Now, thou shalt discuss the Ten Commandments

Wendy Leece

This week we asked our parent panelists: As the Supreme Court

discusses the posting of the Ten Commandments in government

buildings, we are reminded of the 1980 decision that banned a

Kentucky classroom from posting the same. Are the Ten Commandments a

valuable life lesson for the schools, or should they never be

displayed in a public place?

The Ten Commandments on display in schools reminded American

students of basic rules of civility and law in our Western society.

But the Supreme Court ruled there was no secular purpose in posting

them, and Kentucky’s requirement violated the First Amendment’s

Establishment Clause.

Twenty-five years later, we see that civility among students and

toward teachers and other adults is a growing, serious problem. State

and local school boards continue to write new rules about acceptable

student behavior. A few years ago, our school board had to pass an

anti-bully policy.

For thousands of years, the Ten Commandments have been a subtle

force to undergird and order societies. Though the first four

commandments deal with man’s show of respect for God, the remaining

six define how we respect others. Even if someone is not religious,

the moral lessons they represent are timeless and universal. Many

believe that by keeping the commandments, they will have a good life.

Realizing court decisions had been misunderstood and misapplied by

administrators and teachers, Secretary of Education Richard W. Riley

released “Religious Expression in Public Schools” in 1995

(https://www.ed.gov/Speeches /08-1995/religion.html). It states

students may learn that “the Pilgrims came to this country with a

particular religious vision,” and the Bible may be taught as

literature, and schools may only “teach about explanations of life on

earth including religious ones in comparative religion or social

studies classes.”

California Educational Code 51511 allows students to learn about

religion in holidays, literature, history, art, drama and music.

Yet teachers are apprehensive about anything that might be

construed to endorse religion. Teachers don’t want a lawsuit, or to

be reprimanded for proselytizing. Confusion still reigns.

Probably the Scopes trial in 1925 signaled the start of an

insidious effort in America to remove Judeo-Christian symbols. Courts

now endorse a religion of secularism grounded in relativism, where

each person defines what is right or wrong.

I would hope the Supreme Court does not rule that the Ten

Commandments should never be displayed in public. Those obsessed with

using the courts to eliminate Judeo-Christian symbols from the public

square may one day be successful, and that will be a sad day. But

they should know countless Americans don’t need to see symbols to

remind them to obey the Ten Commandments.

They have these precepts written on their hearts and will only

work harder to pass them along to the next generation.

* WENDY LEECE is a parent who lives in Costa Mesa and is a former

Newport-Mesa school board member.

The question is worded interestingly, but the answers are still

very clear. The answers have been clear since the First Amendment to

the Constitution was written.

The Ten Commandments are a valuable life lesson for many, but

cannot be part of the lesson at public schools.

The Ten Commandments should be and are displayed in public places,

but cannot be displayed in government-owned or government-funded

public places in any manner that would construe government

endorsement of religion.

In 1802 Thomas Jefferson wrote what still stands today as the

definitive answer.

“I contemplate with solemn reverence that act of the whole

American people, which declared that their legislature should make no

law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free

exercise thereof, thus building a wall of separation between Church

and State ... “

The first four commandments are purely theological in content.

They refer solely to the Jewish and Christian religions and can be

offensive to non-Judeo-Christians. Thus, they do not pass the test

described by Supreme Court Justice Sandra Day O’Connor, “A law is

unconstitutional if it favors one religion over another in a way that

makes some people feel like outsiders and others feel like insiders.”

If parents believe that the Ten Command- ments should be an

important part of their child’s educa- tion, they have several

excellent choices, including teaching them to their children

themselves, having their child attend religious education classes at

the church of their choice and, of course, sending their child to a

religious school. Any of those options will provide far better

insight than posting the Ten Commandments somewhere on a public

school wall. All of those options come with no constitutional baggage

and all have worked just fine for more than 200 years.

These issues have been decided with respect to public schools. I’d

much prefer that we direct our attention to more pressing issues,

such as improving reading and comprehension skills.

That way the kids will be better equipped to read the Ten

Commandments and the Constitution and understand the importance and

sanctity of the principles embodied in both.

* MARK GLEASON is a parent who lives in Costa Mesa.