Legal Question in Constitutional Law in Arkansas

Re: Freedom of Religion

The way you phrase your question suggests that your mind is made up and that you aren't open to a different view. However:

Requiring removal of religious symbols from a courtroom is required by the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment, which forbids governmental action promoting religion. (Yes, I am greatly oversimplifying this issue, but the nuances don't apply here and there are length restrictions on my answer.) People often come to court against their will, and being compelled by the government to come to a place where they have to see a particular religion promoted strikes me as an absolutely clear violation. Why should a Buddhist or a Sikh have to be subjected by his government to the message of another religion?

The judge, like the rest of us, has the right to free exercise of his religious beliefs. He can have a copy of the commendments on display in his private chambers in the government building where he works, but not where it is on display to the public.

People who focus on the Free Exercise Clause while ignoring the Establishment Clause don't understand the importance of respecting minority religions -- or the fact that such respect is a part of the Constitution itself. The U.S. is overwhelmingly Christian, so if officials could display Christian icons in government buildings under the pretext of exercising their own religious beliefs, the message to visitors would be that the government adheres to Christianity. Our government should repect Christianity, but it should respect all religions equally. The only way to do this is by promoting none of them.

The particular judge you mention had his placque hung inconspicuously, which certainly makes his case less blatant than other recent ones. But he still did it because of the religious significance of the commandments. He has now added copies of the magna carta and of the Constitution which makes the display even less blatant, but he still is in violation as I see it. Reasonable people can disagree with me, of course.

Supporters of displays like this often argue that the Ten Commandments are the basis of our law and are thus appropriate for court buildings, but this argument doesn't really bear scrutiny. Most of the Commanments are not part of our legal system at all -- there is no law requiring us to honor our fathers and mothers, for example, or forbidding us to covet. Some are actually in conflict with our laws -- like "I am the Lord thy God and thou shalt have no other gods before me" (if that were the law then Hinduism would be illegal). Those Commandments which do mirror our laws -- like the prohibition of murder -- were already part of every legal system before Moses was born. The Commandments are not as historically significant to the development of law as some people believe, so this argument is not enough to justify their display in a courthouse.