"If your concern isn't what's in Moore's heart but is what's in the hearts of those who pass by it, well, they can just not pay it no never mind, can't they?"
The monument is intended to provoke a particular state of mind. A monument is erected to provide lasting evidence, reminders, or examples of something great and meaningful. So, one must ask what is the particular meaningfulness of this monument. You could take Neo’s argument that it is simply a historical reference and non-religious. But the monument itself has a history and the history is founded on the specific purpose to raise awareness of God’s importance in the court system from a particular religious perspective.
I am all for that, up and to the point that it distinguishes justice for the believers in a tilted fashion in respect to non-believers. I am generally against monuments being used this way because they raise the question of favor in God’s eyes. You can walk into any church, synagogue, mosque, temple etc, and; you will hear how that particular community is in a favored position, to be 'judged' by God. An engraving that simply stated, “Let God guide this court in justice” with no cultural symbols might be appropriate. But, a monument that identifies a particular strand of humanity is a different thing. |
