Constitutional Law

"Seven Aphorisms" Not Yet Written In Stone

The U.S. Supreme Court announced March 31 that it will hear a Utah dispute over a religious group’s request for a display of its religious messages, called “Seven Aphorisms,” in a city park alongside a Ten Commandments monument. The Supreme Court granted cert. for a review of the 10th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals’ decision, Pleasant Grove City v. Summum, in favor of the Salt Lake City-based religious group.

The group, called Summum, had argued before the 10th Circuit that city officials could not constitutionally approve the Ten Commandment display while excluding other religious monuments. Adherents of Summum believe in an ancient Egyptian meditative process and beings from outer space. Among its Aphorisms are statements, such as “Nothing rests; everything moves; everything vibrates,” and “Gender is everything; everything has its Masculine and Feminine Principle; Gender manifests on all levels.”

Summum’s Web site states that it seeks to help individuals gain “experiences that will awaken us to the spirit within and to our place in the matrix of Creation’s formulations.” Pleasant Grove City officials urge the Supreme Court to overturn the 10th Circuit decision and allow city officials to block the Summum display.

The American Center for Law and Justice (ACLJ), a conservative religious legal group,  maintained that the high court has an opportunity to “preserve sound precedent involving the well-established distinction between government speech and private speech.” The city officials, represented by the ACLJ, argue that they should not be forced to open the public park to all groups seeking erect religious or other displays.

Brian Barnard, an attorney with Utah Legal Clinic, who has represented Summum for many years, countered that the city should be welcoming to other expressions of faith. “It’s a matter of simple fairness,” he told The Associated Press.

Full post as published by ACS Blog on December 31, 1969 (boomark / email).