{"id":3665,"date":"2005-03-03T13:44:03","date_gmt":"2005-03-03T18:44:03","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.thecarpetbaggerreport.com\/archives\/3665.html"},"modified":"2005-03-03T13:44:03","modified_gmt":"2005-03-03T18:44:03","slug":"avert-your-eyes","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/stevebenen.com\/thecarpetbaggerreport\/avert-your-eyes\/","title":{"rendered":"Avert your eyes"},"content":{"rendered":"<p>Yesterday&#8217;s cases before the Supreme Court on government-endorsed Ten Commandments displays produced some interesting fireworks, but also offered <a href=\"http:\/\/www.firstamendmentcenter.org\/analysis.aspx?id=14909\">one of the most disturbing arguments<\/a> I&#8217;ve heard in a long while.<\/p>\n<blockquote><p>&#8220;If an atheist walks by, they can avert their eyes,&#8221; said Justice Kennedy, who also complained of society&#8217;s &#8220;obsessive concern with any mention of religion.&#8221;<\/p>\n<p>[&#8230;]<\/p>\n<p>Scalia was persistent in proclaiming the religious meaning of the Ten Commandments. &#8220;It is a symbol that government derives its authority from God, and that&#8217;s appropriate,&#8221; said Scalia&#8230;. For those who disagree, Scalia said, &#8220;turn your eyes away if it is such a big deal for you.&#8221;<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p>This is painfully absurd. For one thing, it&#8217;s completely at odds with what is supposed to be a conservative outlook on society. Indeed, Scalia&#8217;s standard was embraced by the right yesterday, but would be horrific to the right if applied beyond state-sponsored religion.<\/p>\n<p>Imagine the outcries of conservatives if the Supreme Court&#8217;s response to complaints about pornography was, &#8220;Turn your eyes away if it is such a big deal for you.&#8221; Or if someone saw some jerk burning a flag and those who complain were told, &#8220;Turn your eyes away if it is such a big deal for you.&#8221; Or if some so-called &#8220;pro-family&#8221; group saw adult content on broadcast television and the FCC officials responded, &#8220;Turn your eyes away if it is such a big deal for you.&#8221;<\/p>\n<p>In fact, yesterday&#8217;s flippancy during oral arguments was worse. In the cases of the Decalogue displays, it&#8217;s state officials, who are supposed to be neutral on religion, promoting the Ten Commandments and Supreme Court justices telling us not to look at the state-sponsored religious monuments if we don&#8217;t like them. In other words, one branch of the government is endorsing Christianity while another branch tells us to try not to notice.<\/p>\n<p><!--more-->The other dramatic flaw in Kennedy&#8217;s and Scalia&#8217;s reasoning is that it&#8217;s a recipe for mob rule on religious liberty. To hear these justices tell it, if the majority wants the state to endorse a specific religion&#8217;s holy text, the minority should just get over it. Your First Amendment rights will be protected, so long as you&#8217;re not out-voted by people of other religious traditions.<\/p>\n<p>It&#8217;s turning the nation&#8217;s protections against tyranny of the majority on their head. I remember hearing from my Dad that as a young Jewish kid in a Philadelphia public school, he&#8217;d hear Christian prayers in his classroom every morning. If he didn&#8217;t like it, he was told he could wait in the hall. Eventually, the Supreme Court said this kind of practice is unacceptable under the First Amendment &#8212; kids can pray if they want, but it&#8217;s not the school&#8217;s job to promote prayer, and it&#8217;s definitely not the school&#8217;s job to make people of minority faiths outsiders in their own school and their own country.<\/p>\n<p>Yet this is the logical extension of yesterday&#8217;s &#8220;avert your eyes&#8221; argument. The state is going to endorse the majority faith now, and if you don&#8217;t like it, that&#8217;s your problem. <\/p>\n<p>It strikes at the very heart of what the First Amendment stands for and undermines religious liberty at its core.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Yesterday&#8217;s cases before the Supreme Court on government-endorsed Ten Commandments displays produced some interesting fireworks, but also offered one of the most disturbing arguments I&#8217;ve heard in a long while. &#8220;If an atheist walks by, they can avert their eyes,&#8221; said Justice Kennedy, who also complained of society&#8217;s &#8220;obsessive concern with any mention of religion.&#8221; [&hellip;]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":3,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[617],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-3665","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-general"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/stevebenen.com\/thecarpetbaggerreport\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/3665","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/stevebenen.com\/thecarpetbaggerreport\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/stevebenen.com\/thecarpetbaggerreport\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/stevebenen.com\/thecarpetbaggerreport\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/3"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/stevebenen.com\/thecarpetbaggerreport\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=3665"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/stevebenen.com\/thecarpetbaggerreport\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/3665\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/stevebenen.com\/thecarpetbaggerreport\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=3665"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/stevebenen.com\/thecarpetbaggerreport\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=3665"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/stevebenen.com\/thecarpetbaggerreport\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=3665"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}