Quote:
Originally posted by archer2371
Now if these tablets had just the Roman Numerals I-X on them, would you object as much? Or how about if it weren't so large?
|
The people I have heard claim that the content is much less important than the reasons the judge stated as his basis for erecting the monument: to indicate that the creator's law is above man's law.
That is a perfectly fine belief for one to personally possess. It does not, however, square with our country's essential belief that we ought to governed by laws and not men--including human interpretation of divinely bestowed knowledge.
In this country, at least, our law is supreme--we don't kowtow to any other source of regulation, not even international law if the two collide. This debate wouldn't even be occurring if he had stuck a big, brass cast of his head on a pedestal--yet, here we are arguing over whether a judge can erect monuments in public arenas, especially along with the explicitly stated intent to place the very purpose of the building in which it stands into a subordinate position (sorry, that turned into a convaluted sentence: the monument has been placed in a courthouse to proclaim its dominance over the very principles of the courthouse).
To me, that is very bizarre.