Much has been made of that judge in alabama…and his refusal to remove a sculpture of the ten commandments from his courthouse. The ACLU apparently thinks that this is an unconstitutional endorsement of religion. What about that goddess with the blindfold holding the scales? Isn’t that a rpresentation of the Greek goddess of justice? Is that not an endorsement of (an admittedly mythical) religion?
I want to start a campaign to REMOVE ALL representations of the blidfolded goddess…more appropriate decoration (for a courthouse) would be lawyers with briefcases…perhaps even a sculpture of a lawyer chasing an ambulance would lend a tone of ambience to the courthouse!:eek:
How about a group of lawyers crouched in a circle and rolling dice for who gets the turkey with the fat wallet and the whiplash injury?
Oh, my GODDESS , he’s right!
Very interesting point, but the statues of Justice hold an entirely secular meaning in today’s society. If they were present in courthouses because of a ruling class that subscribed to the ancient greek religion, then maybe the argument would hold. Instead, references of this sort to greek mythology stem from an Enlightenment fascination with classical civilizations. Keep in mind that the separation of church and state is intended to protect minority religions, and pagans are very much in the minority. The founding fathers were all Christians, at least nominally. I’d be very curious to know if this imagery has ever been legally challenged.
I think a key point is that the religion of the Ancient Greeks is not actively practiced today. Hence, the filing of such things under “mythology” instead of “religion”. Therefore, could the court really be said to be promoting an “establishment of religion”, being that there really is no such “establishment” in modern times?
It really doesn’t matter whether the statute represents a “majority” religion. An icon that tended to establish Zoroastrianism would violate the First Amendment.
Courts use the Lemon test to determine if something violates the First Amendment. The Lemon test is:
(1) whether the government’s action has a secular or religious purpose; (2) whether the primary effect of the government’s action is to advance or endorse religion; and (3) whether government’s policy or practice fosters an excessive entanglement between government and religion.
The Lady of Justice and the ten commandments are entirely different things. The commandments have incribed in them words which establish moral principles which the Judeo-Christian religions believe in. And while I don’t particularly object to that, I do object tho the whole “I am the Lord thy God” and all the stuff which blatantly identifies the court’s religious preferances.
The statue of the lady does not acknowledge her existing, just as a statue of a unicorn doesn’t establish that unicorns exist. She was not put up to acknowledge any religion, she was put up as a symbol of justice. The ten commandments were put up for one purpose and that was religious recognition.
This country was based on justice, and it was not based on the preferrance of Christianity.
Note that the architectural details of the U.S. Supreme Court building have a number of depictions of Moses, notably on the East Pediment and the frieze inside the Courtroom, but not the actual words of the Ten Commandments. The depictions of Moses on the SCOTUS building are allegorical and historical allusions to the idea of law, just as the depictions of “Themis” or “Justicia” are allegorical representations of the idea of justice. (All links but the first one are to PDF files.) The statues of Moses and Themis are different from injunctions to the citizen to worship the God of the Jewish and Christian Bible, or to worship the Olympian gods of Greece and Rome.
[Corrected a link. – MEB]