The Ten Commandments and the Law

I was reading a few sites that consist of threads where people shoot their mouths off and ran across this quote attributed to Ronald Reagan. I am not going to track down the reference; it really isn't important if he said it or not. What is important is the sentiment.

I have wondered at times what the Ten Commandments would have looked like if Moses had run them through the US Congress.

I suppose that the suggestion is that the US Congress would have butchered them in some bureaucratic fashion, but perhaps the suggestion is that they would have removed some of them. Well, I wonder too.



The first problem really rests in what we think constitutes the actual content of these commandments. There is a lot of scholarship on the issue, but I'll just take a fairly standard set from Exodus 20:2–17:

2 I am the Lord your God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of slavery;

Ok. We know now who is putatively speaking.

3 Do not have any other gods before me.

Well, this, if passed as a law in the US, would violate the First Amendment of the US Constitution; the establishment of religion part.

4 You shall not make for yourself an idol, whether in the form of anything that is in heaven above, or that is on the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth.

Hmmm... 'an idol'. This seems to me to violate the 1st amendment as well. What of religions that use idols in their religious practice?

5 You shall not bow down to them or worship them; for I the Lord your God am a jealous God, punishing children for the iniquity of parents, to the third and the fourth generation of those who reject me,
6 but showing steadfast love to the thousandth generation of those who love me and keep my commandments.

First amendment violation, again.

7 You shall not make wrongful use of the name of the Lord your God, for the Lord will not acquit anyone who misuses his name.

This seems to violate the first amendment as well... the freedom of speech part.

8 Remember the Sabbath day and keep it holy.
9 For six days you shall labour and do all your work.
10 But the seventh day is a Sabbath to the Lord your God; you shall not do any work—you, your son or your daughter, your male or female slave, your livestock, or the alien resident in your towns.
11 For in six days the Lord made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that is in them, but rested the seventh day; therefore the Lord blessed the Sabbath day and consecrated it.

This would seem to mandate shutting down all work/commerce on Sundays. I wonder just what penalties might be imposed here. I wonder if US consumer culture would tolerate it for any length of time. They couldn't handle Prohibition.

12 Honour your father and your mother, so that your days may be long in the land that the Lord your God is giving you.

This one has always bothered me. What does 'honour' mean? Obey? Respect? These do not mean the same thing. I can respect my father's advice but come to the judgement that it is not in my best interest to follow it.

What exactly would constitute a violation of any law based on this commandment? Would it apply to children alone? So, my 85 year old father gets to tell his 45 year old daughter how to live her life? I would be required by law to obey? What an odd thing.

13 You shall not murder.

Sure, been there, prohibited that.

14 You shall not commit adultery.

Well, they'd better start building prisons. There are no criminal penalties for breaking other civil contacts (unless there is fraud, as a rule), why so for this one?

15 You shall not steal.

Sure, they've got this covered as well.

16 You shall not bear false witness against your neighbour.

Same here; perjury is a criminal offence. On the other hand, does this also cover false gossip you spread over the backyard fence? Again, start building prisons.

17 You shall not covet your neighbour’s house; you shall not covet your neighbour’s wife, or male or female slave, or ox, or donkey, or anything that belongs to your neighbour.

Well. 'Covet' is not in common use these days, but it means something like 'yearn to possess or have (something)'.

I submit that if this was made a criminal offence, you'd never be able to enforce it. Nevertheless, isn't this the very emotional state that capitalistic advertising seeks to evoke from consumers? Does this imply that advertising agencies could be indicted for conspiracy to covet?

The idea that the Decalogue is anything like a blueprint for law. Only three of the ten even resemble things we generally think rise to an importance to warrant the label of criminal activity. Several are inherently religious in nature and as such constitutionally out of the reach of the US Congress. The rest are good ideas from an ethical point of view, but hardly practically enforceable or desirable as laws.

I'll leave the implicit endorsement of slavery in the last commandment alone. It speaks for itself.

Now, I think that there are people who would really like to see all of these things instantiated into law. We call them 'theocrats'; though, I have also seen them called 'Christian Taliban'. It seems to me that the differences between the Taliban and Christian Taliban is that the real Taliban were a lot more successful for a while.