Free Speech Supreme Court

The Supremes, the 10 Commandments….& the 7 Aphorisms

summumaphorismsmonument_lg.jpg


It sounds on the surface like just another quirky but frivolous lawsuit,
in this case brought by a tiny religious sect that worships in a pyramid, has a website that features the motto, Sealed Except to the Open Mind,and is licensed as a winery in order to be able to legally make the intoxicant that is part of its sacred rites.

However the case, which will be heard by the Supreme Court on Wednesday, is not frivolous in the least but is shaping up to be a free speech issue of far-reaching consequences.

Adam Liptak has the story in today’s New York Times.


Thirty miles to the north, in Salt Lake City,
adherents of a religion called Summum gather in a wood and metal pyramid hard by Interstate 15 to meditate on their Seven Aphorisms, fortified by an alcoholic sacramental nectar they produce and surrounded by mummified animals.

In 2003, the president of the Summum church wrote to the mayor here with a proposal: the church wanted to erect a monument inscribed with the Seven Aphorisms in the city park, “similar in size and nature” to the one devoted to the Ten Commandments.

The city declined, a lawsuit followed and a federal appeals court ruled that the First Amendment required the city to display the Summum monument.

[SNIP]

We have a city that will allow one organization to put up its religious ideals and principles,” Mr. Barnard said. “When the next group comes along, they won’t allow it to put up its religious ideals and principles.”

Last year, the federal appeals court in Denver sided with the Summum church and ordered Pleasant Grove City to erect its monument.

Although the case appears to present questions under the First Amendment’s ban on government establishment of religion, the appeals court said the case was properly analyzed under the amendment’s free-speech protections. That distinguishes it from most cases concerning the display of nativity scenes and the like on government property.

The city, supported by more than 20 cities and states, along with the federal government, has told the Supreme Court that the upshot of affirming the appeals court decision would be to clutter public parks across the nation with offensive nonsense.

A town accepting a Sept. 11 memorial would also have to display a donated tribute to Al Qaeda, the briefs said. “Accepting a Statue of Liberty,” the city’s brief said, should not “compel a government to accept a Statue of Tyranny.”

The brief for the Summum church said the relevant dispute was much narrower. “The government,” it said, “may not take sides in a theological debate.”

Read the rest. This is a case to watch.

7 Comments

Leave a Comment