As noted in an earlier post I made, Bill O’Reilly supported the fundamentalists in Alabama. I’m not surprised. I figure he makes the religious freedom argument, saying nothing out of the ordinary. He has bewildered me. Here’s what he said (no links, I can only find it on Lexis/Nexis):

My take on this is that Judge Moore is right in theory. The federal government has no legal basis to order any monument concerning Judeo-Christian philosophy to be dismantled. It’s absurd to think that the 10 commandments reflects a specific religion. It does not.

This is, quite honestly, insane. Too bad O’Reilly wasn’t there the last couple of shows where the issue was debated. This is all I have to go on.

Now, he plainly states that the 10 commandments are a “Judeo-Christian philosophy.” Now, what is Christianity? According to Webster’s:

the religion derived from Jesus Christ , based on the Bible as sacred scripture, and professed by Eastern, Roman Catholic, and Protestant bodies

What is Judaism?

a religion developed among the ancient Hebrews and characterized by belief in one transcendent God who has revealed himself to Abraham, Moses, and the Hebrew prophets and by a religious life in accordance with Scriptures and rabbinic traditions

So, if this a philosophy of two religions, how is it not representative of a particular religion (or two, in this case)? Is this followed by Muslims? Hindus? Buddhists? Some commandments are, of course, the ones that are pretty much followed by civilization everywhere. What the judge has done is made almost a shrine to Christianity. In a gov’t building, this amounts to a endorsment of a particular religion (or two). This is all very simple.

And why does Fox feel the need to post the 10 commandments on their web site? That’s just pointless.