This week a federal district court in Texas temporarily blocked the enforcement of a recently passed Texas law which requires the posting of the Ten Commandments in public schools. On Wednesday, August 20, 2025, Federal District Court Judge Fred Biery issued a preliminary injunction against the law, claiming it likely violates both the Establishment and Free Exercise clauses of the U.S. Constitution’s First Amendment [1].

The lawsuit resulting in this injunction was filed by several families who insisted—quite accurately, in the present writer’s view—that such a law intrudes on their ability to give or not give religious instruction to their own children, based on their chosen religious beliefs [2].

The law mandates the display by public schools of a 16 by 20-inch poster of a specific English version of the Ten Commandments in each classroom [3]. (Some appear quite oblivious to the fact that not only do many English versions of the Ten Commandments exist, but that different denominations—Catholics and Protestants in particular—endorse varying, in some cases abbreviated versions of these divine commands.)

The judge wrote in his decision:

The displays are likely to pressure the child-Plaintiffs into religious observance, meditation on, veneration, and adoption of the State’s favored religious scripture, and into suppressing expression of their own religious or nonreligious background and beliefs while at school [4].

Plaintiff Rabbi Mara Nathan called the decision a win for parents' rights: "Children's religious beliefs should be instilled by parents and faith communities, not politicians and public schools” [5]. Heather L. Weaver, senior counsel for the American Civil Liberties Union's Program on Freedom of Religion and Belief, said the ruling protects inclusivity in schools. "Public schools are not Sunday schools," Weaver said [6].

If this mandate that a specific version of the Ten Commandments be posted in public institutions is not preparing Americans for the end-time establishment of the image to the beast (Rev. 13:16-17), it’s hard to imagine what is!

An Excellent Ruling

We on this website, along with other advocates of civil and religious liberty, applaud the decision of this judge. Seventh-day Adventists everywhere, in fact, should applaud this ruling.

For a secular government to enforce by law the placement of one or another version of the Ten Commandments in a public setting, is most assuredly a breach of the Constitutional wall between church and state. If the law required inclusion of the Ten Commandments in their varied forms alongside other legal traditions for the purpose of education, few could rightly object to that, in a public school setting or elsewhere. But to enforce in a taxpayer-funded context the posting of one version of the Ten Commandments, and not require the education of pupils relative to other bodies of law, cannot be called anything other than a violation of religious liberty and an establishment of one religious faith over a host of alternatives.

As we noted in our article reporting on the debate which preceded the passage of this Texas law [7], few seem to know the differing versions of the Ten Commandments espoused by various segments of the Christian community. A quarter century ago, in the U.S. House of Representatives, a debate transpired on the posting of the Ten Commandments in public places. One Congressman rightly asked:

Which version of the Ten Commandments will be posted? The Catholic version? The Protestant version? They’re different, you know [##8|Congressman Jerrold Nadler, quoted by Rob Boston, “House of Horrors,” Church & State, July-August 1999, p. 5.##].

That’s just the trouble. People don’t know.

Hypocrisy On Full Display

Our recent article on the debate over this Texas law noted how one member of the Texas legislature asked the law’s principal sponsor whether it was more important to insist that others follow the Ten Commandments than to follow them oneself [9]. This is especially noteworthy just now, as Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton, who has vowed to appeal the recent court ruling against the law requiring the posting of the Ten Commandments [10], has himself been accused by his estranged wife of adultery as grounds for her recent filing for divorce [11].

Wouldn’t it be better for some of these theocracy zealots to bring their own lives under God’s rule, rather than trying to impose that rule on others?

As Jesus indicated in His denunciation of the scribes and Pharisees (Matt. 23:27-32), hypocrisy is often the twin sister of intolerance.

REFERENCES

1. Sergio Candido, “Federal judge blocks Texas law requiring Ten Commandments displayed in public school classrooms,” CBS News, August 20, 2025 https://www.cbsnews.com/texas/news/ten-commandments-texas-abbott-law-blocked-federal-judge/

2. Ibid.

3. Ibid.

4. Ibid.

5. Ibid.

6. Ibid.

7. Kevin D. Paulson, “A Tale of Hypocrisy and Opportunity,” ADvindicate, May 30, 2025 https://advindicate.com/articles/draft1-9ek5h-yyxsc-xjn22-6c4dg-3l78d-sg8my-glmmn-2hatl-7t9at-rc9k8-bk9rm

8. Congressman Jerrold Nadler, quoted by Rob Boston, “House of Horrors,” Church & State, July-August 1999, p. 5.

9. Paulson, “A Tale of Hypocrisy and Opportunity,” ADvindicate, May 30, 2025 https://advindicate.com/articles/draft1-9ek5h-yyxsc-xjn22-6c4dg-3l78d-sg8my-glmmn-2hatl-7t9at-rc9k8-bk9rm

10. Candido, “Federal judge blocks Texas law requiring Ten Commandments displayed in public school classrooms,” CBS News, August 20, 2025 https://www.cbsnews.com/texas/news/ten-commandments-texas-abbott-law-blocked-federal-judge/

11. Eleanor Klibanoff, “Sen. Angela Paxton files for divorce from Attorney General Ken Paxton,” The Texas Tribune, July 10, 2025 https://www.texastribune.org/2025/07/10/angela-paxton-divorce-texas-attorney-general-ken/