I said it the other day. This isn't about preventing or improving ANYTHING. It's about Christian Nationalists getting their foot in the door and subverting the government to the point where they can get their hands fully on the levers of power. Oh, and while I'm at it:
Not all assertions on the wall are taken equally. A normally behaved student may take 'I am the LORD your God...' seriously while never contemplating murder, while the murderer ignores them all.
So it's finally come down to this. SCOTUS is going to rule on whether the Establishment Clause actually means anything, or whether it's just an inconvenience for Christian Nationalists to ignore. Accuse me of being melodramatic if you wish, but this one is CRUCIAL. If the US is to continue to be at least a secular nation de-jure if not de-facto, The Nine had better damned well come down on the side of those opposed to this foolishness.
Oh they will definitely rule it means something. What Alito will say is that it means you can't establish any religion *except* Christianity, because of history nobody can change.
Religious right figures like David Barton cling to the fiction this country was somehow based on the Ten Commandments, in spite of the fact eight of them would be unconstitutional should someone try writing them into law. The US Constitution prohibits our government from choosing one religion over another, and yet forcing the Ten Commandments into the public school classrooms is exactly that. Once upon a time, when things worked in this country, this is something the courts would have struck down in a heartbeat. That was before conservatism became the be-all and end-all of the human thought process and a magic book began trumping the Constitution.
I agree with putting the 10 commandments up in classrooms if they have an accompanying poster with trump’s photo and a list of each commandment he has broken.
Do you somehow think the origin of the 10C's is going to stop the harassment of Jewish students who object to the practice, or who say nothing but still get constantly told to follow Jesus by the evangelical students and teachers empowered by such posters?
It's not about what it could represent in a rational world. It's about what it does represent to conservative evangelicals who want dominionism.
But they don't want to be told to love their neighbor - their neighbor might be an immigrant, or in favor of divorce or abortion, or LGBTQ, or think that governmental authority comes from the consent of the governed or other culture-destroying things.
What self-respecting Christian would want to love someone like that?
Leave it to the Sith Circuit to tee up a perfect case for SCROTUS to bludgeon the First Amendment to death with.
I'm gonna leave this little prediction right here, for posterity: if one clause of the First Amendment becomes unenforceable, we're going to almost immediately see the right make plays directly attacking every other clause in the Amendment, and if even one more such attack is successful, the cancer will spread to the rest of the Bill of Rights and then the entire Constitution. They won't bother with a Constitutional Convention- instead, they'll just get SCROTUS to abrogate the document by the clever trick of ruling, piece by piece, that the Constitution itself is irrelevant to Constitutional Law.
It's happening in parallel, not in serial. Trump has been constantly attacking press freedom and freedom of speech while evangelicals simultaneously attack the limit on establishment.
And that party contains politicians and 'movers' from all the various political parties of many nations. Now maybe most of them had nothing to do with the child abuse, but they were perfectly happy to make this rich banker rumour-hounded oddball feel like their best friend, for the donation potential.
This will be the 3rd time I’ve commented on this issue, the first 2 times following SCOTUS decision or lack thereof on the subject of the Ten Commandments in schools or on government properties and they’ve been pretty clear on this point every time. Do you think they metaphorically roll their eyes whenever another suit on the subject hits the docket (that’s what I picture every time)? Now far be it from me to be certain SCOTUS would necessarily agree with their own previous rulings, they can’t be trusted, their memories are short, that’s true. But nothing that props up their previous rulings has changed. And what will kids think upon learning these ‘commandments’, supposedly written by a god (or the God), while the leaders of their country, the very people elected to lead by example, violate them every day? Behave nefariously, covet wives, kill, and see adults worship at the feet of a mortal fail of a man who covers himself in gold? Seems to me the entire idea of posting them in learning environments may have the opposite effect from what they envision.
Considering the current content of the Court and the influence from the Heritage Foundation, under which they operate, I think there is very little rolling of eyes by the conservative majority. Some of them may have been awaiting this particular case / opportunity for the better part of their careers, an idea I find positively terrifying.
That said, I still hope for an 8 – 1 ruling AGAINST (depend on Thomas at minimum to be the asshat here), but realistically, I an not at all sanguine.
Alito and Thomas can both be guaranteed to be asshats on this matter. Alito because he clearly thinks the 1a should protect Christian privilege, and Thomas because he'd burn down every civil rights advance since the 1950s on principle.
Thomas would find some way to wiggle out of it. If Obergefell comes before SCOTUS again, I would sure as hell bring up Loving and be staring at Clarence when I did so!
This is not the first time this issue has been brought before them, however. My hope is since they’ve ruled against it twice in recent years (once on government land. and once before in schools) it’s my hope they uphold it this time. But as I stated, we know they’re not above reversing their own decisions.
If we have learned anything from the Dobbs decision, it should be that 𝑠𝑡𝑎𝑟𝑒 𝑑𝑒𝑐𝑖𝑠𝑖𝑠 means exactly NOTHING to this court. If they can wipe away a woman's right to control her body or the voting rights of minorities, they can do the same thing with State / Church separation.
At this point, I put NOTHING past the current Supreme Court.
Believe me, I take no pleasure and saying this. I wish like hell were otherwise, but we're dealing with a loaded court, and I cannot see that they will be objective in ruling on this matter.
So we're all fools for wanting to fight for what we believe in? Zach, I double dog dare you to say that same thing to either Dan Barker or Annie Laurie Gaylor. They are the co-presidents of the Freedom From Religion Foundation, and I know them both personally. They and their organization have been fighting this fight for one hell of a long time: big fights, little fights, fights you never heard of. And they have a habit of winning.
I've been working with them for the past 12 years, and I've done just a little bit, a fraction of what they've accomplished. What's your excuse?
Do I live in the United States?!? What the fuck do you think? I was born in Cleveland and I've lived in Ohio for the past 48 years. As I stated earlier, I've been working with the Freedom From Religion Foundation since 2014, and I think I am justfiably proud of what they have accomplished, both for the Constitution, but also for the PEOPLE who have had to confront Christian privilege and Christian nationalists. Without their tireless efforts, Christian hegemony would be far more widespread in the United States than it currently is.
But you clearly don't care about their victories or their accomplishments. Fine. We will continue to do what we've been doing in the service of US citizens and democracy.
And I have no further interest in anything you might have to say.
They have invited the flood of cases and emergency petitions they have received. Both by their right-wing rulings, but also by agreeing to hear so many right-wing emergency petitions instead of letting the regular court process work through them.
To open that door so wide, then evince surprise when all these right-wing institutions try to rush through it...well, they should have known and should know better.
Whether or not that matters to SCOTUS remains to be seen. If it doesn't, then all the work done by the founders to create a government of, by, and for the people will have been squandered, because some hung-up Christians felt as though they needed undeserved priority.
That is a tough question, because 6/9 are members of the RCC. The 10 C are quite truncated in their bible as opposed to the KJ and in the Hebrew bible.
As far as the Christian nationalists are concerned, the purpose of their privilege is to subvert everyone else. Consideration or tolerance are non-values to them.
To me the oddest part of this Texas twister is the lack of guidance for teachers. If I were a student entering my classroom & beheld this new poster, it would be like discovering the monolith in “2001: A Space Odyssey.”
What’s this? Why is it here? Who is this god? Why is this god telling me it is mine? Who are these other gods we’re not to have before this one? What’s this god’s name that we’re not to take in vain? Is it just the word god? How’re we not to take it in vain? Which day is the sabbath & how’re we supposed to keep it holy? What land did god give me? Did god register the deed properly? Is Texas’ capital punishment no longer happening? What’s adultery & how do you commit it? Is that what AG Paxton’s wife meant about divorcing him on biblical grounds? Is the fraud & insider trading Trump’s family is doing not stealing? Does Trump have executive privilege on bearing false witness? What’s coveting & why is house separate from wife? Who’s allowed manservants & maidservants? Are they different from the chattel slavery which Texas rebelled Mexico to do & is the reason we have Juneteenth? (This being Texas, the cattle clause is a given.)
I can’t find any official Texas Board of Education or AG guidance, just that it’s a static display. The Baptist Joint Committee for Religious Liberty (BJC) has joined with other organizations to provide unofficial guidance for talking to students:
“Affirm students’ religious freedom. Highlight the many faiths that are represented in our country and in our schools. ‘You probably have friends of all different faiths and beliefs. The Ten Commandments are just one set of beliefs from one faith group.’ Frame the conversation around the historical context of the document, move away from it being a moral document that students must follow. Be honest. If you don’t know the exact right answer, that’s okay. Most students value honesty and transparency.” (https://bjconline.org/texas10c/#)
If I lived in Texas, I’d be constantly in the principal’s office as a student or as a parent.
The lack of guidance is intentional. A non-secular lesson plan is blatantly illegal while a secular lesson plan is not what they want to promote. Leaving it vague is the best way to allow local 1a violations to happen and force the courts into a one-by-one whack-a-mole response rather than a general rejection.
That’s true which is why BJC has offered something to help the teachers finding themselves navigating between the Scylla of Republicans imposing a singular religious text & the Charybdis of 1A religious pluralism. It’s cowardly to insist the document be posted without context & leaving teachers fending for themselves. Such is the political theatre that passes for governing by the Republicans.
It woild not surprise me if a teacher posted a bunch of religious codes on posters the same size as the mandatory 10c poster, and subsequently gets fired and/or sued. Nevermind that only one third of the children aren't Christians and need their own ideas belief systems represented. Paxton would likely see this as a violation of the law.
That would not test the law though, since a teacher putting something up on their own falls under the discretion of the Principal, it's not something mandated by county or state law. The Principal could say 'take it down' and fire someone for not obeying and it wouldn't be a 1a violation, that would just be a workplace discipline non-issue.
What we would need as a stronger counter-case would be for some place like Portland, Or to insist all their district schools put up Islam's 5 or TST's 7 citing some desire to educate the student body on different cultural practices, then have a conservative Christian sue for it being a 1a violation by establishing religion in the classroom.
Alito and Thomas would have no problem in that case saying it's a violation (while the 10C's is not) using Alito's "but history" garbage argument. However, in that case they might have a much harder time getting the other conservatives to buy into the obvious hypocrisy.
The problem is, that's Gandhi's "an eye for an eye makes the whole world blind" solution. 10C's posters in Texas classrooms is bad. Posters of tons of religious claims in every classroom in the US is arguably worse. We want to argue for 'no religious endorsement posters anywhere', we do not want to argue for the 'religious endorsement for all, let's bring wars of religion into the classroom' solution.
I remember a Duck Tales cartoon episode where the gang landed in an island that hadn’t been discovered before and the indigenous inhabitants didn’t have a capitalist system in place. Everyone just got what they needed and noone had more than anyone else. Well, the gang happened to have a bottle cap that was gifted to one of the inhabitants but that started a chain of events spurred by jealousy. Eventually it led to the gang dumping so many bottle caps on the island there was no way to move around (cartoon, remember) and eventually it all got cleared up and cleaned up. And the gang learned a valuable lesson on jealousy.
This is similar that the correction to the original overreach is to add other overreach until the classrooms are all comically overrun with religious posters. But the Nat-Cs are so underdeveloped that they require a childish lesson that a cartoon could convey.
Have these commandment thingies prevented a single school shooting? If not, then they are worthless.
I said it the other day. This isn't about preventing or improving ANYTHING. It's about Christian Nationalists getting their foot in the door and subverting the government to the point where they can get their hands fully on the levers of power. Oh, and while I'm at it:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mSfCALsfj4I
Never mess with a genius packing a flamethrower. Or a laptop.
Ms. Atwood continues to be brilliant, and utterly her own woman.
Get enough of them piled up and you can make a bullet resistant bunker. See? They can be useful.
But but they get to feel superior
They can’t even stop shootings in churches. Weak, puny, xtian god.
They positively encourage shootings in schools...news footage shootings... ;)
Not all assertions on the wall are taken equally. A normally behaved student may take 'I am the LORD your God...' seriously while never contemplating murder, while the murderer ignores them all.
So it's finally come down to this. SCOTUS is going to rule on whether the Establishment Clause actually means anything, or whether it's just an inconvenience for Christian Nationalists to ignore. Accuse me of being melodramatic if you wish, but this one is CRUCIAL. If the US is to continue to be at least a secular nation de-jure if not de-facto, The Nine had better damned well come down on the side of those opposed to this foolishness.
Otherwise, Gilead awaits.
Oh they will definitely rule it means something. What Alito will say is that it means you can't establish any religion *except* Christianity, because of history nobody can change.
https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/e63fc263069b414e9938e491ac021aa8063d75db5a5468e6cbb7c2dfc4b30f5e.jpg
Amy Con-me Barrett AR-15 will come through for Jesus.
Religious right figures like David Barton cling to the fiction this country was somehow based on the Ten Commandments, in spite of the fact eight of them would be unconstitutional should someone try writing them into law. The US Constitution prohibits our government from choosing one religion over another, and yet forcing the Ten Commandments into the public school classrooms is exactly that. Once upon a time, when things worked in this country, this is something the courts would have struck down in a heartbeat. That was before conservatism became the be-all and end-all of the human thought process and a magic book began trumping the Constitution.
Depictions of the Ten Commandments are a direct violation of the 2nd Commandment.
Case closed.
But this SCOTUS wants to change the Constitution, they will just reach in and pull some made-up nonsense out of Alito's ass again.
I think they are certainly an example of political idolatry where believers put their faith in government to force their message upon others.
I agree with putting the 10 commandments up in classrooms if they have an accompanying poster with trump’s photo and a list of each commandment he has broken.
Post the 7 Deadly Sins for good measure.
Trump has violated all seven multiple times.
"Free love? That's what they said at Woodstock. No, love shouldn't be free. I've paid for love, many times."
Donald Trump in Dictator for a Day. Laughter is the New Resistance.
YouTube, Apple TV, YouTube TV, Tubi (free with ads), Google TV.
How about photos of him breaking each commandment?
Even better. Very educational. Many people are saying so.
"trump’s photo" - Why do you hate kids? ; )
They’ve watched horror movies. I don’t think that ugly monster will freak them out too much.
Since the 10 C are Jewish in nature and predate Christianity, are xtians unknowingly pushing Judaism in the classroom?
Do you somehow think the origin of the 10C's is going to stop the harassment of Jewish students who object to the practice, or who say nothing but still get constantly told to follow Jesus by the evangelical students and teachers empowered by such posters?
It's not about what it could represent in a rational world. It's about what it does represent to conservative evangelicals who want dominionism.
Good point. You'd think they'd want to go with how Jesus summed up the commandments with just two - love God and love your neighbor.
But they don't want to be told to love their neighbor - their neighbor might be an immigrant, or in favor of divorce or abortion, or LGBTQ, or think that governmental authority comes from the consent of the governed or other culture-destroying things.
What self-respecting Christian would want to love someone like that?
I know some.
Just so we're taking our spiritual lessons from the other kind, though, right?
This is highly reminiscent of Bill Clinton saying that it all depends on what the definition of “is” is.
Combress shall make no law establishing any religion. As clear as it could be.
You shall have no other gods before me. Thus establishing religion. As clear as clear could be.
The first thing we should do if we ever recover our country, after putting these miscreants in jail,
Is removing everyone of these judges.
I’ve got a little list. They never will be missed.
Any judge who is or was a member of the federalist society.
Leave it to the Sith Circuit to tee up a perfect case for SCROTUS to bludgeon the First Amendment to death with.
I'm gonna leave this little prediction right here, for posterity: if one clause of the First Amendment becomes unenforceable, we're going to almost immediately see the right make plays directly attacking every other clause in the Amendment, and if even one more such attack is successful, the cancer will spread to the rest of the Bill of Rights and then the entire Constitution. They won't bother with a Constitutional Convention- instead, they'll just get SCROTUS to abrogate the document by the clever trick of ruling, piece by piece, that the Constitution itself is irrelevant to Constitutional Law.
https://media.tenor.com/gGPiivoMK4sAAAAM/keith-morrison-see.gif
It's happening in parallel, not in serial. Trump has been constantly attacking press freedom and freedom of speech while evangelicals simultaneously attack the limit on establishment.
OT: Let's guess which party he belongs to. I bet he's also a good, god fearin xtian too.
DeSantis Appointee Arrested on Child Sexual Abuse Charges
Mike Caruso, a close ally of Florida Governor Ron DeSantis, has been arrested and charged with five felonies.
https://newrepublic.com/post/214467/desantis-appointee-caruso-arrested-child-sexual-abuse-charges
The Party of Epstein.
Money was the party of Epstein.
And that party contains politicians and 'movers' from all the various political parties of many nations. Now maybe most of them had nothing to do with the child abuse, but they were perfectly happy to make this rich banker rumour-hounded oddball feel like their best friend, for the donation potential.
This will be the 3rd time I’ve commented on this issue, the first 2 times following SCOTUS decision or lack thereof on the subject of the Ten Commandments in schools or on government properties and they’ve been pretty clear on this point every time. Do you think they metaphorically roll their eyes whenever another suit on the subject hits the docket (that’s what I picture every time)? Now far be it from me to be certain SCOTUS would necessarily agree with their own previous rulings, they can’t be trusted, their memories are short, that’s true. But nothing that props up their previous rulings has changed. And what will kids think upon learning these ‘commandments’, supposedly written by a god (or the God), while the leaders of their country, the very people elected to lead by example, violate them every day? Behave nefariously, covet wives, kill, and see adults worship at the feet of a mortal fail of a man who covers himself in gold? Seems to me the entire idea of posting them in learning environments may have the opposite effect from what they envision.
Considering the current content of the Court and the influence from the Heritage Foundation, under which they operate, I think there is very little rolling of eyes by the conservative majority. Some of them may have been awaiting this particular case / opportunity for the better part of their careers, an idea I find positively terrifying.
That said, I still hope for an 8 – 1 ruling AGAINST (depend on Thomas at minimum to be the asshat here), but realistically, I an not at all sanguine.
Alito and Thomas can both be guaranteed to be asshats on this matter. Alito because he clearly thinks the 1a should protect Christian privilege, and Thomas because he'd burn down every civil rights advance since the 1950s on principle.
I really want to see what Thomas would do if there was a case before him that could overturn Loving v Virginia.
Thomas would find some way to wiggle out of it. If Obergefell comes before SCOTUS again, I would sure as hell bring up Loving and be staring at Clarence when I did so!
Ophra made that same point when the issue first came up.
Was Ophra one of the Greek oracles?
Oh they’ll dissent I have no doubt. At the very least.
I think Uncle Thomas may be retiring, so he really has no excuse not to make the ruling unanimous
That all depends on what Harlan Crow tells him to do.
Ditto. Cuz that’s next, if given the time anyway.
This is not the first time this issue has been brought before them, however. My hope is since they’ve ruled against it twice in recent years (once on government land. and once before in schools) it’s my hope they uphold it this time. But as I stated, we know they’re not above reversing their own decisions.
If we have learned anything from the Dobbs decision, it should be that 𝑠𝑡𝑎𝑟𝑒 𝑑𝑒𝑐𝑖𝑠𝑖𝑠 means exactly NOTHING to this court. If they can wipe away a woman's right to control her body or the voting rights of minorities, they can do the same thing with State / Church separation.
At this point, I put NOTHING past the current Supreme Court.
Oh I’ve left room for their reversal. This court has no shame when it comes to changing their own decisions based on law.
Believe me, I take no pleasure and saying this. I wish like hell were otherwise, but we're dealing with a loaded court, and I cannot see that they will be objective in ruling on this matter.
So we're all fools for wanting to fight for what we believe in? Zach, I double dog dare you to say that same thing to either Dan Barker or Annie Laurie Gaylor. They are the co-presidents of the Freedom From Religion Foundation, and I know them both personally. They and their organization have been fighting this fight for one hell of a long time: big fights, little fights, fights you never heard of. And they have a habit of winning.
I've been working with them for the past 12 years, and I've done just a little bit, a fraction of what they've accomplished. What's your excuse?
Do I live in the United States?!? What the fuck do you think? I was born in Cleveland and I've lived in Ohio for the past 48 years. As I stated earlier, I've been working with the Freedom From Religion Foundation since 2014, and I think I am justfiably proud of what they have accomplished, both for the Constitution, but also for the PEOPLE who have had to confront Christian privilege and Christian nationalists. Without their tireless efforts, Christian hegemony would be far more widespread in the United States than it currently is.
But you clearly don't care about their victories or their accomplishments. Fine. We will continue to do what we've been doing in the service of US citizens and democracy.
And I have no further interest in anything you might have to say.
P.S. The dare still stands. Put up or shut up.
Looks like you'll never get an answer. Somebody had enough and his comments went *POOF!*
They have invited the flood of cases and emergency petitions they have received. Both by their right-wing rulings, but also by agreeing to hear so many right-wing emergency petitions instead of letting the regular court process work through them.
To open that door so wide, then evince surprise when all these right-wing institutions try to rush through it...well, they should have known and should know better.
Further Thought:
𝑇ℎ𝑒 𝐹𝑖𝑟𝑠𝑡 𝐶𝑜𝑚𝑚𝑎𝑛𝑑𝑚𝑒𝑛𝑡 𝑣𝑖𝑜𝑙𝑎𝑡𝑒𝑠 𝑡ℎ𝑒 𝐹𝑖𝑟𝑠𝑡 𝐴𝑚𝑒𝑛𝑑𝑚𝑒𝑛𝑡.
-- Aron Ra
Whether or not that matters to SCOTUS remains to be seen. If it doesn't, then all the work done by the founders to create a government of, by, and for the people will have been squandered, because some hung-up Christians felt as though they needed undeserved priority.
They have felt they needed that undeserved priority for 17 centuries. It's a hard habit to get them to give up.
That is a tough question, because 6/9 are members of the RCC. The 10 C are quite truncated in their bible as opposed to the KJ and in the Hebrew bible.
Asking Christians to protect others from their privilege is asking too much.
As far as the Christian nationalists are concerned, the purpose of their privilege is to subvert everyone else. Consideration or tolerance are non-values to them.
To me the oddest part of this Texas twister is the lack of guidance for teachers. If I were a student entering my classroom & beheld this new poster, it would be like discovering the monolith in “2001: A Space Odyssey.”
What’s this? Why is it here? Who is this god? Why is this god telling me it is mine? Who are these other gods we’re not to have before this one? What’s this god’s name that we’re not to take in vain? Is it just the word god? How’re we not to take it in vain? Which day is the sabbath & how’re we supposed to keep it holy? What land did god give me? Did god register the deed properly? Is Texas’ capital punishment no longer happening? What’s adultery & how do you commit it? Is that what AG Paxton’s wife meant about divorcing him on biblical grounds? Is the fraud & insider trading Trump’s family is doing not stealing? Does Trump have executive privilege on bearing false witness? What’s coveting & why is house separate from wife? Who’s allowed manservants & maidservants? Are they different from the chattel slavery which Texas rebelled Mexico to do & is the reason we have Juneteenth? (This being Texas, the cattle clause is a given.)
I can’t find any official Texas Board of Education or AG guidance, just that it’s a static display. The Baptist Joint Committee for Religious Liberty (BJC) has joined with other organizations to provide unofficial guidance for talking to students:
“Affirm students’ religious freedom. Highlight the many faiths that are represented in our country and in our schools. ‘You probably have friends of all different faiths and beliefs. The Ten Commandments are just one set of beliefs from one faith group.’ Frame the conversation around the historical context of the document, move away from it being a moral document that students must follow. Be honest. If you don’t know the exact right answer, that’s okay. Most students value honesty and transparency.” (https://bjconline.org/texas10c/#)
If I lived in Texas, I’d be constantly in the principal’s office as a student or as a parent.
The lack of guidance is intentional. A non-secular lesson plan is blatantly illegal while a secular lesson plan is not what they want to promote. Leaving it vague is the best way to allow local 1a violations to happen and force the courts into a one-by-one whack-a-mole response rather than a general rejection.
That’s true which is why BJC has offered something to help the teachers finding themselves navigating between the Scylla of Republicans imposing a singular religious text & the Charybdis of 1A religious pluralism. It’s cowardly to insist the document be posted without context & leaving teachers fending for themselves. Such is the political theatre that passes for governing by the Republicans.
https://www.tmz.com/2026/08/18/randy-fine-looking-inside-stranger-mailbox-on-ring-camera/
Well, ain't HE just a charmer? 😝
I liked James Talarico's take- "You're saying you would tell others to follow the Ten Commandments when you're not following it yourselves?"
https://www.tiktok.com/@bettergovernment/video/7670385158805146911?is_from_webapp=1&sender_device=pc&web_id=7495791305978627627
I LIKE Talarico. If he can start turning Texas purple, I'm all for that and HIM!
Me too!! As an atheist, I prefer not to vote for religious types, obviously, but I like Talarico!
I also voted for Adam Hamilton in the primary, a Methodist megachurch preacher running against Roger Marshall for the Senate seat.
Sometimes the choice is the lesser of two evils. I'm not calling Talarico evil, but we'd be happier if he wasn't religious.
But but, conservatives aren't telling anyone to follow them! It's up on the wall for *historical* reasons, don'cha know.
Same way they treat "Employees much wash hands after using the facilities" signs...
😆 TRUTH!! And the way that other legislator laughed when he talked about following the commandments, she probably agrees!
𝐵𝑦 𝑡ℎ𝑒 𝑠𝑎𝑚𝑒 𝑙𝑜𝑔𝑖𝑐, 𝑇𝑒𝑥𝑎𝑠 𝑐𝑜𝑢𝑙𝑑 𝑝𝑎𝑠𝑠 𝑎 𝑙𝑎𝑤 𝑡𝑜 𝑝𝑢𝑡 𝑢𝑝 𝑇ℎ𝑒 𝑆𝑎𝑡𝑎𝑛𝑖𝑐 𝑇𝑒𝑚𝑝𝑙𝑒’𝑠 𝑆𝑒𝑣𝑒𝑛 𝐹𝑢𝑛𝑑𝑎𝑚𝑒𝑛𝑡𝑎𝑙 𝑇𝑒𝑛𝑒𝑡𝑠 𝑎𝑛𝑑 𝑡ℎ𝑎𝑡 𝑤𝑜𝑢𝑙𝑑 𝑏𝑒 𝑓𝑖𝑛𝑒, 𝑏𝑢𝑡 𝑡ℎ𝑒𝑦 ℎ𝑎𝑝𝑝𝑒𝑛𝑒𝑑 𝑡𝑜 𝑐ℎ𝑜𝑜𝑠𝑒 𝑡ℎ𝑖𝑠 𝑙𝑖𝑠𝑡, 𝑠𝑜 𝑤ℎ𝑎𝑡’𝑠 𝑡ℎ𝑒 𝑏𝑖𝑔 𝑑𝑒𝑎𝑙?
So what would actually happen?
𝑌𝑜𝑢 𝑔𝑒𝑡 𝑡ℎ𝑒 𝑓𝑒𝑒𝑙𝑖𝑛𝑔 𝑡ℎ𝑎𝑡 𝑖𝑓 𝑎 𝑙𝑖𝑠𝑡 𝑜𝑓 𝑝𝑜𝑠𝑖𝑡𝑖𝑣𝑒 𝑣𝑎𝑙𝑢𝑒𝑠 𝑓𝑟𝑜𝑚 𝑡ℎ𝑒 𝑄𝑢𝑟'𝑎𝑛 𝑤𝑒𝑟𝑒 𝑢𝑝 𝑖𝑛 𝑐𝑙𝑎𝑠𝑠𝑟𝑜𝑜𝑚𝑠, 𝑡ℎ𝑒 𝑗𝑢𝑑𝑔𝑒𝑠 𝑤𝑜𝑢𝑙𝑑𝑛’𝑡 𝑐𝑜𝑛𝑠𝑖𝑑𝑒𝑟 𝑡ℎ𝑎𝑡 𝑝𝑎𝑠𝑠𝑖𝑣𝑒 𝑎𝑛𝑑 ℎ𝑎𝑟𝑚𝑙𝑒𝑠𝑠 𝑎𝑡 𝑎𝑙𝑙.
Same thing.
It woild not surprise me if a teacher posted a bunch of religious codes on posters the same size as the mandatory 10c poster, and subsequently gets fired and/or sued. Nevermind that only one third of the children aren't Christians and need their own ideas belief systems represented. Paxton would likely see this as a violation of the law.
That would not test the law though, since a teacher putting something up on their own falls under the discretion of the Principal, it's not something mandated by county or state law. The Principal could say 'take it down' and fire someone for not obeying and it wouldn't be a 1a violation, that would just be a workplace discipline non-issue.
What we would need as a stronger counter-case would be for some place like Portland, Or to insist all their district schools put up Islam's 5 or TST's 7 citing some desire to educate the student body on different cultural practices, then have a conservative Christian sue for it being a 1a violation by establishing religion in the classroom.
Alito and Thomas would have no problem in that case saying it's a violation (while the 10C's is not) using Alito's "but history" garbage argument. However, in that case they might have a much harder time getting the other conservatives to buy into the obvious hypocrisy.
The problem is, that's Gandhi's "an eye for an eye makes the whole world blind" solution. 10C's posters in Texas classrooms is bad. Posters of tons of religious claims in every classroom in the US is arguably worse. We want to argue for 'no religious endorsement posters anywhere', we do not want to argue for the 'religious endorsement for all, let's bring wars of religion into the classroom' solution.
I remember a Duck Tales cartoon episode where the gang landed in an island that hadn’t been discovered before and the indigenous inhabitants didn’t have a capitalist system in place. Everyone just got what they needed and noone had more than anyone else. Well, the gang happened to have a bottle cap that was gifted to one of the inhabitants but that started a chain of events spurred by jealousy. Eventually it led to the gang dumping so many bottle caps on the island there was no way to move around (cartoon, remember) and eventually it all got cleared up and cleaned up. And the gang learned a valuable lesson on jealousy.
This is similar that the correction to the original overreach is to add other overreach until the classrooms are all comically overrun with religious posters. But the Nat-Cs are so underdeveloped that they require a childish lesson that a cartoon could convey.