Listening to a program on homeschooling the other day, I heard yet again the claim that our law is "based on the ten commandments". This is quite wrong, and I thought it was worth writing down just how wrong it is.
In researching* this post I rediscovered that there isn't exactly a "ten commandments"; there are a collection of statements which different traditions break up into ten along different lines. But here's the text, with annotations by me:
> I am the LORD thy God, which have brought thee out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of bondage.
This has never been relevant to our law.
> Thou shalt have no other gods before me.
Such a law is directly forbidden as an establishment of religion.
> Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image, or any likeness of any thing that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth:
This has never been forbidden, and the country is full of graven images.
> Thou shalt not bow down thyself to them, nor serve them:
This would also contradict the establishment clause. One of the more hilarious examples of public piety that I've seen in recent years was this. Apparently these people haven't read the book. But they weren't breaking the law.
> for I the LORD thy God am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children unto the third and fourth generation of them that hate me;
We go to some trouble to reduce the extent that the sins of the parents are visited on the children, never mind succeeding generations. We certainly do not deliberately punish people for their parent's sins.
>And shewing mercy unto thousands of them that love me, and keep my commandments.
The establishment clause specifically forbids different treatment for those that love God, and as we will see his commandments are generally ignored or contradicted by our law. We do treat people better who follow the law, although I would question the use of the term "mercy" with people that are following the law.
> Thou shalt not take the name of the LORD thy God in vain; for the LORD will not hold him guiltless that taketh his name in vain.
We have had such laws in the past, but they've been found to be unconstitutional.
> Remember the sabbath day, to keep it holy. Six days shalt thou labour, and do all thy work: But the seventh day is the sabbath of the LORD thy God: in it thou shalt not do any work, thou, nor thy son, nor thy daughter, thy manservant, nor thy maidservant, nor thy cattle, nor thy stranger that is within thy gates:
Sunday trading laws are still widespread, although it's difficult to distentangle them from a widespread desire for a weekend. It's worth noting that the sabbath day is actually Saturday. Doing work on your own behalf is not prohibited anywhere that I know of; whereas the Old Testament notoriously prescribes the death penalty for this.
> For in six days the LORD made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that in them is, and rested the seventh day: wherefore the LORD blessed the sabbath day, and hallowed it.
This can't be used as a justification, as it violates the establishment clause.
> Honour thy father and thy mother: that thy days may be long upon the land which the LORD thy God giveth thee.
Parents typically have legal authority over children until a specific age, although "honour" is not required. Legally, parents have much more responsibility to their children than vice-versa, something not mentioned here at all. The Old Testament expands more on what this should mean in Deuteronomy chapter 20: apparently disobedient children can be put to death. We have nothing like this law on the books.
> Thou shalt not kill.
Is there a legal system that doesn't include this?
> Thou shalt not commit adultery.
Has been a crime in the past, but is now merely a cause for divorce.
> Thou shalt not steal.
Is there a legal system that doesn't include this? Variations here are usually over the definition of "stealing", and depend on who does it. Anyone who wishes to pronounce the US free of such controversies should look into asset forfeiture laws in the US; begin here.
> Thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbour.
I must confess to some ignorance here; I don't know how widespread such an idea is in other legal systems. Lying to authorities about things they care about is often punished quite harshly, but this passage refers to "thy neighbour" - a much more personal idea. Most of the time when I hear this passage brought up it is not by Christians - they seem much more enamored of Biblical passages dealing with sexual morality - but by people pointing out to Creationists that lying is not well thought of by the religion they are claiming to defend.
> Thou shalt not covet thy neighbour's house, thou shalt not covet thy neighbour's wife, nor his manservant, nor his maidservant, nor his ox, nor his ass, nor any thing that is thy neighbour's.
You could make a decent argument that the entire free enterprise system is based on encouraging people to break this commandment. Our legal system certainly prohibits underhanded ways of acting on such desires, but there is absolutely no prohibition on the desire itself. It might be taken as good advice, but our economic system is the embodiment of a rejection of it.
So there you have it. A couple of rules - against theft and murder - that are shared with every other legal system on the planet; one that might be original to the ten commandments, at least in its spirit; and the rest either irrelevant or specifically rejected by our legal system.
No, our legal system is not based on the ten commandments. Thankfully.
* OK, looking it up on Wikipedia.
In researching* this post I rediscovered that there isn't exactly a "ten commandments"; there are a collection of statements which different traditions break up into ten along different lines. But here's the text, with annotations by me:
> I am the LORD thy God, which have brought thee out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of bondage.
This has never been relevant to our law.
> Thou shalt have no other gods before me.
Such a law is directly forbidden as an establishment of religion.
> Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image, or any likeness of any thing that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth:
This has never been forbidden, and the country is full of graven images.
> Thou shalt not bow down thyself to them, nor serve them:
This would also contradict the establishment clause. One of the more hilarious examples of public piety that I've seen in recent years was this. Apparently these people haven't read the book. But they weren't breaking the law.
> for I the LORD thy God am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children unto the third and fourth generation of them that hate me;
We go to some trouble to reduce the extent that the sins of the parents are visited on the children, never mind succeeding generations. We certainly do not deliberately punish people for their parent's sins.
>And shewing mercy unto thousands of them that love me, and keep my commandments.
The establishment clause specifically forbids different treatment for those that love God, and as we will see his commandments are generally ignored or contradicted by our law. We do treat people better who follow the law, although I would question the use of the term "mercy" with people that are following the law.
> Thou shalt not take the name of the LORD thy God in vain; for the LORD will not hold him guiltless that taketh his name in vain.
We have had such laws in the past, but they've been found to be unconstitutional.
> Remember the sabbath day, to keep it holy. Six days shalt thou labour, and do all thy work: But the seventh day is the sabbath of the LORD thy God: in it thou shalt not do any work, thou, nor thy son, nor thy daughter, thy manservant, nor thy maidservant, nor thy cattle, nor thy stranger that is within thy gates:
Sunday trading laws are still widespread, although it's difficult to distentangle them from a widespread desire for a weekend. It's worth noting that the sabbath day is actually Saturday. Doing work on your own behalf is not prohibited anywhere that I know of; whereas the Old Testament notoriously prescribes the death penalty for this.
> For in six days the LORD made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that in them is, and rested the seventh day: wherefore the LORD blessed the sabbath day, and hallowed it.
This can't be used as a justification, as it violates the establishment clause.
> Honour thy father and thy mother: that thy days may be long upon the land which the LORD thy God giveth thee.
Parents typically have legal authority over children until a specific age, although "honour" is not required. Legally, parents have much more responsibility to their children than vice-versa, something not mentioned here at all. The Old Testament expands more on what this should mean in Deuteronomy chapter 20: apparently disobedient children can be put to death. We have nothing like this law on the books.
> Thou shalt not kill.
Is there a legal system that doesn't include this?
> Thou shalt not commit adultery.
Has been a crime in the past, but is now merely a cause for divorce.
> Thou shalt not steal.
Is there a legal system that doesn't include this? Variations here are usually over the definition of "stealing", and depend on who does it. Anyone who wishes to pronounce the US free of such controversies should look into asset forfeiture laws in the US; begin here.
> Thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbour.
I must confess to some ignorance here; I don't know how widespread such an idea is in other legal systems. Lying to authorities about things they care about is often punished quite harshly, but this passage refers to "thy neighbour" - a much more personal idea. Most of the time when I hear this passage brought up it is not by Christians - they seem much more enamored of Biblical passages dealing with sexual morality - but by people pointing out to Creationists that lying is not well thought of by the religion they are claiming to defend.
> Thou shalt not covet thy neighbour's house, thou shalt not covet thy neighbour's wife, nor his manservant, nor his maidservant, nor his ox, nor his ass, nor any thing that is thy neighbour's.
You could make a decent argument that the entire free enterprise system is based on encouraging people to break this commandment. Our legal system certainly prohibits underhanded ways of acting on such desires, but there is absolutely no prohibition on the desire itself. It might be taken as good advice, but our economic system is the embodiment of a rejection of it.
So there you have it. A couple of rules - against theft and murder - that are shared with every other legal system on the planet; one that might be original to the ten commandments, at least in its spirit; and the rest either irrelevant or specifically rejected by our legal system.
No, our legal system is not based on the ten commandments. Thankfully.
* OK, looking it up on Wikipedia.
