OUR VIEW: Opening a Pandora’s box

Maybe it could be an attraction, Religion Land? We could probably use the tourist dollars. Every faith could be represented, even something for people who say they aren’t religious but are “spiritual.”

Last week state representatives approved 86-10 House Joint Resolution 1062, which would repeal Section 5 of Article II of the state Constitution. It reads, in part “public money or property cannot be used directly or indirectly for any sect, church, denomination, or system of religion.”

This is, of course, a way to get the Ten Commandments back on Capitol grounds. Approved easily, because isn’t that what the people of the state want? It may very well be, in that very specific instance. But this is not a very specific amendment.

Removing this language from the Constitution would likely open the door for legal challenge after legal challenge for groups who want to either make a statement, or get their fair share.

Why should anyone be left out of our State Capitol? It’s the argument most recently made by a Hindu organization, that would, if approved by voters, again request a statue of Lord Hanuman on Capitol grounds. Can we say yes to one and no to another?

Remember the Satanic church that wanted a statue of the devil placed on Capitol grounds? That was mainly political theater, a protest for the separation of church and state, but state lawmakers still balked. Said it would never be allowed. Sorry, but it’s just one of the possible futures we could be looking at with a backlash of Ten Commandments legislation in place.

One argument is that the Ten Commandments is of historic significance, because it serves as the basis for our justice system. Maybe, but that argument isn’t tied to simply removing language from the Constitution about public property use for religious items.

We get why this had such wide approval, no one wants to be the one to stand in the way of such a rigorous belief system. How do we look now on Puritanical New England, with stocks, scarlet letters, witch hunts or any number of devices for public shaming? We don’t look favorably on that society ruled by an oppressive religious doctrine. But, in that time, people within the society probably just thought of it as business as usual.