they also did a fairly good job at paraphrasing the legal ramifications of the 1st Amendment, and admitted that the "other side" has the backing of the law: "...the majority of liberal activists from outside of the county in favor of upholding the laws of our Constitution that state there must be separation of church and state." Note she didn't write, "in favor of their interpretation of the Constitution..." or some similar exposition.
By Terri Langford, 2/15/2007
The American Civil Liberties Union of Florida (ACLU) recently filed a lawsuit at the federal courthouse in Gainesville, FL, sighting that Dixie County has violated the Establishment Clause of the United States Constitution by placing a monument, bearing the Ten Commandants on the county’s courthouse steps.
Since its placement, there has been much debate from both sides, with the majority of citizens in Dixie County in favor of keeping the monument on the courthouse steps and the majority of liberal activists from outside of the county in favor of upholding the laws of our Constitution that state there must be separation of church and state. With the lawsuit in place, the next step to take will be in the hands of the Dixie County Commission.
The “establishment of religion” clause of the First Amendment can be summed up to the following: Neither a state nor the federal government can set up a church. Neither can pass laws which aid one religion, aid all religions, or prefer one religion over another. Neither can force nor influence a person to go to or to remain away from church against his will or force him to profess a belief or disbelief in any religion. No person can be punished for entertaining or professing religious beliefs or disbeliefs, for church attendance or non-attendance. No tax in any amount, large or small, can be levied to support any religious activities or institutions, whatever they may be called, or whatever form they may adopt to teach or practice religion. Neither a state nor the Federal Government can, openly or secretly, participate in the affairs of any religious organizations or groups and vice versa.
One case that is referred to often is where former Chief Justice of Alabama, Roy Moore, installed a monument of the Ten Commandments in the state judicial building in 2001. In 2003, he was ordered by a federal judge to remove the monument. Moore argued against the order, stating his right to acknowledge God. However, the courts used the separation of church and state argument that is listed in the establishment clause as grounds for removal of the monument on the government owned property. In keeping with the clause, the federal court also noted that Moore had the right to acknowledge God as a private person and to place the monument on his privately owned land.
The Dixie lawsuit is the newest case to be filed in the federal court system. In a press release issued by the ACLU, Howard Simon, Executive Director of the ACLU of Florida stated: “Government does not have the right to tell Americans which God to worship. The Ten Commandments are an important part of the Judeo-Christian religious tradition and should be read from the pulpit of churches and synagogues – but the Constitution prohibits the government from endorsing religious messages such as this one. In addition to the commonly held secular commandments about murder, stealing, an honoring one’s mother and father, the Ten Commandments also include strictly religious statements.”
J. Brent Walker, Executive Director of the Baptist Joint Committee for Religious Liberty said, “The question is not whether the Ten commandments embody the right teachings; rather the question is who is the right teacher – politicians or parents, pubic officials or religious leaders, judges or families,” Other points made in the press release were that by the erection of one version of the Ten Commandments, it sends a signal to others that they are not welcome and will be treated unfairly. Dr. Lesley Northup, Associate Dean, Honors College, FIU stated in a teleconference last week that a display like the one on the Dixie County steps does not show religious freedom, but promotes a type of religious depression. She added that all religious people should be wary of such symbols. “What hurts some of us hurts us all,” she stated.
It was asked of the panel during the teleconference, what, if any were the differences between the Alabama case and the Dixie County case? Besides the monument being outside on the courthouse steps and not inside the building; they are also looking at the phrase placed at the bottom of the monument which states, “Love God and Obey His Commandments” as an 11th Commandment.
There have been numerous local citizens who have voiced support of the monument since its placement in November 2006. The ACLU stated they were filing the lawsuit on behalf of their members, of whom they have approximately six residing in Dixie County. However their names have been kept from the public.
A copy of the lawsuit can be read online at http://www.aclufl.org/pdfs/Legal%20PDfs/Dixie Complaint.pdf.
More information on the ACLU can be found on their website at www.aclufl.org. [I added links]
While the monument was paid for by private citizens, it is not clear as to what the cost of fighting the ACLU lawsuit will be, however taxpayer resources are already being expended through county employee man hours. According to Dixie’s County Attorney, Leenette McMillan, as of press time, the county had not been served papers concerning the lawsuit and was not able to comment at this time. Once those papers are served, the ball will be in their court as to whether they will challenge the validity of the lawsuit or come to some agreement with regard to the monument.
I hope that the county doesn't fight it -- I don't want to see them squander their resources on a case they'll certainly lose. What they have to remember is that even with the free legal defense, they will have to pay the plaintiff's legal costs once they lose, and that could be hundreds of thousands of dollars. Put the damn thing on private property, where it belongs.
________________
Technorati tags: Religion, Church-state, Politics
