Quasi political-religious rant about...

The Ten Commandments. I'm not some fundamentalist bible-bashing religious freak, but I do have a few things to say.

What is it about these Ten Commandments that offend so many people? First off, my beliefs do not depend on whether or not the Ten Commandments can be displayed on public property. I just find it so amazing that there is such hostility concerning this topic. What is the big deal about the Ten Commandments that people will go to such great lengths to have them removed from a public environment?

The First Amendment is often cited in reference to the display of the ten commandments on public land, so here's the first amendment:

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.”

That’s It? Wait a minute, where’s all of the “Can’t say ‘God’ in the Pledge of Allegiance, and “Can’t have anything remotely religious on public land” and “Can’t have the symbol of the cross on official seals” and all of that?

(sound of crickets chirping)

Oh, I get it. It’s all in the interpretation of the phrase. That makes sense. So whose interpretation is correct? Is it the person who has an axe to grind against all things religious? And how exactly is congress establishing or supporting a religion in allowing the Ten Commandments to be shown?

Not only Christians, but Jews and Muslims revere the Ten Commandments as well. So, which of the literally hundreds of factions between those three major faiths would the state be endorsing as its official religion if it allows the posting of the Ten Commandments?

And what if your faith isn’t congruent with Judaism, Islam or Christianity? Why worry? Why not celebrate the fact that you live in a country that allows you to worship however you may? (Within reason, of course. Last time I checked, human sacrifices - virgin or not - are still highly frowned upon by legal community.) Let's take a look at the big ten, just to see what the uproar is about:

• "Thou shalt have no other Gods before me"
  
• "Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image"
  
• "Thou shalt not take the name of the LORD thy God in vain"
  
• "Remember the sabbath day, to keep it holy."
  
• "Honour thy father and thy mother"
  
• "Thou shalt not kill."
  
• "Thou shalt not commit adultery."
  
• "Thou shalt not steal."
  
• "Thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbour."
  
• "Thou shalt not covet"
  

The first four of Ten Commandments deal with honoring deity. If you believe in God, then obeying those first four commandments are between you and God. If you don't believe in God, then those first four really don't apply to you, do they? The next six commandments are commendable for just about any social code.

Just because the commandments are displayed somewhere - maybe even on public property - does not mean that you have to abide by them; in fact many people don't. Other than the obvious moral element, The commandments do have historical value in being a foundation upon which many different legal systems worldwide have been based.

One of the four definitions of “religion” found in The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, Fourth Edition is as follows:

“A cause, principle, or activity pursued with zeal or conscientious devotion.”

"Atheism", as defined by the "Skeptic's Dictionary" is thus:

"Atheism is traditionally defined as disbelief in the existence of God. As such, atheism involves active rejection of belief in the existence of God."

Sounds like Atheism is a religion to me. Sounds like it's lobbying to become the state-supported and funded religion (with the help of the likes of the ACLU and Society of Separationists).

What is it that makes the belief system of atheists so much better than those who subscribe to a belief in a God?

Quite honestly, I believe it is all about power. The power of the few over many. The ability to tell a large number of people just how they can live their lives, and what they can and can't do in public. And while those who argue that this is precisely what organized religion is, I submit to you that exactly this definition fits those who are fighting for the removal of the Ten Commandments from public parks and courthouses.

It's like the mere presence of the monument is an itch underneath a plaster cast that they can't scratch, and there is no shortage of lawyers willing to milk tax dollars out of small towns and large cities to make these people feel better. (Lawyer, consoling client): "Now there, there...you managed to get the monument removed and you won 1.4 million dollars in damages...does that make the hurt go away? Besides that, you got to rub it in the faces of all those religious people..."

Don't get me wrong! I think the context in which the commandments are presented is also important. It should be presented in a manner that demonstrates its historical value, and the moral values that our country was founded upon. The monument shouldn't be used to ramrod Christianity, Judaism or Islam down someone's throat at taxpayers' expense.

For those of you who believe that just its simple presence does that, I would have to disagree with you. That would be like saying that law enforcement officers all over the country who wear six-pointed stars are actually out to enforce the Law of Moses (over 600 different rules!), or that the Washington Monument (also on public ground) promotes ancient Egyptian religions. Poppycock.