Ten Commandments Argument Analysis

Placement of the Ten Commandments Controversy Is a monument featuring the Ten Commandments placed on the grounds of the state capitol a violation of the First Amendment? The First Amendment to the Constitution declares that Congress cannot make any laws “respecting an establishment of religion” (Schmidt, Shelley, Bardes 69), and the establishment clause provides the guidelines for separation of church and state. That is where the controversy over the Oklahoma state Capitol’s Ten Commandment monument begins. The controversy over the placement of the Ten Commandments display began in December 2013 when an Oklahoma City woman decided that the monument was “an endorsement of religion by the state” and felt that the display was “hurtful” (Dinger “Atheist

(Dinger “Ten Commandments …”). The Attorney General Scott Pruitt was happy with the decision because of the historical context of the monument. He was quite sure the judge would rule in the state’s favor because of a similar case involving “a nearly identical monument in Texas” where the United States Supreme Court ruled it constitutional. (Dinger “Ten Commandments …”). Hiram Sasser, legal director for the Liberty Institution agreed that it was “a great victory for the people of Oklahoma” (Dinger “Ten Commandments …”).

Nevertheless, on July 27, 2015, “the Oklahoma Supreme Court reaffirmed . . . that a Ten Commandments monument on the state Capitol grounds is unconstitutional and must be removed” (“Oklahoma Court: Ten Commandments Monument at Capitol Must Go”). The Supreme Court stated that “the Ten Commandments are obviously religious in nature and are an integral part of the Jewish and Christian faiths” (Scribner); therefore, by allowing this monument to stay on the state Capitol grounds, the First Amendment was being