Regarding the "dispute" over posting of the Ten Commandments at the
Hamilton County Courthouse, Dr. Robert Swansbrough, UTC political
science professor and career political hack for the Left, said: "It's patently obvious...there is political gain in being on this side of this issue in the buckle of the Bible Belt. Even if they lose, they are seen as on the side of right. It's very opportunistic."
Swansbrough's assertion not withstanding, the real issue is much more important than "political opportunism," and one the Left would like to avoid. At stake is the question of what authority the Constitution gives the central government and its federal judiciary to decide such matters in the several states.
Of course there is nothing stipulating "separation between church and state" in the U.S. Constitution (nor was such envisioned by our Founders). The only Constitutional language pertaining to this issue is found in Article 6, Section 3, ("no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States.") and again in the First Amendment ("Congress shall make
no law respecting an establishment of religion....") Both of these
references are restrictions upon the central government.
Nowhere does the Constitution, or its definitive explication The
Federalist Papers, provide for activist judicial intervention in the
several states in such matters as prayer at football games or hanging
the Decalogue at a county courthouse. The Ten Commandments are are, after all, carved in marble relief above the bench of the Supreme Court.
Mark Caldwell
Chattanooga