‘The Ten Commandments, the American South, and Southern Jews: Is the Ten Commandments Really the “Moral Foundation” of American Law’?

On April 29, students, faculty, and Williamsburg community members gathered in Tucker Hall to hear Dr. Paul Finkelman, Visiting Professor at the University of Toledo College of Law, deliver a lecture titled ‘The Ten Commandments, the American South, and Southern Jews: Is the Ten Commandments Really the “Moral Foundation” of American Law’? Sponsored by the Religious Studies Department, Dr. Finkelman’s lecture examined the motivations for inserting the Ten Commandments into locations such as classrooms, the rotunda of the Alabama Supreme Court, or other public, secular areas. Dr. Finkelman also emphasized the impacts of placing the Ten Commandments in these spaces and the implications for different religious beliefs.  

As an expert witness in the Alabama Ten Commandments Monument Case (Glassroth v. Moore), Dr. Finkelman began his lecture by highlighting cases in Alabama, Louisiana, Kentucky, and Texas, where courts have supported the inclusion of the Ten Commandments in classrooms or courtrooms. These actions, he explained, are supported through various arguments claiming that the Ten Commandments are not religious statements. Delving further into these statements, Dr. Finkelman discussed 4 groups of faiths who have different versions of the Ten Commandments. Looking at the language within each commandment, the Ten Commandments, he explained, are unique and important statements in Western theology and Western human cultures. These statements are distinct observations and decisions supporting monotheism, making them inherently religious statements.  

Emphasizing the different versions of the Ten Commandments, Dr. Finkelman further explained that when the government places one version of the Ten Commandments into public, secular spaces, they are taking a specific position on religion, deciding which religious faith is “correct”. When Southern state courts take this position, this excludes countless people, particularly Jews across the South. Finkelman continued to illustrate how the act of promoting a singular group’s religious beliefs is denigrating others, as religion is a personal and private faith outside of government decisions. When the government does become involved in this faith, this is harmful to religion and goes against the framer’s fundamental emphasis on a wall of separation between church and state. Dr. Finkelman concluded with an engaging Q&A session, where attendees pondered the broader implications of these cases for diversity, democracy, and civil society.