And that's what we're afraid of. A judge has a lot of latitude within the laws of man to make someone pay for not obeying the laws of your god.
And that's what we're afraid of. A judge has a lot of latitude within the laws of man to make someone pay for not obeying the laws of your god. -antiRepublicrat
I will concede the following points:
1. The 10 commandments are not the law of the land
2. Prominent 10 commandments monuments in courthouses could give someone the impression that they will be judged by these rules
3. Judges have latitude
4. Some judges earn reputations for being harsh or arbitrary, whatever their ideology.
But let's remember it is a display. It is reasonable to expect people to understand this is not a posting that officially proscribes certain behaviors.
Getting back to the original subject: reining in the judiciary. Those of us who complain that they've overstepped their bounds are asked to provide specific justifications for this claim. Fair enough. Also fair is to ask the same of those who stand with the judiciary in their application of the Establishment clause. Where are the specific cases or documented trends in where jurisprudence is overly influenced by the 10 commandments? Are there religious judges who throw the book at "fornicators" because of the commandment not to covet your neighbor's wife but are lenient on crimes orthogonal to all 10 commandments?