10 Commandments

I find the two cases that the SCOTUS has chosen in the 10 commandment case to be interesting. Maybe as a hint as to what they might end up doing. Personally, I hope that they don't make a strong 'No religious symbols anywhere in state lands' proclamation, as the political backlash would be enormous and the push to get more conservatives on the bench would get a lot of energy behind it.

Of course, that's a political view, not a legal one. So, the two cases - to me - represent what should be allowed and what shouldn't be. In the Kansas case, the 10 commandments were part of a larger display about historical legal documents. And while I recognize the opportunity for abuse here, I don't think that this is a problem constitutionally.

In Texas, there was a huge monument which simply mentions the 10 commandments, a symbol of Christ, and also states 'I am the lord'. Clearly this is not designed as a nod to the historical impact the 10 commandments has had on modern law. This should not be allowed. The fact that it was paid for with 'private' money is a red herring, and not relevant to my mind.