Ten Commandments decision prompts conservative outcry – KAUZ

Oklahoma Gov. Mary Fallin said Tuesday the Ten Commandments monument at the Capitol will stay there despite the state’s Supreme Court ruling it violated the Constitution and must be removed.

The outcry immediately followed the court’s 7-2 decision Tuesday that the monument violates the Oklahoma constitution’s ban on using public property to benefit a religion.

“It is a privately funded tribute to historical events, not a taxpayer funded endorsement of any religion, as some have alleged”, Fallin said.

Oklahoma is a state where we respect the rule of law, and we will not ignore the state courts or their decisions.

“We need to restore the balance in our state government and not put up with this kind of judicial tyranny”, Rep. Calvey said. “This is historical heritage of our birth as a nation and birth as a state”. “Additionally, our Legislature has signaled its support for pursuing changes to our state Constitution that will make it clear the Ten Commandments monument is legally permissible”, she added. It has been the subject of many debates over the separation of church and state. “Taken to an extreme it could even lead to churches, synagogues, mosques and other buildings used for religious purposes being unable to receive police and fire protection as they would be directly or indirectly benefiting from public monies”. “It was written with discrimination in mind, and like a malignant tumor, needs to be removed completely”, he said.

Attorney General Scott Pruitt argued before the court that the monument was similar to one in Texas that the USA Supreme Court validated, though the state’s justices said that the Ten Commandments display is a violation, instead, of Oklahoma’s constitution, the AP reported.

The state Supreme Court clearly saw it differently, though, with the ruling becoming so contentious that some Republican lawmakers called for the justices’ impeachment last week.

“You don’t change the law by impeaching people”, Poarch said. Henderson said he hopes that if the amendment comes up for a vote, voters would have time to become more informed about the issue and the constitutional provision. “[If not], then potentially there will be an appeal all the way to the Supreme Court”.