For one, the ten commandments is not a relgion. It's a historical document, though this one is a replica of course. So some religions picked up on this and use it in their religions. It was a precedent set for society. Even if it was an old man smokin peyote that thought it up, several of those commandments are used today in modern laws in different interpretations and less definite. Let me ask you this: If the christians worshipped the color blue, and this judge wanted the walls in the halls painted blue, would that be unconstitutional?
How is he denying freedom to others? What freedoms do they have under the Constitution that prevents him from displaying the ten commandments?
Since when can a court make laws and enforce them? I must be misunderstanding but I always thought the laws were created by a legislative branch or a "general assembly" and laws were enforced by the executive branch or the department beneath the executive. This court order crap is an undermining of the other two branches. This governemnt was created to prevent one branch from having more power than the other. It looks like the judicial branch can just do whatever they want. Who can stop the supreme court if they rule everything unconstitutional? Since FDR, the courts have been loaded with liberal judges and they have destroyed any values this nation was founded on by twisting words to thier "interpretation"
Why can he display the tenets of his faith on public property, but others cannot?
Since FDR, the courts have been loaded with liberal judges and they have destroyed any values this nation was founded on by twisting words to thier "interpretation"
You should read the district court opinion and the appellate opinion in this case - watch for how Judge Moore tries to define the word "religion" to basically mean "Christianity, and nothing else". Kind of hard for us to complain about judges twisting the Constitution to fit their preferred interpretation when we've got the Roy Moore's of the world polluting our own bed...