Since 1971, the city park in Pleasant Grove, Utah, has featured a granite monument to the Ten Commandments. It doesn’t much look like Roy Moore’s rock in Alabama, but it’s a Decalogue display nevertheless.
While the park’s monument hasn’t generated a lot of controversy in the past, it may soon become the subject of a lawsuit.
Now I know what you’re thinking. A Ten Commandments display on public property maintained by the state might prompt a legal challenge from my friends at Americans United for Separation of Church and State or the ACLU. Not this time (not yet, anyway).
No, the Pleasant Grove controversy is driven by another religious group that would like equal treatment. If Christians can have their sacred text endorsed in a public park, they’d like their beliefs to receive similar support.
The name of the group is Summum, which is based primarily in Utah. This religion, which I have to admit I’m only tangentially familiar with, celebrates the Seven Aphorisms of Summum. The tenets include statements such as “Summum is Mind, Thought; the Universe is a Mental Creation,” and “Nothing rests; everything moves; everything vibrates,” and “As above, so below; as below, so above.”
If you’re looking for an explanation as to what any of this means, you’ve come to the wrong place. Besides, that’s not the point of this post.
According to a letter sent to Pleasant Grove’s mayor, Summum President Ammon Ra would like to “erect a monument similar in size and nature (to the Ten Commandments display) in that same city park” that feature the Seven Aphorisms. Ra argued in his letter that their faith’s display would help “make the world a better place.”
Not surprisingly, public officials in Pleasant Grove are unwilling to grant Summum’s request. They’d like to keep their Ten Commandments display, of course, but keep out a similar display honoring the Seven Aphorisms.
So, are the champions of government-sponsored religion, the ones of practically deified Roy Moore, who oppose church-state separation, and demand more religion “in the public square” leaping to the Summum’s defense? Not so much.
In fact, just the opposite is true. The same people who thought it was an outrageous act of tyranny to maintain church-state separation in Alabama seem to believe Pleasant Grove’s park should honor their Ten Commandments, but no one else’s faith tradition.
When the Jerry Falwells and Pat Robertsons of the world talk about the need for more religion in the public square, what they really mean is more of their religion in the public square.
This can’t work. As far as I’m concerned, the government should be neutral. When it comes to decorating schools, courthouses, public parks, and city halls, I’d prefer inclusive secular displays, not divisive religious ones.
If, however, the government at a state or local level is prepared to open the door to one religious tradition, then I’m afraid they’ll have to open the door to all religious traditions, no matter how small or out of the mainstream they may appear.
The government cannot be in a position of deciding which religions are “real” and which are “bizarre.” Religious liberty must not be open to a popularity contest.
If officials in Pleasant Grove insist on keeping a monument to celebrate the Ten Commandments, then they better start saving some space for other religions too. The Seven Aphorisms of Summum will need a spot, as will the Five Pillars of Islam, the Four Noble Truths of Buddhism, the Wiccan Rede, and the Affirmations of Humanism.
Or perhaps we can leave promotion of these principles to their respective traditions and maintain a government neutral on faith.