cross and clouds

To stay informed on the latest church-state news, visit the Baptist Joint Committee’s Blog from the Capital at www.BJConline.org/blog, or click on the “blog” category on this mobile site. Updated regularly by Don Byrd, it has news and analysis on a variety of stories affecting religious liberty. Here are some recent items, including a way you can participate in the newsgathering process.

‘The six commandments’ is no solution

[A] federal judge in Virginia is urging parties in a Ten Commandments dispute to think outside the box to arrive at a solution. One of his suggestions was the possibility of removing from public school displays the commandments that are explicitly religious in character, leaving a display of only six commandments (which brings to mind a scene from Mel Brooks’ History of the World: Part I).

Church-state experts weighing in don’t sound optimistic that this would be a practical or acceptable answer to the problem. The Roanoke Times reports:

   Charles Haynes, a senior scholar with the First Amendment Center, said the compromise is unlikely to appeal to either side.

“I don’t think it cures the problem,” Haynes said. “In fact, it may make it worse, because for many Christians, to somehow edit the commandments would be an offense to their faith.” …

“It’s the worst of both worlds,” Haynes said. “It keeps the scriptures on the walls as a government-sanctioned message, but it truncates the scriptures and distorts their message.”

Meanwhile, columnist Ted Biondo suggests the plaintiffs challenging the display are responsible for cutting the religion out of the Ten Commandments. But, it’s the display’s defenders that argue the Ten Commandments’ historical, legal significance (not its religious significance) justifies the posting. So which side is secularizing this sacred text?

Judge rules Sussex County prayer practice likely unconstitutional           

Far be it from me [Don Byrd] to recommend a person spend time out of their busy day to slog through a judicial opinion on church-state matters. That’s what you count on me for, right? But if you are interested in the issue of legislative prayer — that is, official prayer opening government meetings — you should take a few minutes to read the opinion filed [May 15] enjoining the Sussex County (DE) Council from implementing their prayer practice because it is likely to be found unconstitutional. The discussion section (pages 7-16) offers an especially clear explanation of the issues involved and the precedent controlling, without losing the complexity or delicacy of the analysis.

The bottom line — for those who still would rather not (I can’t blame you) — is that while the Supreme Court has left a broad opportunity for government bodies to open meetings with prayer, there are limitations that keep the state from crossing the line into endorsement of a particular faith. Here, Sussex County’s Council delivered a distinctly Christian prayer (The Lord’s Prayer) before most every meeting. That close affiliation with the Christian faith, the court rightly concludes, runs afoul of the First Amendment.

 The fact that The Lord’s Prayer has been the only prayer recited at the beginning of Council meetings for over six years is likely to be found to demonstrate that the Council gives Christianity an unconstitutionally preferred status, sending a message to meeting attendees that the Council is promoting the beliefs of Christianity. …

The defense in this case offered up the troubling argument that perhaps The Lord’s Prayer was not in fact distinctly Christian, and they argued that to improperly advance religion, the Council would have to have actively proselytized. The judge rejected both arguments … In issuing the injunction that would halt the practice, the judge delayed its effect for a month to give the parties time to work out a solution.

 A campaign on issues?           

It’s nice to see both President Obama’s and presumptive Republican nominee Mitt Romney’s campaigns decry the use of religion in attacking the opposition. The Los Angeles Timesreports that on the heels of Romney’s refusal of a renewed Rev. Jeremiah Wright line of criticism, David Axelrod has likewise said Romney’s faith is not appropriate campaign fodder.

Obama campaign senior advisor David Axelrod said Sunday [May 20] that Mitt Romney’s Mormon religion was off-limits in Democratic strategies for the campaign.

 “We’ve said that’s not fair game,” Axelrod said on CNN’s “State of the Union with Candy Crowley.”

When the GOP proposal from a “super PAC” emerged last week, Romney was quick to distance himself from the conservative group.

“I want to make it very clear I repudiate that effort,” Romney told reporters at a campaign stop in Jacksonville, Fla., … “I think it’s the wrong course for a PAC or a campaign. I hope that our campaigns can respectively be about the future, and about issues and about a vision for America.”

As the 2012 election approaches, a recurring feature of the blog will be excerpts from candidates’ own words on religious liberty. As candidates for office in your state or congressional district discuss those issues, send their comments to Don Byrd at [email protected].

From the June 2012 Report from the Capital. Click here for the next article.