Ten Commandments Monument Declared Historic

In Utah, a federal judge has decided that a Ten Commandments monument is more historic than religious. Therefore, it doesn’t have to be moved from public property. This appears to be one of the monuments erected in the 1950s on account of the movie “The Ten Commandments.” Just how old does something have to be before it becomes “historic”?

BYU NewsNet reports:

"No one and no religion has an exclusive claim to the icons of history," Jenkins wrote in his ruling. "History belongs to all." ... "I find it kind of ironic that in order for Pleasant Grove to keep its monument in place they have to deny the religious nature of it," Barnard said. "If someone has deeply-held religious beliefs, they should be able to publicly announce them. Instead the leadership of Pleasant Grove is taking this less than forthright route."

Personally, I’ve never encountered any defender of Ten Commandments monuments who was genuinely motivated by historical considerations and history alone. Oh, historical arguments are indeed used all the time — but that’s not what motivates defenders. What motivates defenders is a religious commitment to what they regard as important religious doctrines. They know that Ten Commandments monuments have a religious meaning to them and others, but they argue in court that they “only” have a historical meaning. Doesn’t this suggest dishonesty on their part?

Read More:

• Secularism 101
• Separation of Church and State 101
• Ten Commandments