Maybe...just maybe the governor's and legislature's constituents wanted this to happen. Heaven forbid that the people's representatives would do something a vast majority in that state wanted. And not for any of the strawmen that Aaron set up.
I think the much more interesting development in Louisiana was St. George seceding from Baton Rouge. Maybe the urbanist Aaron Renn could comment on that as a model.
As a political trategy, this recent article is an interesting proposition. I think Christians ought to politically work to conserve and promote mediating institutions and focus political capital in ways that diminish the Left's attempt to continue to erode away at laws and policies that erode culture.
I agree on your self defeating dated culture war aspect. Still, I think at some point we must constitutionally challenge “separation of church and state”. The constitution says “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion…”. This keeps government out of religion. It does not keep religion out of government. There will be an issue in our time where that needs to be made clear, but we can’t use that here.
Passing a law forcing conscription to Judeo-Christian ethic does seem like we’ve made the government overstep. Having parents, students and teachers free to post the 10c is another thing if it is “the free exercise thereof”.
The mem going around is “America is not a Christian nation; it’s a nation where Christians are free to exercise their religion”. This takes a progressive secularist shot and hits the target that Christians have acted as if their faith should be legislated. Christ is enough to believe. He does not need our coercion to mandate people to follow Him. We need to show them Him, not our anger and resentment over not being esteemed. Christ convinced.
Has LA been a Red state for a long time? Is it a Red state now? Or is this a one-off?
To me LA seems to be a Blue machine politics state like IL, NY and MA with a main big Blue city really running things...
I'm still not convinced that the culture war approach is a good evangelistic tool - these types of gestures seem more to be a simple, hard poke in the eye of Gov.
So to start I am willing to agree in principal to the premise that this is not a good conservative play in and of itself. I am a new resident of Louisiana and am loving the moves I am seeing happen. The Censorship Lawsuit with MO, passing the no authority by WHO and other globalist orgs law, a comprehensive change and improvement to schools, and not backing down to the title IX crap from the feds (not going to have trans athletes cross sex competing) are a few examples I can think of easily. This one is a part and parcel with the others but it is not the only play LA has been making. Sometimes old plays are needed in an overall strategy or to reach an end goal (which may be extreme originalist federalism for LA).
However this quote regarding the U.S. Constitution I pulled does concern me,
"Not only would this have been very constitutional, even normal, for the vast bulk of American history, there are people my age who’ve been noting how they had the Ten Commandments in their classrooms when they were in school.
The courts may very well rule that this law unconstitutional. I choose to view the malleability of our constitution in that way as a feature not a bug. Meaning I too want to change various things that are presently viewed as “the constitution.” "
I am not comparing the USC to the Holy Bible, but does Aaron consider language malleable? The USC says what it says, which the writers intended it to say or it does not. One problem with the the concept of malleability is that it can corrupt many areas of our lives including the Word of God. In fact we are witnessing that at an alarming rate.
In some regards I think as a singular governing document the USC is even less prone to interpretation than even the Bible. It is written in modern English (so need to figure out the original "greek"). It written as one particular genre rather than the several genres in the Holy Bible. It is meant for the United States not a global audience.
If the Constitution ever allowed the 10 Commandments in public schools it always has. End of debate.
Good play for Louisiana? I think it was because it is one of many plays all with a goal of letting the feds know we want them to piss off!
From a Christian perspective, I don't like the idea of turning the Decalogue into mere classroom decor. In my kids' classical Lutheran school, the students memorize the 10 Commandments along with Luther's explanations. We teach that all commandments flow from the First: "You shall have no other gods." If the public school teacher cannot identify the one true God, what good is the display? And if she does teach that God is the God of Christian scripture, there really is a constitutional problem there.
So I agree with Aaron. Sometimes I wonder if Conservative Republicans have a self-defeating streak. 1) pass a symbolic, constitutionally dubious law, confident that the courts will shortly strike it down. 2) Complain bitterly when the law gets struck down 3) Get reelected without ever having to do anything effective in service of their stated principles.
One of the reasons that the overturning of Roe v. Wade is so wonderful is that state-level conservatives are actually going to have to do something to restrict abortion, and face blowback at the polls for doing so. Things were much easier when they only had to mouth the party line, knowing there was nothing they could really do.
Good example of trying to rethink the playbook. Louisiana, being part of the Christ Haunted South makes it not as much of a stretch move politically. It's also a gumbo bowl of Catholics, red neck Protestants, and black folks. It's probably the most "different" state in the Union. Even down to the level of using Napoleonic Law.
I live there now 2 years and yes much different. But I am liking the trends there. Longer post below outlines a few of those trends and I add to you tax reforms being proposed.
Speaking of officially-sanctioned religion, the town of Bethlehem, NY, near where I live, announced that it would be displaying a so-called "Pride" flag during the month of June. They claimed explicitly that this was “a statement of the Town Board, and a form of government speech.” This was to curtail the display of other symbols by private individuals. https://spotlightnews.com/news/government/2024/05/08/pride-flag-to-fly-over-bethlehem-town-hall-in-june/
I'm willing to accept that this symbolic action is much less good than other more substantive actions. I question the notion that only a minority of people want the symbolic in Louisiana. This kind of thing is low-key popular in large parts of the country. Nobody's dying on that hill, but given the choice, yes, they want it. The question then is merely whether LA can get it through the courts. That remains to be seen. SCOTUS knows full well the original (and even amended) constitution permits this. We will see what political calculation they make.
I live in LA and this one of many plays being made. I have a longer post below if you want to read it. You are right about SCOTUS but the recent speech ruling is a bit concerning.
Yes, it might not poll well in the Midwestern red states, but I'm inclined to think that in a few states in the South this would poll favorably and Louisiana is likely to be among them (most people being largely indifferent, but more being strongly in favor than strongly opposed).
But otherwise I agree with Aaron here. Nothing wrong with it in principle, but what a low priority to spend political capital and pick a fight over. It's pure cargo cult thinking to suggest that if you hang a laminated copy of the Ten Commandments up, the kids will be inclined to obey them, and perhaps come to Christ, against the backdrop of an otherwise hostile culture.
Is it cargo cult? Seems to me that the government making statements about what's right and wrong makes a big difference. Just look at LGBT. But of course the symbolic action must be part of a consistent policy.
I agree somewhat; I just think it's the "consistent policy" that's the issue.
I agreed with what Matt Jamison posted above, which I think speaks to the matter of consistent policy:
>From a Christian perspective, I don't like the idea of turning the Decalogue into mere classroom decor. In my kids' classical Lutheran school, the students memorize the 10 Commandments along with Luther's explanations. We teach that all commandments flow from the First: "You shall have no other gods." If the public school teacher cannot identify the one true God, what good is the display? And if she does teach that God is the God of Christian scripture, there really is a constitutional problem there.
Maybe our biggest disagreement here is whether LA should get the benefit of the doubt. It seems particularly uncharitable to call this simply a matter of decor. Could the legislature be that blockheaded? Maybe. But why assume?
Well I hope I'm wrong, but legislatures are often blockheaded, and as Aaron points out, making highly visible, substance-free displays of the Ten Commandments has a long history as a fruitless move in the culture war playbook. Also, as Matt Jamison points out, you're not going to survive any legal challenges if you actually try to teach any substantive religious doctrine, so what is the next step?
If you want to teach doctrine to the kids, I imagine voucher programs are a better start.
One problem with a move that lacks substance, but is designed to trigger determined opposition, is that now your enemies are onto you and you've done nothing to weaken their hand. Before, if you wanted to do more to support religious schools or homeschoolers, you could have done so more quietly and with plausible deniability (since your actions will also support secular alternatives to public school). Now, everyone is more primed to be more suspicious of your motives, to think that everything you're doing is about instituting a "Christian Nationalist" theocracy.
I wonder what version of the 10 commandments will be displayed in classrooms. Catholic or Protestant?
Maybe...just maybe the governor's and legislature's constituents wanted this to happen. Heaven forbid that the people's representatives would do something a vast majority in that state wanted. And not for any of the strawmen that Aaron set up.
I think the much more interesting development in Louisiana was St. George seceding from Baton Rouge. Maybe the urbanist Aaron Renn could comment on that as a model.
As a political trategy, this recent article is an interesting proposition. I think Christians ought to politically work to conserve and promote mediating institutions and focus political capital in ways that diminish the Left's attempt to continue to erode away at laws and policies that erode culture.
https://nationalaffairs.com/publications/detail/a-family-focused-fusionism
I agree on your self defeating dated culture war aspect. Still, I think at some point we must constitutionally challenge “separation of church and state”. The constitution says “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion…”. This keeps government out of religion. It does not keep religion out of government. There will be an issue in our time where that needs to be made clear, but we can’t use that here.
Passing a law forcing conscription to Judeo-Christian ethic does seem like we’ve made the government overstep. Having parents, students and teachers free to post the 10c is another thing if it is “the free exercise thereof”.
The mem going around is “America is not a Christian nation; it’s a nation where Christians are free to exercise their religion”. This takes a progressive secularist shot and hits the target that Christians have acted as if their faith should be legislated. Christ is enough to believe. He does not need our coercion to mandate people to follow Him. We need to show them Him, not our anger and resentment over not being esteemed. Christ convinced.
Has LA been a Red state for a long time? Is it a Red state now? Or is this a one-off?
To me LA seems to be a Blue machine politics state like IL, NY and MA with a main big Blue city really running things...
I'm still not convinced that the culture war approach is a good evangelistic tool - these types of gestures seem more to be a simple, hard poke in the eye of Gov.
So to start I am willing to agree in principal to the premise that this is not a good conservative play in and of itself. I am a new resident of Louisiana and am loving the moves I am seeing happen. The Censorship Lawsuit with MO, passing the no authority by WHO and other globalist orgs law, a comprehensive change and improvement to schools, and not backing down to the title IX crap from the feds (not going to have trans athletes cross sex competing) are a few examples I can think of easily. This one is a part and parcel with the others but it is not the only play LA has been making. Sometimes old plays are needed in an overall strategy or to reach an end goal (which may be extreme originalist federalism for LA).
However this quote regarding the U.S. Constitution I pulled does concern me,
"Not only would this have been very constitutional, even normal, for the vast bulk of American history, there are people my age who’ve been noting how they had the Ten Commandments in their classrooms when they were in school.
The courts may very well rule that this law unconstitutional. I choose to view the malleability of our constitution in that way as a feature not a bug. Meaning I too want to change various things that are presently viewed as “the constitution.” "
I am not comparing the USC to the Holy Bible, but does Aaron consider language malleable? The USC says what it says, which the writers intended it to say or it does not. One problem with the the concept of malleability is that it can corrupt many areas of our lives including the Word of God. In fact we are witnessing that at an alarming rate.
In some regards I think as a singular governing document the USC is even less prone to interpretation than even the Bible. It is written in modern English (so need to figure out the original "greek"). It written as one particular genre rather than the several genres in the Holy Bible. It is meant for the United States not a global audience.
If the Constitution ever allowed the 10 Commandments in public schools it always has. End of debate.
Good play for Louisiana? I think it was because it is one of many plays all with a goal of letting the feds know we want them to piss off!
From a Christian perspective, I don't like the idea of turning the Decalogue into mere classroom decor. In my kids' classical Lutheran school, the students memorize the 10 Commandments along with Luther's explanations. We teach that all commandments flow from the First: "You shall have no other gods." If the public school teacher cannot identify the one true God, what good is the display? And if she does teach that God is the God of Christian scripture, there really is a constitutional problem there.
So I agree with Aaron. Sometimes I wonder if Conservative Republicans have a self-defeating streak. 1) pass a symbolic, constitutionally dubious law, confident that the courts will shortly strike it down. 2) Complain bitterly when the law gets struck down 3) Get reelected without ever having to do anything effective in service of their stated principles.
One of the reasons that the overturning of Roe v. Wade is so wonderful is that state-level conservatives are actually going to have to do something to restrict abortion, and face blowback at the polls for doing so. Things were much easier when they only had to mouth the party line, knowing there was nothing they could really do.
Yes, good expansion of what I mean by "cargo cult thinking" in my reply to Nathan James.
Good example of trying to rethink the playbook. Louisiana, being part of the Christ Haunted South makes it not as much of a stretch move politically. It's also a gumbo bowl of Catholics, red neck Protestants, and black folks. It's probably the most "different" state in the Union. Even down to the level of using Napoleonic Law.
I live there now 2 years and yes much different. But I am liking the trends there. Longer post below outlines a few of those trends and I add to you tax reforms being proposed.
Speaking of officially-sanctioned religion, the town of Bethlehem, NY, near where I live, announced that it would be displaying a so-called "Pride" flag during the month of June. They claimed explicitly that this was “a statement of the Town Board, and a form of government speech.” This was to curtail the display of other symbols by private individuals. https://spotlightnews.com/news/government/2024/05/08/pride-flag-to-fly-over-bethlehem-town-hall-in-june/
I'm willing to accept that this symbolic action is much less good than other more substantive actions. I question the notion that only a minority of people want the symbolic in Louisiana. This kind of thing is low-key popular in large parts of the country. Nobody's dying on that hill, but given the choice, yes, they want it. The question then is merely whether LA can get it through the courts. That remains to be seen. SCOTUS knows full well the original (and even amended) constitution permits this. We will see what political calculation they make.
I live in LA and this one of many plays being made. I have a longer post below if you want to read it. You are right about SCOTUS but the recent speech ruling is a bit concerning.
Yes, it might not poll well in the Midwestern red states, but I'm inclined to think that in a few states in the South this would poll favorably and Louisiana is likely to be among them (most people being largely indifferent, but more being strongly in favor than strongly opposed).
But otherwise I agree with Aaron here. Nothing wrong with it in principle, but what a low priority to spend political capital and pick a fight over. It's pure cargo cult thinking to suggest that if you hang a laminated copy of the Ten Commandments up, the kids will be inclined to obey them, and perhaps come to Christ, against the backdrop of an otherwise hostile culture.
Is it cargo cult? Seems to me that the government making statements about what's right and wrong makes a big difference. Just look at LGBT. But of course the symbolic action must be part of a consistent policy.
I agree somewhat; I just think it's the "consistent policy" that's the issue.
I agreed with what Matt Jamison posted above, which I think speaks to the matter of consistent policy:
>From a Christian perspective, I don't like the idea of turning the Decalogue into mere classroom decor. In my kids' classical Lutheran school, the students memorize the 10 Commandments along with Luther's explanations. We teach that all commandments flow from the First: "You shall have no other gods." If the public school teacher cannot identify the one true God, what good is the display? And if she does teach that God is the God of Christian scripture, there really is a constitutional problem there.
Maybe our biggest disagreement here is whether LA should get the benefit of the doubt. It seems particularly uncharitable to call this simply a matter of decor. Could the legislature be that blockheaded? Maybe. But why assume?
Well I hope I'm wrong, but legislatures are often blockheaded, and as Aaron points out, making highly visible, substance-free displays of the Ten Commandments has a long history as a fruitless move in the culture war playbook. Also, as Matt Jamison points out, you're not going to survive any legal challenges if you actually try to teach any substantive religious doctrine, so what is the next step?
If you want to teach doctrine to the kids, I imagine voucher programs are a better start.
One problem with a move that lacks substance, but is designed to trigger determined opposition, is that now your enemies are onto you and you've done nothing to weaken their hand. Before, if you wanted to do more to support religious schools or homeschoolers, you could have done so more quietly and with plausible deniability (since your actions will also support secular alternatives to public school). Now, everyone is more primed to be more suspicious of your motives, to think that everything you're doing is about instituting a "Christian Nationalist" theocracy.
Fair. And well said.