By Randy BrogdonFor decades Democrats and Progressives have been aggressively working to undermine the foundation of Americanism. Sadly, the protection of life and liberty has become a trivial pursuit to many. Liberals have patiently and persistently dismantled the foundational building blocks of our way of life. The evidence of which can be found in the recent controversy surrounding the courts.
Last week Oklahomans took not one, not two, but three, knock-down punches to the gut. First, the affirmative court rulings on Obamacare and homosexual marriage, and most recently, the Oklahoma Supreme court ruling that the Ten Commandments must be removed from the State Capitol grounds. These rulings are an all out assault on all things moral and spiritual. It goes even further than that inasmuch, self governance and justice appears to no longer be important to the courts.
In 2009 I was the Senate author of the legislation to place an historical monument of the Ten Commandments of the grounds of the State Capitol. Even though the bill passed with bipartisan super majorities in both houses and signed by a Democrat governor, the Oklahoma Supreme Court ordered the monument to be removed. Their stated reason was the “Ten Commandments are obviously religious in nature and are an integral part of the Jewish and Christian faiths.” Let that soak in for a moment. The Oklahoma Supreme Court stated in effect, that if anything has any religious meaning, it is unconstitutional and must be extracted from the Capitol grounds.
They cited Article 2 Section 5 to render their opinion. It states: “No public money shall ever be appropriated , applied, donated, or used…for the benefit or support of any sect, church, denomination, or system of religion, or support any priest, preacher, or minister.”
An honest reading of the law, is to prevent tax dollars from being used to promote a church or leader of a church on state property. First of all private funds were used to build the monument, and secondly, no church, denomination, or preacher is benefiting.
The court had ignore the obvious to come to their political decision, because it certainly isn’t an honest, legal or rational reading of Article 2 Section 5.
Some judges believe their responsibility is to interrupt the law, rather than to uphold the law as it is written. It is very troubling that any court justice would ignore the clear language of a law and impose their bias to interpret it rather than protect it. When a judge raises their right hand they swear to uphold the Constitution and anything else is a breech of their sworn duty.
The court’s latest ruling is a clear example of legislating from the bench. Their agenda seems to be revealed in their statement, citing the “Ten Commandments are obviously religious in nature and are an integral part of the Jewish and Christian faiths.” The seven members who voted to take the monument down, offered their opinion without regard to the language in the Constitution.
The Ten Commandments are as historically important to our system of government as is the Magna Carta, the Mayflower Compact, the Articles of Confederation and The Declaration of Independence. The Oklahoma Supreme Court does not have the authority to change the historical significance of our basis of law as outlined in the Ten Commandments. Nor do they have the right to change the will of the people. But the people do have the right to change members on the court.
We may have been knocked down by the court rulings but we’re not, knocked out. I believe it’s time for Republicans to fight the moral ignorance and political arrogance of the courts. The legislature is supposed to create the laws that protect the liberty of the people, and the courts are to be their guardian. Republican principles are still in vogue and it is high time we put them back on display. Defending and demanding limited government, individual liberty, and personal responsibility is and must remain the battle cry for the conservative.
– See more at: http://www.okgop.com/blog/2015/07/07/6441/#sthash.KwhWlhYF.dpuf
Aside from Brogdon’s typo errors, he obviously selects certain wording from the Constitution when making his shallow arguments, and ignores the facts.
The Constitution in article 2, section 5, states:
‘No public money or property shall ever be appropriated, applied, donated, or used, directly or indirectly, for the use, benefit, or support of any sect, church, denomination, or system of religion, or for the use, benefit, or support of any priest, preacher, minister, or other religious teacher or dignitary, or sectarian institution as such.’
He seems to ignore the reference to public property. Who paid for the monument is not relevant. And his flawed logic concerning his claim that no religious reference is implied by the Ten Commandments monuments is unbelievable and ridiculous.
I continue to be amazed by these pols who are yelling and screaming that SCOTUS disregarded the US Constitution last week (and I agree), while at the same time berating the OKSC for following the Constitution.
I detect the rancid stench of hypocrisy in the air.
Mr. Wood, to read your reasoning and follow your logic through to its obvious conclusion is a bit daunting here, but (correct me if I’m wrong), it’s like what you’re trying to squeeze out of this is that, by allowing the Ten Commandments monument to be built at the State Capital, what the legislators and governor did somehow constituted “appropriating property” for the “use, benefit, or support” or a “system of religion”–is that what you’re saying? I’m trying to borrow word from the amendment, see it from your angle, and figure out where the break down is, and this is what I’m coming up with. Fascinating.
Nobody is denying that the Ten Commandments are religious in nature. Having religious meaning does not equate with supporting a church, paying a minister, or giving property to promote a particular religious system. Stop and think: which church, synagogue or religious community was given the property where this monument was built? Which one will likely have more people in attendance at its services this weekend because the state has touted its faith with this monument? No one in particular, right? There you go….
Yes, the Ten Commandments are religious in nature–but then again, so is “In God We Trust” on our currency. So are the Ten Commandments displayed at the U.S. Supreme Court building. So are chapel rooms at state institutions—but all of these are GENERAL religious heritage expressions, not promotions of a particular denomination or affiliation. I think we’d both agree that “Judeo-Christian” takes in a LOT of territory (a multitude of faith practices)–but it forms the basis for the moral underpinnings of our legal system and its influence is still a part of the fabric of our society, much as the teachings of Confucius form the basis for the moral underpinnings of traditional Chinese society. Recognizing and celebrating our collective heritage is not the same as giving money or property pay a preacher, build a church, or promote a particular brand of faith, no matter how someone tries to spin it.
Troy, you would make a great politician.