New front in religious battle

In this article from The Hill.com we learn that a Republican representative from Indiana is trying to weigh in on a court ruling telling an Alabama judge that he can't put a monument to the 10 commandments in the rotunda of the courthouse.

An Indiana Republican's amendment to a pending spending bill could block federal marshals from enforcing a federal court order to remove a massive replica of the Ten Commandments from the Alabama State Judicial Building in Montgomery. Rep. John Hostettler's amendment to the Commerce, State and Justice spending bill adds another element to the religious wars that have broken out of late on Capitol Hill. In recent weeks, Republicans have accused Democrats of operating an anti-Catholic litmus test that prevents conservative Catholics who oppose abortion from being confirmed to the federal bench. Hostettler told The Hill: "It's plain clear that Congress can do this because according to Article 1, Section 8, and Article 3, given that we create [the courts], we also fund them. It's a very excellent civics lesson that once a federal court says something it is not law."

It's also a great Civics lesson to look into the idea of checks and balances. It's even a better Civics lesson to look at first amendment of the US constitution, which says:

The establishment clause of the First Amendment states: “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting free exercise thereof.” Judge Ed Carnes, writing for a three-judge panel on the 11th Circuit, said that Supreme Court precedent held: “The establishment clause applies to the states through the due process clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.”

I feel sorry for the people of Alabama who have to put up with this kind of behavior from their government officials. Moreover I feel sorry for the Buddhists, Hindus, and others who don't share the ten commandments as part of their religious faith. I feel sorry for them because when they go into the courthouse in Alabama they are told by their government that they do not have equal standing. They are not part of the community, and ultimately they won't receive justice under the law, but justice under a Christian God as interpreted by a man. According to the article:

During the trial, Moore testified that he intended to teach the citizens of Alabama that God’s law trumps laws ordained by men, such as the U.S. Constitution, if the two are seen to be in conflict.

It's apparent to me that Moore feels that the people of Alabama can't get the religious instruction they need in church, and so he has been kind enough to bring it into the public courthouse as well. It's obvious that the United States celebrates our religious diversity. Given the fact that we pray in public schools, before public meetings, and sometimes before sporting events, it's obvious that we also need to have a religious icon in our courthouses. Because in America, there is great religious diversity, you can be any kind of Christian you want to be.