Until one of them can reconcile the Ten Commandments and Moses peering solemnly from the Supreme Court building itself, I think the answer to that is obvious.
Yet again, moving argument that winds up being incompatible with your previous argument.
First amendment was submitted in 1789 and ratified in 1791, Supreme Court building was completed in 1935. Maybe you intended to refer to the Moses and Ten Commandments that appear in the U.S. Capitol, but that building was designed in 1793 and not completed until 1811. You argue that subsequent intent shouldn't affect the original intent at the time the first amendment was adopted, but then you point to subsequent actions. Contradictory.
Aside from this, Moses is a historical figure, not solely a religious one. He is viewed as one of the earlier historical "lawgivers," and thus is featured alongside other religious and non-religious figures who were lawgivers in a historical context, including Confucius, Solon, Hammurabi, Pope Innocent III, and even Suleiman I, a *gasp* Muslim.
I am not aware of any display of the Ten Commandments in the Supreme Court or U.S. Capitol that lists the commandments themselves. Rather, there is a symbolic depiction of two tablets with Roman numerals I - X. These tablets appear in many different places, including on a frieze in the Supreme Court's courtroom itself. The frieze's designer, Adolph Weinman, has a letter on file with the Supreme Court archives which indicates that those tablets refer to the Bill of Rights.
Furthermore, there are also documents on file in the Supreme Court archives which indicate that architect Cass Gilbert instructed Adoplh Weinman to "choose the subjects and figures that best reflected the function of the Supreme Court building," hence the selection of a variety of historical lawgivers, both of religious and non-religious backgrounds.
But even if any of those images of tablets could be construed so as to refer to the Ten Commandments (such as the tablets that appear directly with Moses), there is no quotation of the Biblical contents of those tablets. Instead, there is only an image of tablets with Roman numerals on them, and thus no direct reference to religious commandments themselves, but rather a contextual reference to one of the first sets of laws created. The intentional absence of the actual text of each commandment in combination with the presence of other lawgivers suggests that no religious reference was intended to be displayed or conveyed.
116 Replies
19278 Views