RE: Steven Williams case and the Ten Commandments cases

[Marc Stern]

This is fundamentally wrong as a matter of fact. There are far more than 10 commandments in what we know as the Ten Commandments. <>There are significant differences in numbering the commandments, differences with significant theological overtones. There are important differences in translations and understanding, again with significant theological and practical import(Is it a ban on killing or murder? Does it encompass war or abortion or capital punishment? And there are crucial differences in the importance of the commandments. Are they as many Christians seem to think, the sum and substance of binding law after the advent of Jesus or as Jews think something else-a covenantal document or a summary of the law, but not its totality. I spell out these differences in  an amicus brief in Orden v. Perry. Professor Finkleman has an article coming out in an upcoming Fordham Law review pointing out some of the differences and Professor Lubet had a similar piece in constitutional commentaries a few years ago. All of this says nothing of the rights of atheists or non-Judeo _Christian faiths. Marc Stern   From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, December 16, 2004 7:56 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Steven Williams case and the Ten Commandments cases   In a message dated 12/15/2004 4:52:10 PM Eastern Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Hm -- and some people say that the Protestant Empire is dead and gone. If one can display the Ten Commandments (five gets you ten that the only version we are likely to see in any of these displays is the evangelical Protestant version) along with other legal documents, that one can display the Sermon on the Mount etc. so long as it is "contextualized" with the Declaration of Independence and the U.S. Constitution, for example. And, I must ask, what displays does one suppose that a Protestant Empire would want to put up? Why they would be the ones that the SG supports and that Alan has supposed below!   As we worked on aspects of the decalogue cases that our organization has defended, and the amici we have filed in other cases, I have become more and more fascinated by the Jewish-Catholic-Protestant dichotomy drawn in some quarters. The Decalogue is set out in full in the scripture. For purposes of catechesis, it is summarized in brief. Various summarizations exist, but are all based on the same statement in full of the Ten Words. Is there any variation in the ten words amongst the versions?  No. Is there any variation in the summarization of the ten words?  Yes, a small amount. Is there a difference of significance?  Not at all. Consider this example:  Mom tells little Johnny:  go potty, wash your hands and face, brush your teeth, and go to bed.  Some variation in the order of the instructions and the execution of them leads to unfortunate consequences, for example, if Johnny waits till he's in bed to go potty.  But the ten words don't work that way.  And there is no dispute over the text from which the summarizations are drawn.  So, there really is no "there" there in the teapot tempest over which version will be used.  Jim "Do you have any other arguments?" Henderson Senior Counsel ACLJ

_______________________________________________
To post, send message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To subscribe, unsubscribe, change options, or get password, see 
http://lists.ucla.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/religionlaw

Please note that messages sent to this large list cannot be viewed as private.  
Anyone can subscribe to the list and read messages that are posted; people can 
read the Web archives; and list members can (rightly or wrongly) forward the 
messages to others.