Should we post the Ten Commandments in schools?

Yes
Kent Adams
You can't deny its social impact

A few months back, an e-mail was forwarded to me quoting a child praying to God, asking, "Why didn't You intervene during the Columbine massacre?" God answers, "I would have, but I'm not allowed in public schools." How far have we come in the name of "progress," taking great strides toward "social reform," only to discover that we have eliminated from our society the substance on which we were founded?

In this year's session of the Indiana General Assembly, I authored a bill in the Senate that seeks to remind our young people of that substance. This legislation, if passed and signed by the governor, would allow local governing bodies to permit the display of the Ten Commandments in public buildings (including schools) in a historical context with other documents of historical significance. The historical documents might include the U.S. Constitution, the Declaration of Independence, the Magna Carta, and other documents that have greatly influenced our legal system in the United States.

This approach to the public display of the Ten Commandments is relatively new and, to my knowledge, untested in the federal court system. According to the legislation, the Ten Commandments could not be displayed more prominently than the other documents but, rather, be integrated into the larger historical display as a document worthy for its impact on our system of laws and ethics. To deny this impact would be to declare that sweeping statements such as "Thou shalt not kill" and "Thou shalt not steal" have not influenced our judicial system.

Given that the Ten Commandments have, indeed, had an impact on our legal system, the question becomes an issue of constitutionality. Is the public display of these precepts in a historical setting acceptable constitutionally? I believe the answer to that question is yes.

The First Amendment prevents the state from establishing or endorsing a single religion over others. This legislation does not establish or endorse a single religion. While it is obvious that the Ten Commandments originated in a decidedly religious context, the effect they have had on Western Civilization in general and the U.S. legal system in particular is decidedly secular.

The bill I authored does not establish a state religion. It does not mandate posting the Ten Commandments. It merely allows local governing bodies to decide for themselves whether the Ten Commandments have influenced our society and gives those bodies permission to display them.

The father of the U.S. Constitution, James Madison, summed it up best: "We have staked the whole of our political institutions upon the capacity of mankind for self-government, upon the capacity of each and all of us to govern ourselves, to control ourselves, to sustain ourselves according to the Ten Commandments of God."

No
Barry W. Lynn:
It's an easy--and wrong--solution

At least 10 state legislatures, as well as the U.S. Congress, are considering bills to allow public schools to post the Ten Commandments. This battle is just the latest in a long-running but misguided effort to force religion back into public schools.

Much of the impetus for this movement is the horrific shootings last spring at Columbine High School. However, as a minister, I know that the mere posting of a sacred text is not going to stop crime or even save souls. Indeed, posting the Commandments in defiance of a l980 Supreme Court decision that disapproved such actions sends a signal that adults can pick and choose which laws to obey--not the kind of value I expect my children to be taught in public school.

Picking the holy text of some religions for display invariably gets the government in the business of playing favorites. Since our country is now home to more than 2,000 religious groups, followers of the Five Pillars of Islam, the Four Noble Truths of Buddhism, or the Affirmations of Humanism would feel like second-class citizens in their own classroom. This is just the kind of alienation some feel led to the Columbine tragedy in the first place.

Incredibly, some politicians have been reduced to asking: "What harm can it do?" which is a new low point in determining the value of legislation. They act as if these words are just homespun truisms from some pop psychology bestseller. To the contrary, at least four of the Commandments are explicitly religious, raising deep theological issues over which people have fought (and sometimes died) for centuries. Just what is a "false god" or what "graven images" should be banned? When children ask which day is the sabbath, is the teacher supposed to pick Friday, Saturday or Sunday--or just say it doesn't matter?

I sometimes think that too many politicians mistake genuine spirituality for magic talismans. If we think we solve the problem of youth violence with a posting of holy writ, not only do we violate the principle of separation of church and state, but we also let ourselves off easy when it comes to real solutions. Although some anti-public school groups falsely portray teachers as "value free," most teachers do try regularly to teach commonly shared community values (including some that parallel some of the Commandments, such as not lying or stealing) without trying to tie them to specific religious traditions. Those of us who are parents ought to encourage this, as well as support those teaching professionals who seek out troubled young people and work with them.

For a few thousand years, the leaders of Judaism and Christianity have managed to get the word out without benefit of an act of Congress or the Indiana Legislature. Legislators who want to impress voters are better served by abiding by the Commandments in their personal lives if they consider them holy, not by instructing all of us where to paste them on the wall.

American Federation of Teachers, AFL•CIO - 555 New Jersey Avenue, NW - Washington, DC 20001