Scott J. Lawson

June 20, 2024

Louisiana is now the first state to require the Ten Commandments to be displayed in every public school classroom from kindergarten to public state-funded universities. A bill recently signed by Governor Jeff Landry requires a poster-sized display of the Ten Commandments in “large, easily readable font” along with other historical documents (Mayflower Compact, the Declaration of Independence, the Northwest Ordinance) in all classrooms.

Certain to be challenged in court, the law has already been criticized and prompted outrage from a variety of groups including advocates of the separation of church and state, most Democrat politicians, and of course from atheist groups and Leftist organizations.

According to the bill;
“The legislature finds and declares all of the following:
(1) In 2005, the Supreme Court of the United States recognized that it is permissible to display the Ten Commandments on government property in Van Orden v. Perry, 545 U.S. 677, 688 (2005).
(2) In 2006, the legislature enacted Act No. 602 of the 2006 Regular Session of the legislature which provided for the secretary of state to publish the Ten Commandments and other historically significant documents for posting in court houses and other public buildings to address “a need to educate and inform the public as to the history and background of American and Louisiana law
In 2019, the Supreme Court of the United States further recognized that the Ten Commandments “have historical significance as one of the foundations of our legal system. . .”, in American Legion v. American Humanists Association, 588 U.S. 29, 53 (2019) and, the court also ruled that the displaying of the Ten Commandments on public property may have “multiple purposes” such as “historical significance” and represent a “common cultural heritage”. id, 588 U.S. at 54.
(4) Recognizing the historical role of the Ten Commandments accords with our nation’s history and faithfully reflects the understanding of the founders of our nation with respect to the necessity of civic morality to a functional self-government. History records that James Madison, the fourth President of the United States of America, stated that “(w)e have staked the whole future of our new nation . . . upon the capacity of each of ourselves to govern ourselves according to the moral principles of the Ten Commandments.”
(5) Including the Ten Commandments in the education of our children is part of our state and national history, culture, and tradition.”

Legal arguments aside, is the backlash from Leftists in particular, who seem perfectly content to allow the display of what is essentially their religion (an organized version and practice of their worldview, ideology, beliefs system, preferred groups, dogmas, etc) a hypocritical stance? After all, they have spent the last couple years adamantly defending the placement of LGBT flags, paraphernalia, and doctrine in not only physical classrooms but in lesson plans as well.

If we cannot all just agree to keep all such controversial ideological, religious, and political content off display and out of classrooms so that children can focus on learning the basics, why would current controversial ideological and political trends be ok to promote, but basic moral doctrine that has been around for thousands of years not be ok? If the actual content of the Ten Commandments is somehow troubling to these people, what if a colorful flag were concocted (similar to the rainbow LGBT flag) and displayed to represent the commandments? Could such a flag be referenced and spoken about without issue, or would talking about it present a problem as well? Can our children develop a proper understanding of our moral, cultural, social, political, and legal systems without discussing ideas as basic as the Ten Commandments? Clearly things are getting a bit absurd in this country.

Given the reality of the debate, it is very likely this bill was introduced at least partially as a provocative act and it appears written in such a way as to prepare for a future legal battle. It may very well be that displaying the Ten Commandments is unnecessary, or contrary to what has come to be the precedent pertaining to the First Amendment and religious display by public entities. But the Ten Commandments as a document certainly does have historical significance and it would certainly be difficult to argue children do not need to at least know about them and how they fit into our system. The Ten Commandments have inherent value that applies to human beings outside of a religious context. Most secular people, even those that have a problem with their display, would likely acknowledge this. But for those that may be confused, below is a summary of the Ten Commandments for secular people to consider from their perspective. Included is the text of the Commandments from Exodus followed by a brief discussion of what the commandments might mean in secular philosophical and moral terms.

Commandment I:

And God spoke all these words: “I am the Lord your God, who brought you out of Egypt, out of the land of slavery.

“You shall have no other gods before me.”

-The secular equivalent today might be something like, “you shall recognize objectively-derived moral principles and obey them from duty.” The overall concept of the monotheistic God of the Bible is certainly more complex than that, but morally, the notion of God as a supreme lawgiver that must logically be obeyed because He is pure goodness is equivalent to the idea moral imperatives are true in themselves and a good will must not act to contradict them or logically an inherent contradiction is created.

Commandment II

“You shall not make for yourself an image in the form of anything in heaven above or on the earth beneath or in the waters below. You shall not bow down to them or worship them; for I, the Lord your God, am a jealous God, punishing the children for the sin of the parents to the third and fourth generation of those who hate me, but showing love to a thousand generations of those who love me and keep my commandments.”

-From a secular perspective this might mean, “You shall not allow worldly desires to come before obedience to these objectively-derived moral principles and the rights derived from them.” Putting something else first in an attempt to pursue a worldly ends will ultimately cause social breakdown and personal pain. Such action can be considered morally wrong when the maxim of the act cannot be universalized and when it comes at the expense of the fundamental rights of others.

Commandment III

“You shall not misuse the name of the Lord your God, for the Lord will not hold anyone guiltless who misuses his name.”

-Far from a prohibition on simply uttering the lord’s name loosely, this reflects the idea, “You shall not misuse this objective moral concept to get what you want or falsely seem virtuous.” It is a prohibition against falsely claiming that a desire you prefer or a desire you do not prefer has some inherent authority outside of objective principle, or that another worldly authority wills it and has the final say on matters of controversy. Obviously there is going to be a lot of disagreement on various points and principles that come up in human affairs, but essentially it is a rejection of subjective moral judgment at the fundamental level.

Commandment IV

“Remember the Sabbath day by keeping it holy.  Six days you shall labor and do all your work, but the seventh day is a sabbath to the Lord your God. On it you shall not do any work, neither you, nor your son or daughter, nor your male or female servant, nor your animals, nor any foreigner residing in your towns. For in six days the Lord made the heavens and the earth, the sea, and all that is in them, but he rested on the seventh day. Therefore the Lord blessed the Sabbath day and made it holy.”

-This commandment is probably the most difficult to translate into a secular principle. If I had to summarize it in a secular way I would say it essentially means, “You are not a beast of burden, you have reason and you shall honor this with willful time for reflection and strive to cultivate the faculties in your disposition that make such reasoned reflection possible.” To some, this might seem like a stretch, but consider just how much in our current society could be better handled if we all spent less time on personal worldly pursuits and just stopped to study and reflect on morality, ethics, our criteria for judgement, social, economic, and political matters, and our interactions with the natural world. When one really considers it, this commandment is probably the least appreciated, yet most important to bolstering all the rest.

Commandment V

“Honor your father and your mother, so that you may live long in the land the Lord your God is giving you.”

This might mean, “You shall respect the natural order, the family, and reasoned authority.” Few would argue with the general notion of parental authority and duty to their offspring, and the logical opposite of this – the duty children have to submit to their parents (at least until the age of empancipation). In addition to this, we ought to consider how such a willful submission plays a role in creating virtuous individuals, strong families, and maintaining an orderly society. When this perpetuates, in accord with nature, there will be prosperity. If it degenerates, we risk trouble.

Commandment VI

“You shall not murder.”

-Many may see this as self-explanatory, however given the rest of the context of the commandments and our understanding of the purpose, it also means “You shall respect the mutual fundamental right to life we all have as members of a moral community based on reason.” Given objective principles, we cannot take exceptions for ourselves and determine we have the authority to end the life of other innocent human beings contrary to their equal fundamental inalienable rights. To do so would contradict the concept of fundamental inalienable rights.

Commandment VII

“You shall not commit adultery.”

-This is another commandment that may seem self-explanatory, however given the rest of the commandments it can be interpreted further to reveal the essence of the wrong, “You shall respect the bond and commitment man and woman make to each other in furtherance of the natural and moral order.” Adultery is based on deceit and a disrespect for one’s partner. It is putting selfish worldly pleasures ahead of moral goodness and duty. In a marriage, for instance, the two individuals (man and woman) become one with a covenant and bear offspring. Adultery is contrary to this concept because of the violation of consent and trust of the other party, as well as the dereliction of duty one has to be faithful and committed to the family.

Commandment VIII

“You shall not steal.”

-Extrapolating out, this means, “You shall not take what is not rightfully yours because it violates the rights of others and reduces their humanity to that of a means to your own selfish end.” There is no moral justification for the act, as the maxim of said act could not be universalized given it requires a violation of consent.

Commandment IX

“You shall not give false testimony against your neighbor.”

-This means, “You shall not be dishonest – it is an inherent contradiction – it improperly takes advantage of others and if universalized would render society (and the moral community) unworkable.” If the lie implicates another person in an immoral/illegal act, it is directly doing them wrong, but all lies victimize the truth, and this harms all of humanity because it threatens the supremacy of the truth as the default for fruitful relations among individuals in the mutual moral community.

Commandment X

“You shall not covet your neighbor’s house. You shall not covet your neighbor’s wife, or his male or female servant, his ox or donkey, or anything that belongs to your neighbor.”

-Similar to where we began with the commandments, this one comes back around to the notion one ought not put worldy things before virtue and moral principles. “You shall not be jealous, overly materialistic; it is a distraction from what is important, it cheapens your humanity, and harms the moral community.”

From this explanation it should be clear how the Ten Commandments are in fact compatible with, and helped inspire, the systems we have based our foundations on today. One does not need to be a Jew or a Christian to appreciate the Ten Commandments or abide by the moral principles they reflect. Given this, should a state be able to determine whether or not such a document ought to be displayed and taught in classrooms within their jurisdiction? Does including the Ten Commandments in such a list of historical documents insult, disrespect, or take away from any other religious or ideological texts or doctrines?  You decide.

I’m sure the courts will decide this issue. But whatever the courts decide, it will always remain true that studying the Ten Commandments has worth, and all children ought to understand them. The same cannot be said about many other ideological movements, some of which are based on subjective ends and more akin to indoctrination that promotes selfishness at best, degeneracy at worst. Those movements are often contrary to the inherent moral basis reflected in the Ten Commandments, which explains why the same people oppose them so fervently.

Here are some more typical Leftist internet reactions that indicate their promoted talking points for your enjoyment: