Why I Support the Ten Commandments in Classrooms

As both a Christian and a citizen who deeply values constitutional freedom, I want to share why I support the University of Arkansas’ decision to display the Ten Commandments in classrooms—and why I believe this decision is not only lawful, but necessary in a time when our culture desperately needs moral grounding and honest conversations about history.

I understand the objections. They usually begin with a reference to Stone v. Graham (1980), the Supreme Court case that struck down a Kentucky law requiring the posting of the Ten Commandments in public schools. That decision leaned heavily on the so-called Lemon test, which scrutinized whether a government action had a secular purpose, advanced or inhibited religion, or excessively entangled church and state. But what many critics fail to acknowledge is that the legal landscape has shifted dramatically since then.

In recent years, the Supreme Court has explicitly rejected the Lemon test. In American Legion v. American Humanist Association (2019), the Court upheld a World War I memorial cross on public land, emphasizing that questions under the Establishment Clause must be judged according to “historical practices and understandings.” And in Kennedy v. Bremerton School District (2022), the Court again reaffirmed that history, tradition, and the absence of coercion—not a rigid three-part test—should guide how we interpret the First Amendment. These cases fundamentally reshape the way we think about religious expression in public spaces.

It’s also crucial to remember that a university is not a grade school. The Stone decision dealt with compulsory exposure of young children in a K–12 classroom. College students, however, are adults. A university is meant to be a marketplace of ideas where competing worldviews can be presented, challenged, and debated. If we can discuss Nietzsche and Marx, display artwork that critiques religion, and fund secular student organizations, then surely we can also acknowledge the moral and legal influence of the Ten Commandments without fear of “establishment.”

The truth is, this conversation is far from settled. Federal courts have recently issued preliminary injunctions against similar laws in Arkansas and Louisiana, but these decisions are not final. In fact, the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals recently vacated a panel ruling striking down Louisiana’s Ten Commandments law and agreed to rehear the case en banc—proof that even judges see the question as unresolved under today’s Supreme Court framework. What was unconstitutional in 1980 may not be unconstitutional in 2025.

And let’s be clear: acknowledgment is not establishment. The First Amendment forbids government from creating an official religion or compelling anyone to believe. It does not require us to erase every trace of faith from public life. The Ten Commandments have profoundly influenced Western law and ethics. They’re woven into the very fabric of our legal tradition, referenced in courtrooms, engraved in monuments, and even depicted in the friezes of the U.S. Supreme Court building itself. To present them as part of an educational display is not to proselytize—it’s to tell the truth about our history.

Pluralism is not about purging religion; it’s about making space for all viewpoints. If universities can promote secular philosophies and host religiously skeptical art installations, then they can also include religious texts that have shaped our civilization. True diversity means Christian voices belong in the public square too.

Finally, as a Christian, I believe deeply that faith must be chosen freely. Coerced belief is no belief at all. But a passive display of the Ten Commandments doesn’t compel anyone to worship or believe—it simply invites them to consider. Students can read it, ignore it, critique it, or even reject it entirely. That is not coercion. That is freedom.

I support this decision because I believe that our public institutions should reflect the complexity of our heritage and the diversity of our thought. Including the Ten Commandments in that story is not an act of exclusion—it’s an act of honesty. It acknowledges the role faith has played in shaping our legal and moral framework while leaving every individual free to decide what they believe.

At a time when our society seems increasingly untethered from any shared moral compass, displaying the Ten Commandments is not about forcing religion into classrooms. It’s about reminding us all—believers and skeptics alike—that our laws, our rights, and our freedoms did not emerge from a vacuum. They were shaped by ideas, including deeply moral ones, that continue to challenge and guide us today.

References

• Stone v. Graham, 449 U.S. 39 (1980)
• American Legion v. American Humanist Association, 588 U.S. ___ (2019)
• Kennedy v. Bremerton School District, 597 U.S. ___ (2022)
• Ongoing: Louisiana Ten Commandments Case, Fifth Circuit (en banc, 2025)
• Ongoing: Arkansas Ten Commandments Litigation, preliminary injunction (2025)