U.S. Supreme Court Unanimously Upholds Right to Publicly Display Ten Commandments

By Kathleen Gilbert WASHINGTON, D.C., February 26, 2009 (LifeSiteNews.com) - The United States Supreme Court ruled on Wednesday that a Utah city can display the Ten Commandments in a public park without giving quarter to a different religious viewpoint. In a landmark 9-0 decision, the Court ruled…

Full article…

I think the decision was that the city was not required to post an alternate religious tablet. The justices tiptoed around if the city was promoting religion by having the Ten Commandments monument in the park.

So the decision definitely did not say it was OK to post the Ten Commandments.

Yeah, but the final upshot of it will be that everyone will assume it is ok. Hallejulah!!

The court ruled that monuments in public places are forms of government speech and therefore not subject to rules on free speech. The ruling would not allow the placing of the 10 commandments on the front of a court house or a school. However, if a public park were erected in front of either building, the commandments could be placed there.

The ruling furthermore does not allow exemptions from the establishment clause so that government officials cannot order such monuments placed.

Possibly a false assumption, huh? Thus guaranteeing more cities are dragged into court, making lawyers richer.

What is the penalty for breaking the commandments and why aren’t they also posted?

Just curious.

When we see a sign that says “No Loitering,” we can always inquire with a nearby police officer to find out what the punishment. So, I was wondering if such easy access to the ramifications for breaking the posted rule is also available.


Such as asking a nearby member of the clergy?

I’ve personally never received a consistent answer from different clergy or citizens.
Admittedly, I’ve never been in there area, so perhaps there is a consensus in that one specific region.

Perhaps they should announce in their local paper the result of breaking any of the commandments and who enforces the said response.

Well, in Chicago I have Picasso’s Afghan hound (or a woman, he never would explain it), Joan Miro’s woman and Sandy Calder’s flamingo all displayed as downtown sculptures. How should I respond to these?

Ars gratia artis.

DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit www.catholic.com.