The Texas House on Sunday passed Senate Bill 10, a measure requiring the display of the Ten Commandments in every public-school classroom in the state.
The bill now returns to the Senate for concurrence, following a last-minute perfecting amendment the Senate participated in writing.
“Posting religious texts without context doesn’t teach history,” state Rep. Vincent Perez (D-El Paso) said in opposing the bill.
“The Supreme Court has indeed addressed the Ten Commandments,” Perez said, “but never once has it approved their mandatory display inside public-school classrooms.
The final speaker against the bill during Saturday’s 2½-hour debate was state Rep. James Talarico (D-Austin), a former San Antonio public schoolteacher and current seminary student.
On Sunday, the Texas House approved Senate Bill 10, which mandates that the Ten Commandments be displayed in all public school classrooms throughout the state.
The Senate participated in writing a last-minute perfecting amendment, which now sends the bill back to the Senate for concurrence. After that, it would go to the governor’s desk. Greg Abbott, who is anticipated to ratify the legislation.
Given that it might violate the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment to the United States Constitution, such a law is likely to be challenged in court. S. . Constitution.
Despite some Democrats voting against the Republican majority, SB 10 passed its third and final reading in the Texas House on Sunday by a vote of 82-46.
It is scheduled to go into effect in September. The Ten Commandments monument outside the Texas State Capitol in Austin uses the same language from the King James Bible as the Ten Commandments, and if Abbott signs it, it will be required to be displayed in every public school classroom in the state.
“The Supreme Court has already approved and upheld this monument and the words on it in a 2005 case,” the state representative stated. At the beginning of the bill’s debate on Saturday, Candy Noble (R-Lucas), the bill’s sponsor in the House, stated that the wording won’t require a new court case objection. “,”.
According to Perez, Noble misunderstood the U. S. . the Supreme Court’s decision. He maintained that although it provided protection for displays outside of state legislatures, it did not extend to those found in public schools.
The Supreme Court has addressed the Ten Commandments, according to Perez, but it has never once authorized their required display in public school classrooms. The exact opposite. In Stone v. Graham, the Kentucky law that required a blatantly religious display in classrooms was overturned by the Supreme Court. That ruling is still a good law today. “.”.
However, a lot of Republican lawmakers in Texas view the Stone v. Graham as being declared invalid by a more recent ruling, Kennedy v. The school football coach was permitted to pray on the field both during and after games by the Bremerton School District.
The United States will have to decide which precedent is most important. A. Fifth Circuit Appeals Court. A Louisiana law that was passed last year and is nearly identical to SB 10—down to the wording of the Ten Commandments that must be taught in public schools—is scheduled to be challenged in that court.
Noble used a number of historical, legal, and moral arguments to support SB 10, emphasizing that the Ten Commandments had been taught in textbooks for a large portion of the United States. A. history up until Lemon v. Supreme Court in 1971. They were compelled to leave the classroom by Kurtzman. She maintained that the precedents set by Lemon and Stone were rendered invalid by the Kennedy decision.
The Ten Commandments are “nothing more deeply ingrained in the fabric of our American tradition of education,” according to Noble. “The Ten Commandments serve as the foundation for how our society treats others. In the midst of the chaos in the courtroom these days, it’s time to go back to the foundations of our educational system. Have respect for authority. Be considerate of other people. Stay away from stealing. Tell the truth. Keep your life intact. Keep your promise. “,”.
The goal of the fifteen amendments proposed by Democratic lawmakers appeared to be to force Republicans to recognize that the bill was intended to establish a clearly Christian worldview in Texas schools. Republicans frequently used a parliamentary tool called a point of order to end any discussion of the proposed amendments before the Democratic speaker could even start outlining their amendment.
Perez and state Rep. In addition to the Protestant King James Bible, Jon Rosenthal (D-Houston) suggested amendments requiring the Ten Commandments to be displayed in classrooms in both Jewish and Catholic translations.
These distinctions are not insignificant. They are a reflection of deep religious traditions. The bill doesn’t restore tradition by acting as though these differences don’t exist. Perez stated, “It distorts it.”. “If we approve the initial draft of this bill, taxpayers will be responsible for the costs of any ensuing legal challenges. “..”.
Both of Perez’s and Rosenthal’s amendments failed. The state representative also made a number of amendments. Gene Wu (D-Houston), who aimed to include the Ten Commandments with the foundational texts of Buddhism, Islam, and Hinduism—religious traditions with significant followings in Texas.
Some Democrats pointed out that about one-third of Texans are not Jewish or Christian and do not view the Ten Commandments as central to their faiths.
State Rep. John Bryant, a Democrat from Dallas, expressed concern that SB 10 might be used as a springboard to further impose a clearly and narrowly Christian worldview in public schools. When young children ask questions about the Ten Commandments, like what adultery means, he pointed out that the typical public schoolteacher would find it challenging to respond.
Bryant added, “And the first time a teacher falters and commits an error, Ms. To raise Cain and accuse someone of persecuting Christians, Noble and her supporters of this bill will lead a group with pitchforks down to the schoolboard. “..”.
During Saturday’s two and a half-hour debate, state Rep. was the last speaker to oppose the bill. Former San Antonio public schoolteacher and current seminary student James Talarico (D-Austin). In support of his claim that SB 10 would have the opposite effect from what was intended—that is, it would backfire and produce a generation of atheists rather than Christians—he cited the apostle Paul.
Talarico stated that “this bill is not the way to address the spiritual crisis in our world that needs to be addressed.”. Not only does the state benefit from the separation of church and state. It safeguards the church as well. “.”.
