Replies

"There has to be some consideration of intent."

Really? So we are to presume someone's intent? I don't see how that is possible. Even if they make a claim as to their intent, we can only have faith that they are being truthful.

"Are there any Supreme Court justices or employees who worship such Greek / Roman "gods" and put the statue there as a religious statement?"

I haven't done a poll. So the issue is, if they worship the God which everyone seems to be reminded of when they look at the monument/statue, that is when it becomes wrong? So if Moore was a Buddhist, this monument would be okay?

"Is anyone claiming Greek / Roman gods gave us laws that are the "highest law of the land"?

Many claim that our system of justice came from the Romans and the Greeks, and I know there are statues to both the Roman and Greek god/goddess of justice in a few courthouses around this land. I view that as the same thing.

So we are to presume someone's intent? I don't see how that is possible. Even if they make a claim as to their intent, we can only have faith that they are being truthful.

I don't believe there's any presumption required. Judge Moore has publicly stated his intent. I will take him at his word until he's proven a liar.

So if Moore was a Buddhist, this monument would be okay?

Moore's religion is immaterial. If he uses his government office and government facilities to favor a particular religion, he's wrong. Buddhist, Zoroastrian, Catholic - it doesn't matter.

I haven't heard folks make that claim (I've heard England), and I haven't heard anyone claim that laws given by their (Roman / Greek) gods were the law of our land.