First up from the God machine this week is a church-state controversy I’ve been following for several years now, which I admit I find endlessly entertaining. Best of all, the controversy is going to be heard by the Supreme Court, which guarantees an enormous amount of interest.
If a city allows a monument with the Ten Commandments to be erected in a public park, must it also allow other religions and groups to display monuments of their choosing? The Supreme Court agreed Monday to take up that question in an unusual dispute over the reach of the 1st Amendment and freedom of speech.
In the past, the court has said the free-speech rule applies in parks and officials may not discriminate against speakers or groups because of their message. In this context, freedom of speech means a freedom from government restrictions.
But last year, the U.S. appeals court in Denver extended this free-speech rule to cover the monuments, statues and displays in a public park. It ruled in favor of a religious group called Summum, which says it wants to erect its “Seven Aphorisms of Summum” next to the Ten Commandments in Pioneer Park in Pleasant Grove, Utah.
Its ruling left the city with an all-or-nothing choice: Allow Summum and others to erect their own displays in the park, or remove the other monuments.
It’s a classic case for conservatives who say we need more religion in the public square — and then balk if they don’t like the religions asking for equal treatment.
Local officials in this case want to allow the Ten Commandments (which they like) to be promoted on public property, but want to reject the “Seven Aphorisms of Summum” (which they don’t like). When officials say they support more public endorsement of religion, they mean their religion.
Here’s the funny part: Pleasant Grove is getting legal assistance from TV preacher Pat Robertson’s American Center for Law and Justice.
Yes, the legal group that brags about its efforts to get state-sponsored religion on public property is helping a local government keep a religious group from erecting a religious monument.
The ACLJ and the rest of the religious right insist that we need more religion in the “public square.” The Summum agree. Christian activists respond, “Uh, we didn’t mean you guys.”
The Supreme Court will hear the case in a few months. I look forward to hearing conservative religious activists nationwide argue vehemently against more religious displays.
Also from the God Machine this week, The Virginian Pilot’s Bill Sizemore, who knows as much as Pat Robertson as anyone, had a fascinating observation about Robertson’s plans for the Second Coming. (via Right Wing Watch)
In order to prepare for the imminent Second Coming — which Robertson believes will occur on the Mount of Olives in Jerusalem according to biblical prophecy — he acquired METV (Middle East Television), a station then based in southern Lebanon that could broadcast into Israel. Straub was given marching orders to be ready to televise Christ’s return.
CBN executives drew up a detailed plan to broadcast the event to every nation and in all languages. Straub wrote: “We even discussed how Jesus’ radiance might be too bright for the cameras and how we would have to make adjustments for that problem. Can you imagine telling Jesus, ‘Hey, Lord, please tone down your luminosity; we’re having a problem with contrast. You’re causing the picture to flare.'”
I don’t think I can respond to this any better than Yglesias did: “Good thing that as long as the Republicans are in charge we don’t need to worry about any nutty pastors getting political influence.”