The Trojan Horse of SB 34:
Ten Commandments in Ohio Classrooms?
Recently, SB 34, which is dubbed the “Historical Educational Displays Act,” was introduced into the Ohio Senate and had its first hearing. I’m going to parse out a particular quote from the sponsor testimony, but first, let’s give a run-down of what this bill would do.
This bill would require school boards to select one of the following historical education documents to display in every classroom:
The Ten Commandments
The Mayflower Compact
The Declaration of Independence
The Northwest Ordinance
The mottoes of the United States and Ohio
The Magna Carta
The Bill of Rights
The United States Constitution
The Articles of Confederation
The bill also allows schools to erect monuments to these historical documents. According to the sponsor, the reason for this bill is to expose students to documents that have “served as the backbone of our legal and moral traditions as a people.” That’s certainly true of some of the documents. The Constitution, along with the Bill of Rights, are the framework for American law, and the Articles of Confederation were the bridge to the Constitution. Most of the others also have significance in American history, although the mottoes have considerably less influence. “In God We Trust” has been challenged before for its overt religious message and only found constitutional due to what the court called “ceremonial deism,” meaning that its religious meaning has been so diluted through its usage in patriotic and historical contexts.
However, that leaves us with The Ten Commandments and why they would be included in this list. Other states have passed or attempted to pass very direct “Ten Commandment display” laws, so why is ours grouped in with other potential options? Well, in my humble opinion, it’s a ploy. While it’s possible that school boards would choose one of the other “Historical Educational Documents,” considering that this bill comes without funding and the sponsor has already said that he anticipates there are “plenty of organizations happy to donate” these monuments, they’re hedging their bets that Christian groups will donate Ten Commandment monuments.
After all, are you aware of any civic organizations chomping at the bits to donate displays/monuments of The Northwest Ordinance to public schools? Of course not. This is little more than a way to allow the school districts some plausible deniability over the obviously religious nature of the displays.
So let’s ask, are the Ten Commandments historically significant to American law? I would argue that they are not. In fact, I would argue that many of the Ten Commandments are in direct opposition to The United States Constitution. Let’s quickly run through them and see how they compare to one another:
1st Commandment - "You shall have no other gods before me"
The first commandment is completely religious in nature, demanding allegiance to the Hebrew God. This is in direct contradiction to the First Amendment of the United States Constitution, which promises freedom of religion, as well as the Establishment Clause, which doesn’t allow the United States to establish any official religion. While the commandment makes it clear that Yahweh alone is to be worshipped, our Constitution specifically allows individuals to worship any god they so choose or none at all.
2nd Commandment - "You shall not make for yourself a graven image... You shall not bow down to them or serve them."
This again violates the First Amendment, which allows for religious freedom, including “idol worship.” Hindu and Buddhist Temples—among others—are allowed to host idols to any gods they choose in the United States.
3rd Commandment - "You shall not take the name of the Lord your God in vain."
Again, this commandment is in direct opposition to the First Amendment and is solely a religious decree. In the United States, we allow for freedom of speech, which includes “blasphemy” and other such language that others may find offensive.
4th Commandment - "Remember the Sabbath day, to keep it holy."
Sounding like a broken record here, but this would be a violation of the First Amendment. The United States cannot mandate any sort of religious observance, including a “Sabbath” day.
5th Commandment - "Honor your father and your mother."
While U.S. law recognizes parental rights, we don’t force children to “honor” their parents. Disobedience to parents is not generally viewed as illegal, unless the child is breaking some other law in the process. We also have the freedom to associate or not associate with whomever we choose, allowing adult children and parents to cut off contact when they feel necessary. The government also has the right to remove children from the homes of parents and even sever parental rights under certain circumstances.
6th Commandment - "You shall not murder."
Murder is illegal in the United States, so we should be good with this one… right? Well, kind of, but not exactly. Murder is generally considered the unjustified taking of a life, but the Bible’s definition of “murder” is much broader. Under biblical law, certain offenses such as adultery, idolatry, witchcraft, and homosexuality were punishable by death. In contrast, under U.S. law, these actions would not justify the taking of someone’s life. If you killed someone for these reasons, you’d be committing murder and would face legal consequences.
7th Commandment - "You shall not commit adultery."
The Constitution largely protects personal privacy and freedom of choice in relationships. In the past, various states have had laws criminalizing adultery, but even then, the punishment was not execution, as outlined in the Bible. While we may morally understand the cruelty of cheating on a partner, we now understand these as moral, personal, and, at worst, civil matters—not criminal matters.
8th Commandment - "You shall not steal."
Generally, not an issue with this one. While we recognize nuances in the discussion around what is theft—such as taking something that doesn’t belong to you in order to save a life—we could generally agree that this is good guidance for our lives.
9th Commandment - "You shall not bear false witness against your neighbor."
This one can be much more complicated than presented in the commandments. U.S. law doesn’t criminalize lying in all cases, but it certainly does in some. For example, lying in court will land you with a perjury charge. Certain types of lies may get you into a libel or slander lawsuit. However, telling your friend that her new hair color looks great when you really believe it looks terrible isn’t a criminal offense—in fact, telling her it looks terrible may end your friendship.
10th Commandment - "You shall not covet your neighbor’s house... wife... or anything that belongs to your neighbor."
The U.S. Constitution does not criminalize thought—only actions. In fact, it could be argued that coveting is the bedrock of the American economy.
Generally speaking, some of the commandments may apply to our lives, but where they correlate with The Constitution, it’s coincidental at best. But let’s move on to one of my “favorite” statements from the sponsor testimony (thanks to reporting from The Buckeye Flame):
“If we’re talking about religions, atheism is a religion. You have to believe there is no God. And the school is full of atheism and we don’t mind that so much and I don’t really understand why. On the other hand, religion is not central to what we’re talking about [here]. The historical documents that gave birth to our nation and being able to trace that like breadcrumbs is what’s important.”
First, atheism is not a religion. It has no tenets, commandments, or moral positions on any issue. Atheism is simply the answer to a single question: “Do you believe in a god?” In many cases, atheism is treated as a religion for First Amendment purposes because it is the answer to a religious question.
However, Sen. Johnson has completely misconstrued what atheism actually is. Atheism is not strictly the belief that “there is no God.” Atheism is the absence of belief in a god or gods. It doesn’t necessarily assert that no god exists. It simply states that those who say a god exists have failed to meet their burden of proof.
As for schools being full of atheism, I’m not sure I even know what Sen. Johnson means. If we’re talking about the people in the schools—teachers, staff, and students—I’d dare say that would mean schools are full of Christianity, as Christianity is the prominent religious ideology in the United States. Most recent surveys find that atheists make up only 4% of the U.S. population. That is an increase from prior surveys, but it hardly represents some massive takeover of the public schools.
I would suspect that Sen. Johnson means that our schools are full of secularism, and on that, we’d somewhat agree. Secularism is the principle of separating religion from government, ensuring that religious beliefs do not dictate laws or public policies. Secularism also is not a religion, and something else—other than our schools—are full of secularism: The United States Constitution.
In short, SB 34 is little more than a Trojan horse for inserting religion into public schools under the guise of historical education. The Ten Commandments are not the foundation of American law, nor do they align with the principles of the U.S. Constitution. The sponsor’s testimony only reinforces that this bill is built on misconceptions—about our founding documents, secularism, and even atheism itself.
Ohio students deserve real investments in their education—fully funded schools, better teacher pay, and updated resources—not performative legislation designed to score political points. Instead of playing games with religious displays, maybe lawmakers should focus on actually helping the children they claim to care about.