US monument row in Supreme Court

The case has potential implications for religious freedom

The US Supreme Court is to rule on whether a religious group can erect a monument in a public park, in a case which could affect freedom of speech.

A city in Utah took the case to the court after its decision to reject a monument to the guiding principles of the group, Summum, was overturned.

The park is also home to a Ten Commandments monument, donated by another private group in 1971.

Summum said the city could not allow some private statues and reject others.

Previously a federal appeals court agreed with Summum, but Pleasant Grove City is appealing to the higher court.

Seven Aphorisms

It is concerned that if it had to accept Summum's monument, then it would mean anyone could erect a monument in a public park.

Under the First Amendment's Establishment Clause in the US Constitution it is illegal to favour one religion over another.

The Summum say the Seven Aphorisms were given to Moses on Mount Sinai along with the Ten Commandments.

Moses destroyed the tablet containing the aphorisms because he saw the people were not ready for them, the Summum say.

Its "Seven Aphorisms" are psychokinesis, correspondence, vibration, opposition, rhythm, cause and effect, and gender.

It is not the first time the group has sought to have a monument erected next to Ten Commandments monuments on public land.

Its website says that in three previous cases city officials either removed the Ten Commandments monuments or converted the land to private use to allow them to retain the Christian monument.