Quantcast

Texas House resolution calls for ‘God’ and Ten Commandments in schools

By David Edwards
Wednesday, February 27, 2013 11:27 EDT
google plus icon
Texas state Rep. Phil Stephenson
 
  • Print Friendly and PDF
  • Email this page

A Republican state lawmaker in Texas has filed a formal resolution calling for Christian religious dogma — including the word “God” and the Ten Commandments — to be used in the state’s public schools.

The resolution filed by state Rep. Phil Stephenson (R) on Monday asserts that all schools should display the Ten Commandments because the Republican Party Platform says that “public acknowledgement of God is undeniable in our history.”

“The overwhelming majority of voters in the 2010 Republican Party Primary Election voted in favor of the public acknowledgement of God,” the resolution states, adding that “displays of the Ten Commandments in public educational institutions and other government buildings are acknowledgements of the continuing and important role of our religious tradition.”

If the resolution is adopted then the Texas Legislature would be agreeing to “hereby support prayers, including the use of the word ‘God,’ at public gatherings as well as displays of the Ten Commandments in public educational institutions and other government buildings.”

The Dallas Observer‘s Eric Nicholson pointed out that Stephenson’s resolution had dropped all pretense that there was any difference between public policy in Texas and the GOP platform.

“Public policy in Texas is already dominated by the small cadre of Texas voters who vote in Republican primaries,” Nicholson wrote. “Why not just write it into law? On what grounds could the Supreme Court possibly object to such rock-solid legal reasoning?”

The Supreme Court has already ruled that displaying the Ten Commandments in public schools is unconstitutional. In the its 1980 Stone v. Graham decision, the court said that a Kentucky law requiring the Ten Commandments to be displayed in every public school violated the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment because it had no “secular legislative purpose.”

[Photo: Facebook]

David Edwards
David Edwards
David Edwards has served as an editor at Raw Story since 2006. His work can also be found at Crooks & Liars, and he's also been published at The BRAD BLOG. He came to Raw Story after working as a network manager for the state of North Carolina and as as engineer developing enterprise resource planning software. Follow him on Twitter at @DavidEdwards.
 
 
 
 
By commenting, you agree to our terms of service
and to abide by our commenting policy.
 
Google+