Mocking the Ten Commandments

Atheists in Florida are celebrating the erection of the first atheist monument on public land in the U.S.  It seems that some religious people are upset at this.  One of their objections is that this monument serves the purpose of protesting the monument to the Ten Commandments that has been present at the same courthouse for some time.  It was stated that the Ten Commandments were the source of law in this country.

I would say that if some people want a monument to advance the view that they were a source for law in this country, that people who disagree with this should be able to promote their views in the same manner.  As it happens I think that the opponents of the Ten Commandments are right.

To examine this issue let's take a look at the Decalog and compare it to the Constitution.

1. Do not worship any other gods.  It seems that the writers of our constitution not only forgot to put this one in, they directly contradict it.  American Atheists rightly point out in their monument that under Old Testament law the punishment for this is death.  Our constitution fails to mention gods at all.  As near as I can tell the part that deals most directly with the practice of worshiping other gods is the first amendment:

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.

It seems that not only have the writers of the Constitution failed to establish the death penalty for worshiping other gods, but they have made it impossible for Congress to make any laws establishing a punishment for this infraction.  So far were the writers from prohibiting the practice that they actually managed to protect it.

2. Do not make any idols.  Again we search in vain for any reference to idols, graven images, likenesses to anything on heaven or the earth and so on.  There is no mention of these whatsoever.  It seems that this practice enjoys the same protection as the first.  It seems to me that there is quite a bit of difference between protecting a practice and establishing a death penalty for that same practice.  Apparently this distinction has escaped the attention of some of our more theistically inclined friends.

3. Do not misuse the name of God.  Again no mention of any god in the Constitution.  It would seem that this practice would fall under the same first amendment protection as the last two.

4. Keep the Sabbath holy.  Again no mention of a Sabbath or even a day of rest, nor any mention of anything being kept holy or sacred.  There's nothing in the Constitution specifically protecting people who want to work on the Sabbath, but the writers have neglected to prohibit the practice.  However, laws against working on Sunday are not entirely unknown in our legal history.

5. Honor your father and mother.  Again the writers of the Constitution left this part out.  There is no mention of mothers and fathers in the text at all.  If you follow the link to the Constitution that I have provided above you will find father only once and that is in a supplementary note at the bottom providing a link to the biographies of "founding fathers" who didn't sign the Constitution.  However, there have historically been laws in our country stipulating that children obey their parents.

6. Do not murder.  There is no mention in our constitution of murder.  However, here it seems that the promoters of the Decalog have some justification.  We see this in the fifth amendment:

No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a grand jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the militia, when in actual service in time of war or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.

See the part near the end where no person is to be deprived of life without due process of law.

7. Do not commit adultery.  I find no mention of adultery, cheating, husband or wife.  I doubt that the writers of our constitution intended for the government to establish a death penalty for the practice.  Some may even have been guilty of the offense.  However, there have been laws enforcing this commandment.

8. Do not steal.  In addition to the fifth amendment quoted above there is the fourth:

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

Score one more for the Decalog.

9. Do not lie.  I believe that this commandment is more narrow than this.  Other versions specifically prohibit bearing false testimony against a neighbor.  It is probably a prohibition against defamation of character, or perhaps perjury.  This is indeed a part of our legal tradition, though it didn't make it into the constitution.

10. Do not covet.  This commandment is traditionally interpreted as a prohibition against envy, which would be very difficult for human institutions to enforce.  I have run across a video of a TEDx talk that looked at the word used for covet as it was used in other parts of the Old Testament.  The speaker made a persuasive case that the original meaning referred to taking something for one's own use.  Unfortunately I am unable to provide a link to the video.  This interpretation gives the most charitable interpretation of the commandment.  Thus we could make a case that this rule is part of our legal tradition, even though this is probably by accident and it is difficult to tell how this differs from a prohibition against stealing.

In summary three of the Ten Commandments are directly opposed by the Constitution.  It is specifically those commandments that deal with God and worship that are likely to be opposed.  Of the remaining seven, only two or three have anything that could remotely be considered support in the Constitution.  However, there either is some support for them in other parts of our law or was at some point in the past.  The penalties for infractions have only been as severe in the case of murder.

The parts of the Ten Commandments that made it into our constitution and laws were often present in societies that drew from other sources.  For instance the Code of Hammurabi contains numerous provisions against theft and a few against violence along with references to other gods.  It is thought by most scholars to predate the Decalog by centuries.   It is simply not the case that civilizations with other religious traditions thought that theft and murder were acceptable.  So much for the Ten Commandments being a unique source from which our constitution and laws derive.