In Oklahoma, like many other states, the Christians working in government wished to have the foundation of the American legal system honored.  They recognized that the Ten Commandments have been a major influence on Western thoughts on Jurisprudence.  To honor this history, lawmakers voted to display the Commandments on the grounds of the capital building.  And, like many other states have discovered, revisionist readings of the Constitution will soon bring that display down.

Christian News reports:

Following a legal challenge from an apostate Baptist minister, the Oklahoma Supreme Court has ruled that a Ten Commandments monument placed on the grounds of the Oklahoma Capitol building must be removed because it violates the state Constitution’s prohibition of government property being used to support religion.

The idea that a display of the Ten Commandments supports religion is a show of ignorance.  It is baffling to me how we continue to allow such bad arguments to stand.  To support is to pay for, not to display writings, or statues.  There is something wrong when you think a display of the Commandments is support.  Besides the bad argument, we must recognize that the Commandments are the historical basis for our legal system.  The reason that they are so controversial is because of their lack of use by Christians.  I argue for their use in my book, An
Eternal Covenant.  But we know it is all just a ruse to get the Church out of the public.

Christian News continues:

The lead plaintiff was liberal minister Bruce Prescott, the director of Mainstream Oklahoma Baptists. Prescott said that mixing the sacred with the secular in such a manner cheapens the display, and asserted that it violated the Constitution’s Establishment Clause, which says that “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion…”

Okay, so, let’s put this to bed once for all.  If we look at the establishment clause, here quoted by this apostate, we should notice that this never says anything about displays or public quoting of scripture.  In fact, this has nothing to do with state and church, except that it provides freedom for the people.  There is no mention in the Constitution concerning public displays of faith.  Rather, it is stating that the State cannot restrict or hinder personal expressions of faith.

The fact that they use this to prohibit the use of public grounds for religious/historical symbols is sad.  It is sad because they and all who fall for such arguments show they lack the power to reason.  Only children use such lines of reasoning.  “I don’t like it; therefore, it is wrong.”  Knowing that this would not fly, they were forced to turn to the Oklahoma Constitution.

The case was then refiled with the Oklahoma Supreme Court, which ruled on Tuesday 7-2 that the monument must be removed because it violates Article 2, Section 5, of the Oklahoma Constitution, which states that property cannot be used to promote a “church denomination or system of religion.”

“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,” the section reads.

The Court decided to side with the ACLU and the apostate.  Ignoring the fact that the display met none of the requirements given in the Constitution.  No public funds were given to place the display, and no denomination or sect was here endorsed.  May God grant the legislature the strength to resist this tyrannical ruling.

Source