Separation of Church and State, or...?

[sff_corgi_lj]

There's a great hoo-hah going on in Federal Court over a judge in Alabama refusing to remove the following piece of statuary from court property:



Now, the way I see it (without being able to read all the engraving on the front of the work), this is a representation of the socio-historial foundation of Western law as much as any sort of religious representation (which is what the judge is leaning towards).

Correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't a lot of British common law (on which a lot of American law bases precedent) derive from Christian-institutional interpretation of Hamnurabi and Hwyel Dda? Doesn't make it right, wrong or otherwise, but it's the mindset behind the very law being practiced in this building in Birmingham, Alabama.

So therefore:

[Poll #170586]
If 'other', please leave a comment with details.

Comments

[immovablemover.livejournal.com]

I think we've all established that this judge is a total asshole. Gross, gross, gross--and as a proud Southerner, I must express my disgust at the way this guy is so efficiently propagating the redneck-closed-minded-Bible-thumping stereotype many people seem to harbor about Southerners. (Hello, my name is Tori, I grew up in Georgia, I'm not a racist, I'm not a homophobe, I don't go to church, and I'm here to tell you that the world was not, in fact, created by God in seven 24-hour days. Thanks.)

That said, though, I'm with ashkitty up there in that I think the monument in question is more about art and history than it is about the legal system. It's a monument to the very roots of the legal system. Yes--YES--I am ALL for the separation of church and state, but I don't think this piece falls under that rubric any more than having "in God we trust" on our money does (which is also a nod to our forefathers, who were, by the way, Deists and not a bunch of evangelical preachy Southern Baptists that burned down abortion clinics).

I think there are much bigger fish to fry.