Judge Roy Moore
Criminal or Freedom Fighter?
A Debate

Comments Welcome
Send To subject line MOORE
Reload often for latest comments

Did Judge Roy Moore, by violating what he believed to be unconscienable law which both violated the US Constitution and his State Constitution set a mark for liberty with his act of civil disobedience (for which he was dismissed as a Justice) or did he simply defy the rule of law, seeking his own selfish, religious desires to impose a religion upon a secular society? You be the judge...


Tracy Fallon
Judge Moore is no hero, hence he is no more a judge! He violated the rule of law, the very thing these right-wing religious whackos stand on and pummel everyone else with night and day. He's through! If Roy had his way, everyone in America would be forced to worship his god, his way and in the public arena. He was wrong, the justices found him to be wrong, and they were right. There's nothing honorable about breaking the law.
Dr. Donald Florence
As somebody who used to teach the American Civilization sequence for the University of Illinois, I might know a thing or two about American history, thank you.
If Moore wanted to display a two-and-a-half ton monument of the Ten Commandments in his front yard, fine. Displaying it in the statehouse rotunda crossed the line. Implicitly or explicitly, his act suggested state authorization, which blurs the line separating church and state. He also broke the law by subsequently denying a federal court judge's order to remove the monument. Please note that all eight of Moore's fellow supreme court justices, some of whom are Christian fundamentalists themselves, found Moore guilty on this point.
People are free to believe what they wish. What is a "legacy" for some, however, may not be a "legacy," for others, and in any case "legacy" does not translate into state authorization or a justification blurring the line between separation of church and state. There are many people in this country who are not Christians and many Christians who are not fundamentalists. (In case you're wondering, I happen to admire some of Jesus' ethical teachings very much, but I don't subscribe to Christian theological dogma, even though I was raised a fundamentalist Baptist.)
The Old Testament is also the Jewish Torah, obviously, but I don't ever recall any Jewish legislator or judge arguing that the Ten Commandments should be displayed in a statehouse, do you?
It's also worth pointing out that broader principles of empathy, compassion, forgiveness, fair play, etc., are hardly the exclusive province of the Judeo-Christian "legacy" or tradition (which, in fact and in practice, has often failed miserably on that score; some of the greatest warmongers and inquisitors in history have been "Christians"). As Mark Twain was fond of pointing out, the "golden rule" also traces back to Confucius, and I suspect that it really traces back to the first hominid who dimly realized that hey, that other guy has thoughts and feelings just as I do. I might suggest a thorough study of world history, especially ancient history, for you to gain some context and perspective on these matters. The one-volume "A History of the World" by highly respected Oxford professor J. M. Roberts might form a nice starting point. Some study in assorted scientific disciplines might also prove useful in evaluating certain beliefs and understanding why some other folks have differing perspectives.
If Mr. Moore and his fellow believers keep their religious monuments out of public statehouses, they won't find other folks agitating for "equal time" for monuments representing *their* religious, philosophical, and scientific perspectives. That sounds like a good deal to me.
Sincerely yours,
Dr. Donald Florence
Alton Raines

What we have here is the classic hoodwink. Those who don't want any religious anything want to dictate to everyone else how our society will look and operate. So much so, that a silent stone causes them woe. That alone is rather interesting from a theological perspective, but I digress. The Constitution is clear. Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion (that means promoting one) or prohibiting the free exercise thereof. In other words, the state cannot encroach upon the church and the church cannot encroach upon the state through any legal/legislative means whereby the government authorizes or endorses a religion or forbids it either. It doesn't say the religion must be practiced in the closet of the home of the religious person as those on the extreme left would like us to believe. On the contrary, our Founding Fathers opened and closed every session, as does the Supreme Court and Congress and Senate, with a prayer to God! Why? Because the state is authorizing one religion over another? No! Because the majority of people adhere to that religion and their voice cannot constitutionally be silenced. The Bill of Rights guarantees it.

I have no problem with hindu, jewish, buddhist, whatever symbols and teachings being displayed publically as well. Religious freedom dictates that such should be a part of our culture and society and its something we should cherish, even venerate. But some simply want to twist the Constitution and the history of this nation to reflect a godless humanist perspective, and I'm sorry, I don't care how deeply piled ones PHd is, it can be piled higher and deeper with pure crap, too. Moore practiced reasonable civil disobedience, fully willing to suffer the consequences and he did. Just like Rev. Martin Luther King. That is the core of this issue -- its sad we've come so far from what the founders intended. Does a secular society mean religious imagery, history and legacy is banned in public? It certainly was not by the founders! Why should it be today?
Gene Edinger
Dear Jeff,
I am appalled by the current splash screen proclaiming Judge Roy Moore a hero of the First Amendment, the Constitution, and religious liberty. Please note the wording in the following treaty with Tripoli which was ratified by the United States June 10, 1797 . . . proclaimed June 10, 1797. And please consider the wording this treaty contains -- it's precise and unambiguous about the secular nature of the USA:
"Article 11. As the government of the United States of America is not in any sense founded on the Christian Religion, -- as it has in itself no character of enmity against the laws, religion or tranquility of Musselmen,--and as the said States never have entered into any war or act of hostility against any Mehomitan nation, it is declared by the parties that no pretext arising from religious opinions shall ever produce an interruption of the harmony existing between the two countries"

To read more, see...
Roger Wallace
(Email witheld)

Roy Moore merely sought to maintain a historical symbol of our Jude-Christian heritage. Atheist groups are now seeking to see Judge Roy disbarred! I think its evident what this fight is really about. It's not enough for them that he fought his conscience and took his licks, losing his job. They want the man punished personally, destroying his career and evaporating his ability to practice law. Every one of us with an ounce of Jeffersonian spirit should recognize that there is a law above the law of man, be it God's law or ones own personal convictions and conscience against evident tyranny.
Those who side against Moore are frightening examples of political extremists who only seek the ruin of our nation. They clearly hate all things Jude-Christian and want history revised so that a hundred years from now, no child would ever know this nation's true history rooted in these values and philosophies. That's serious evil!
Name Witheld

Just my two cents, but -- I think Moore was obviously wrong, by law -- but right, by something bigger and more important. Truth. At one time the law said blacks could not vote. It was wrong. It took people breaking the law to change that. Sometimes you have to break the law. And for a judge to do it, for something that had nothing to do with any personal gain, is impressive. I wish we had more justices like Roy Moore.
His religious beliefs are not important to me. As an agnostic, I am not offended by the ten commandments in the courthouse. Its just an artifact of our history, like a big painting of some founding father. You can't walk ten feet in Washington DC without running into passages from the Bible carved in monuments -- our taxes pay for that. Right out in front of the UN is a quotation from Isaiah. Is that promoting a religion, too?
From Richard

The phrase "separation of church and state" is not in the Constitution. It stemmed from a personal letter of Thomas Jefferson in which he used the phrase. The Constitution requires that there be no state (government) religion, and simultaneously, that the state (government) does not restrict the free exercise thereof. There's was to be no "American" church as there was an "Anglican" church.
Per the Bill of Rights, Amendment I
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
There is NOTHING that prohibits the state from being religious and to be so in the context of its natural judeo-christian tradition (one of its foundational pillars, by the way). The modern notion that this may "offend" some sensible souls who have a different world view, matters not one iota, so long as they aren't forced to adopt a "state religion" as a condition of citizenship and of its privileges. The interdict is there to allow and protect the freedom of worship for OTHER non-judeo-christian religions. NOT to stifle the expression within the halls of the state of the very religion upon which this state drew most of its inspiration.
The core fundamental Truth of this Nation (expressed with an eloquence shadowed by the reality of the gallows) is that our freedoms (endowed by our Creator) are ipso facto instilled in the citizens. These "freedoms" are deemed inalienable (i.e., incapable of being surrendered or transferred). The individual citizen then extends these rights to the individual state in which he/she lives. These states in turn empower the federal government. This is what all of our forefathers fought and died for. The Oath was to the Constitution, not to a federal government or to a president.
The state/federal government (should) work for us, we should not be subject to it. Citizens, through their States, created the Federal Government, not the other way around !!! The Bill of Rights, Amendment Ten states: "The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people."
So, here we have Alabama's Supreme Court Chief Justice Judge Roy S. Moore struggling for Liberty and his personal faith in God, and the real Constitutional element is ignored by the mainstream. The truth in this situation now is no different than an earlier truth that split our Republic. The War Between The States (American Civil War) was fought for one thing and one thing only: STATE'S RIGHTS ! The current issue with Judge Moore should be framed as an issue of State's Rights. This fight over the Ten Commandments has little to do with religion and EVERYTHING to do with who determines our fate. Are we subjects of the FEDERAL CROWN or are we sovereign citizens within our own sovereign states?
From Alex Jones
I am an unapologetic atheist, defender of civil rights, and patriot who was relived to hear that justice had prevailed and that Judge Moore lost his position as Attorney General of the state of Alabama for his blatant disregard for the rule of law. No one, not even a state attorney general, is above the law and the self righteousness, smugness, and sense of entitelment exhibited by Mr Moore was sickening.
The First Amendment guarantees the judge and everyone else the right to acknowledge his or her gods or no gods at all in their private life but not in a government building or in an official capacity. His act of civil disobedenience was bold and I admire him standing up for what he believes so strongly in as long as he was willing to accept the consequences of his choices as he apparently was. Yes, many of the early founders and builders of this nation were indeed Christians and while I believe that we should recognize the religious history of our nation we should not make that history the basis for the laws of the land for if we did we would still have slavery and women would still be denied the right to vote.
As Americans we must be thankful and never forget that America was founded by people of faith as a Democracy and not a Theocracy.
Alex Jones
North Carolina
From Jeff Weinhaus
As a born again, fire baptized believer in Jesus Christ, I say praise the LORD to the removal of the ten commandments. Psalm 111 is very clear that if the foundations be destroyed what shall the righteous do? All I can say is look up our redeemer draws near. Jesus is coming and all of you God haters will be able to rejoice that we are all gone, of course you might have to dodge a few hundred pound hail stones but what the hell no one will be here to tell you what to do with your life. The removal of the commandments is just another sign of the times, fall mountains, just don't fall on me! Hide your face from the wrath of the LAMB. Get saved before it is too late!
Jeff Weinhaus
From Richard W. Blaisdell
This country was founded on "Freedom of Religion" not freedom from it. To deny our historical beginnings is a far larger crime than he committed.To find someone today that will STAND for what they and the majority of our citizens believe and be willing to not back down is a rare quality indeed. Did he break man's law? Yes. But as others have shared, sometimes peaceful civil disobedience is the only way to bring to light the error of that law and with it subsequent change. What would the detractors of this man say if he were elected governor of that state via a write in vote. I think the people of his state have a true champion of the people and should elect him. ALABAMA, WAKE UP AND SMELL THE COFFEE! THIS MAN IS YOUR VERY BEST. Like him or not.

Richard W. Blaisdell
Name Witheld
My God Loves all of us and is most comfortable in a church or a personal prayer, not a courthouse where people are sentenced under the laws of this country.
Judge Moore has no right to stick HIS statue in one of OUR country's courthouses. What if you were a Jew, a Muslim, a Hidu, a Buddhist, or even an athiest, and had to be tried in a court with a Ten-Commandments monument in the lobby?
Judge Moore passed sentence on people using our Nation's laws without any problem. It's only when sentence was passed on him did he decide that HIS law; "God's law", would suit him better.
Judge Moore is a HYPOCRITE.
Just in case somebody doesn't know why a blindfolded lady with a scale is used to represent the most fair and just court system on the planet:
I might not be exact on this, but the blindfold represents her blindness to superficial factors like how you are dressed, how much money or influence you have, or what religion you represent. The scale represents the truth, void of hypocracy.
American who loves people based on their honesty and integrity, not their religion.
San Diego, CA
From Russ
Smokescreen. Plain and simple. Our nation is being led to the slaughter by corporate-minded fascist warmongers, and this "news" story is a convenient distraction from that simple and undeniable fact. Our country is now embroiled in the ludicrous and blatantly contrived War On Terror to the point of exhaustion, our civil liberties are undermined at every turn, and our jobs being exported daily to the lowest bidder. Meanwhile, the corporate media takes this non-issue and runs with it. Of course they do, it's what they're paid (off) to do, right?
Our so-called elected government lies, steals, cheats, and does whatever it takes to maintain their stranglehold on society, and the corporate media helps as best they can, by keeping us distracted with trivial nonsense. If there has ever been a separation of Church and State, then why in the world would witnesses be routinely compelled to swear an oath with one hand on the Christian Bible in courtrooms from sea to shining sea?! And why oh why would such "public servants" as Mr. Moore draw salaries of $170,000 a year?! That should be the news story, if anything: that zealots like this are sitting in judgement of Americans like you and me, and literally raking in our tax dollars hand over fist...while our young men and women are wounded, crippled and killed every day in far-off foreign lands, in military actions that have absolutely nothing to do with our national security, unless you count the security of the NeoCons and fascist corporate leaders in their positions of unbridled power. Right now, they are quite secure in the notion that their "War" will never end, and that their military-industrial-academic-pharmaceutical machine will live long and prosper, and as it stands, they're more or less correct. The rest of us are too overwhelmed with trying to keep our families fed, clothed, and housed (in a system that's rigged against us) to be able to do anything about it.
From Steven Edward Aanes
This goes way before and beyond our stalwart good Judge Moore. Can no one see what is happening? Answerable to no man's law? Martin Luther King chose such a path, and rightfully so because those laws he defied were wrong. Judge Moore also chose not to obey the tyranny of man, yet to obey the freedom-loving instincts granted and recognized by G-d. The federal judiciary will not judge him, or you, or anyone else, when that most critical of judgments arrives. G-d will do the judging. Now I digress. Can no one see the inexorable path of nibbling away at freedom's foundation, that essential belief that a Supreme Being endowed humankind with its inalienable rights instead of those rights being grudgingly granted by a self-prepossessing human authority? When it becomes heresy to be a Jew, to be a Christian, the bland, corporate New World Order will then command: Step up and receive your tattoo. Dumbed down and disarmed, who will then be able to resist? G-t hilfe uns!
Steven Edward Aanes
Oakwood, GA
From Bob Kearns
If Ms. Fallen doesn't believe other judges are violating the constitution and rule of law, she should see what judges get away with in America's Family Court system. But, she is a woman so I am sure wholesale judicial misconduct would be acceptable as long as she walks away with the children, family assets, and a huge child support award. We need ten thousand Judge Roy Moores to straighten this mess out.
Bob Kearns
From Dave Rice
The 10 Commandments must never be displayed unless the "Cross" is displayed above them.
Dave Rice
Sitka, Alaska

From Humberto Nunez
The US Federal Government is SATANIC AND ANTI-CHRIST. I hope the US passes more and more anti-christian laws so that the WRATH OF THE LIVING GOD will come upon you filthy pagan Americans. And I hope all you Americans drop dead.
-Humberto Nunez

From CC
One cannot blindly accept the court s decisions as upholding constitutional rights. Should FEDERAL MONEY decide LOCAL decisions and attitudes ?
In my opinion, Judge Roy Moore's ACTION represents a very PRECIOUS and IMPORTANT DUTY of true patriotes : one of civil disobedience when necessary.
I defend his action :
- not because of any particular religious viewpoint (although I do hold my own) - but rather to defend the liberty of religious expression that our forefathers died for. (SILENCE is NOT EXPRESSION)
Judge Moore s decision should be respected seeing as it is not involving CORRUPTION. If the general populace isn't happy with his decision they can petition for a vote by REFERENDUM concerning the matter.
Over-centralized government leads to CONFORMITY of BEHAVIOUR and REPRESSION instead of personal liberty. It eventually can lead to DICTATORSHIP.
The expression of CULTURAL heritage even of a religious nature (such as monuments and plaques being displayed) shouldn't be destroyed in the name of separation of state and religion-- that's ridiculous. Visit Europe and you'll see it is filled with monuments of a religious nature. No one is offended by that. It's HERITAGE.
Hamurabi's law which dates back to approximately the same time as the Ten Commandments represented much of the same laws, equally being displayed.
Are we so SOPHISTICATED in the 21st century that we would consider HISTORICAL REFERENCES such as the above as being offensive or outdated, and prefer amorality instead... with thought and action constantly POLICED !!?
From "Mo"
"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof" This is a direct quote from the 1st Ammendment to the Constitution of the United States of America. How many people can't understand the 1st ammendment? (perhaps this shows the failings of our educational system) The first ammendment guarantees the right of religious freedom and religious displays. It does not discriminate against such displays in public places. If I am not mistaken, the President of the United States is sworn in using a Bible which contains the Ten Commandments in it. Is not Congress open each session with a prayer? Do these instances not take place in public places? Our Country would be in much better shape if we would take the Constitution at its face value. Our Founding Fathers were wise enough to establish the basis of a country that is the most powerful in the world and has been one of the only bastions of free speech, religious freedom, and freedom of the press. Certainly they would not considered the display of religious motifs unconstitutional and would have supported Judge Moore in his stand. I think we should follow their lead.

From Charles Roberts
We may have freedom of religion, separation of church and state, civil disobedience in the name of Christianity -
But what about freedom from religion?
The onerous oppression of religious belief-mongers has done more damage to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness than any other assault upon human progress.
Nothing can be more dangerous to our self-determination and aspirations than superstition, ignorance and the surrender of personal spiritual authority represented by all religious movements throughout history.
Judge Moore has committed a series of crimes against humanity, and is not fit to hold any public office in any nation.
From Miss Ross

Greetings, Please do not publish my email address.
I strenuously object to your obscene depiction of Judge Moore's right hand. While I disagree with the monument in question because the Ten Commandments are erroneously numbered, the Judge meant well. Isn't it ironic that our legal system, which is derived from the Ten Commandments and other sacred scripture, is now being used to bludgeon any discussion of religion from the public sphere?

Miss Ross
From Antonietta
God has blessed America and judge Roy Moore is grateful. Now the American people have pushed out God, but very soon God will judge America.
I want to thank Roy Moore!!!
Antonietta Wheeler

From Mark
Judge Roy Moore, perhaps is the last man standing. The other "justices" sat down. Probably because they did not have the moral fortitude to start the war.
What war you ask? Start ,hell. It already started in the garden of Eden. Believe what you want. But the facts , still are facts. Man and woman started somewhere, and it might as well been the garden. Evil influence stepped in. I call him "the Bringer of light" Lucifer, satan, the devil, the serpent.He cohabitated with Eve , even after God, the molder of man, told her and him not to "partake" in the other tree. {The tree of Satans lineage.} Eve had two children, although she concieved once with Adam, Satan, had his way too. And so on So and still the fight betwixt good and evil rages on. It starts as a thought.Concepual thoughts, Constitutional wranglings, legal fights to the "letter of the law" To the point: Where has Congress established a national religion? I must have missed it. Where does the constitution of any state or federal say "separation of church and state",,, I must of missed it. I for one, if I am going to be taxed, want the moral code, such as the ten commandments, displayed publicly. It may help keep crime lower. I believe the precise reason the country is in such a terrible financial state, as so are the states themselves, is because they operate with "elected "officials that have NO moral code except the "almighty buck". What some see as the decline of this once, GOD fearing nation,is what they see. P.S. It may be "legal" to have an abortion, But it is still unlawfull to take a life. You see, everything that has been made "legal" must of been UNLAWFULL at one time................
Mark's ramblings
From "Trucker"

Hey Jeff....Might the contry be a better place if Judge Roy More was president....!!?? He should run in the next ellection...let us all see just how many anti GOD people are here....!! The whole thing has turned into a scandle.....!! Let the people decide the outcome....Then they could all decide on the 87 billion $$ this country is giveing away for free when there are so many places cutting back here....What about the fire depts...the police depts...the!!?? Every night on the news something else is closeing....all the cities around here are cutting back on everything....All the jobs are going too....People are hideing in their own homes for fear of their neighbors....!! The city crime issue would decrease a bit...(I bet)...if we refused to put all the garbage they call music now cramen in our childerns faces (and ears)..!! The morels in this country are takeing a dive into an empty pool.....!! I'd just bet Judge Roy More has a few ideas that could really help us all....!! Keep up the good work....!!

From Clinton Kew
The First Amendment says congress can't tell you to put the Ten Commandments on public property, NOR can it tell you that you CAN'T. That's what it says.

Somebody that didn't have to go to Harvard Law School to figure out if Bill Clinton had sex with what's her name.
From Lazel Hamilton
All the great men of history were criminals, because all the righting of wrongs required violating the evil, mindless laws imposed by oppressors of truth. I think it's funny (and sad) how the left wing rally around freedom and liberty for homosexuals and every kind of lunatic there is, but someone who believes in God and adheres to moral absolutes is someone to silence. They are truly the most hypocritical of people. They want to tell everyone else how to live by laws and rules they literally make up on the spot! At least when they accuse the right wing of wanting to impose its "morality" on the populace, the right is pulling from millennia-proven law with enormous history -- if not truly divine origins. You know, little nothing laws like don't kill... don't steal... don't lie. Those laws these left wing hypocrites never want to be reminded of because they support abortion rights, the murder of millions of people. They are, to be blunt, mass murderers. Thieves and liars, hypocrites so blinded by their own evil that they have the unmitigated audacity to attempt to inculcate their wickeness as social normalcy! They exhibit what Paul called 'The Mystery of Lawlessness."
They want a law unto themselves, by their own invention. No input from God. But isn't it interesting, that if people live according to those 10 commandments, you have peace, happiness, health, prosperity and sanity? And those who chose not to... well, just take a look around you!!! The proof is evident. Those who deny and reject God, will suffer the consequence. And this is it:
"Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools, And changed the glory of the uncorruptible God into an image made like to corruptible man, and to birds, and fourfooted beasts, and creeping things. Wherefore God also gave them up to uncleanness through the lusts of their own hearts, to dishonour their own bodies between themselves: Who changed the truth of God into a lie, and worshipped and served the creature more than the Creator, who is blessed for ever. Amen. For this cause God gave them up unto vile affections: for even their women did change the natural use into that which is against nature: And likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another; men with men working that which is unseemly, and receiving in themselves that recompence of their error which was meet. And even as they did not like to retain God in their knowledge, God gave them over to a reprobate mind, to do those things which are not convenient; Being filled with all unrighteousness, fornication, wickedness, covetousness, maliciousness; full of envy, murder, debate, deceit, malignity; whisperers, Backbiters, haters of God, despiteful, proud, boasters, inventors of evil things, disobedient to parents, Without understanding, covenantbreakers, without natural affection, implacable, unmerciful: Who knowing the judgment of God, that they which commit such things are worthy of death, not only do the same, but have pleasure in them that do them." (Romans 1)
From Warren Palin
Dear Jeff,
Three Cheers for Judge Moore. Let his name be known and remembered as a man of Courage and Principle. Sadly these are commodities that have become increasingly rare in Public Officials
I keep asking myself what is it that people find offensive in the Ten Commandments?
Is it the admonition to not commit murder?
Perhaps the prohibition on Adultery?
To not covet?
To not steal?
To not bear false witness?
I keep looking for that which a Just and fair minded individual would find offensive and I find nothing to my eye which a Just and Tolerant person should find offensive. Quite the contrary these would seem to be bedrock principles for a civilized society.
In reviewing the debate thus far the reasoned and eloquent defense of Judge Moore's position would seem overwhelming. The Constitution guarantees the right of freedom of Conscience, it does not prohibit it's expression. As has been quoted but bears repeating the exact text is: Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
Amazing how the second clause of that statement is seldom quoted by the opponents of Religious Liberty and Tolerance: "or prohibiting the free exercise thereof."
The esteemed Professor Florence is really being quite disingenuous in his argument in that even a cursory reading of the debates surrounding this Amendment clearly show that the intent of the founders was to prohibit the establishment of an official State Religion and Church akin to the Church of England. This prohibition exists and extends ONLY to the Federal Government and it's Congress. The language could be no clearer when one takes into account the restrictions the Constitution places upon the Federal Government. It has only those powers delegated it by the Constitution; no more, and no less. Many of the Men who wrote this historic document had fled, or their ancestors had fled, Religious persecution for not adhering to the Official Church of England. They were somewhat obstreperous and certainly recalcitrant in allowing that same form of tyranny to be established in their young nation. However, it should be noted that several of the 13 Colonies that formed the United States Maintained an Official State Church for a number of years following the ratification of the Bill of Rights. The dirty little secret here is that the Constitution Prohibits the FEDERAL GOVERNMENT from dictating matters of Conscience but the Tenth Amendment protects the RIGHTS of the States to do as they see best. As is apparent no State has continued to maintain an Officially Sanctioned Church.
The opposition to Judge Moore seems quite insubstantial in that is boils down to nothing more than "I don't like your Religion and I don't want to have to acknowledge it's existence - and I want you to FORCE you to shut up about it". Hardly a position of Tolerance. And there is freedom from Religion for those who find it's existence unbearable: Don't look. I will not force you to, nor will I impose my beliefs upon you. Kindly reciprocate; it is the civilized thing to do.
The arrogant intolerance of those who oppose this simple display is really and truly monumental. The principled position might be to demand an ecumenical display acknowledging the many and diverse Religious Traditions of the people of our Country. Demanding that another be forced to still their voice, or that a belief cannot be acknowledged, is the demand only of the militantly intolerant.
In the matter of Law: The Law used to rip out and disparage the Ten Commandments monument is a Federal Law. Let us return to the FIRST Amendment: "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof;". The text of the Tenth Amendment States unequivocally: "The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people."
No Federal Law respecting this monument is VALID OR LEGAL under the restrictions laid forth in the FIRST AND TENTH Amendments. Only by sophistic contortions can one justify this action which is clearly contrary to, and offends, the Constitution of The United States and the principles of a free people.
In a Pluralistic Society such as ours Tolerance for other's beliefs would seem to me to be a rational position. For the record I am not a Christian nor have I ever been one. Yet, I commend Judge Moore because in supporting his position, which ultimately promotes good, I am defending my own Religious Liberty and the right to freedom of Conscience. So long as Judge Moore and his Brethren seek only to maintain their right to Freedom of Conscience and the right to give it voice neither I nor anyone else is threatened.
This ended up being a little longer than originally intended, but I think there should be no mistaking my position.
With Unbounded Humility I Remain Your Humble Obedient Servant,
Warren Palin

From Hayden
Dear Jeff,
Reading your question carefully, I would say "guilty on both counts...... but not very guilty."
Did he "set a mark for liberty" ??? Did he strike a blow for freedom? I only wish he had!!
Did he violate "what he believed to be an unconscienable law"?
Well, at this point in time, the courts have found that he did indeed violate that law and based on statements attributed to him I would say that yes he did find that law to be "unconscienable." But the thing that weakens and renders impotent any "mark for liberty" or "blow for freedom " is his "reasons" for that belief.
The good judge evidently "believes" that G-d belongs in the court house. That's all very well for the judge to "believe" but it is not HIS place to drag G-d in. It's not his court house! It belongs to the citizens of the State of Alabama. Not to Judge Moore. Not to the Federal government. Not even to G-d. Therefore, while Moore may have been "seeking his own selfish, religious desires" and have been thwarted in them, it was accomplished by the wrong court. The state court house of Alabama belongs solely to the Alabama Citizenry. Judge Moore and the federal courts have no say in the matter. Furthermore, if the Citizenry of Alabama want to put G-d in their court house that'sTHEIR business AND NO ONE ELSES!
Do we all agree that the federal Constitution is the supreme law of the land?
Good. Let's look at it.
There are only two places in the constitution that mention religion.
First is at the end of Article 5 where we find, "no religious test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States."
A jew, a christian, a moslem, an athiest ..... all have equal footing. A very strong position of religious tolerance, if you think about it.
And that's all it says in the original document, completed and offered for ratification, to the original 13 states, September 17, 1787. (It's equally interesting to note that none of the original states were required to join! it only took ratification by 9 states to create the U.S. If four wanted to stand aside and be independent countries, they could.)
It was nine months before New Hampshire became the ninth ratified and admited and the nation was born on June 21, 1788. Why all the foot dragging? Why did it take so long? Admitedly, the period from Sept, '87 through June, '88 does include the winter months when transportation and communication were slowed down, but that's not all of it. People wanted to think about it ... and I don't mean just legislators and officials. Population was much smaller then and the state representatives much more approachable. And approached they were. Up and down the eastern seaboard meetings were held, debates were presented, questions were posed.
One of the burning questions was "How much power would the individual states be handing over?" "How much of their autonomy would they lose?" It must be remembered that these people had only recently endured a war lasting eight years in order to rid themselves of a distant, powerful, and oppressive central government. The British governments act of writing thirteen seperate peace treaties (one for each of the colonies) had solidified the notion that their state was a soveriegn, independent political entity. Why surrender that? The fear of jumping from the frying pan and into the fire plagued them. To what extent could this new "Federal" government over-ride decisions made in the local state house? Could it be trusted?
It was almost two full years before the other four states signed on, the last being little Rhode Island.
The other place religion is mentioned of course, is in the Bill of Rights (the first ten amendments to the constitution) passed into law Dec. 15, 1791, three and a half years later.
Article 1 states: "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof;"
Now we've all been throughly schooled in the idea that congress cannot create a state religion. But read that phrase again.
If they can't create a state religion, how can they be blocked from passing any laws prohibiting the free exercise of the religion that they're not allowed to create???!! Doesn't make any sense, does it.
Let's try another tack. Let's say you and me and Joe McGee decide to start (read, "establish") a religion. Article 1 is pretty clear. Congress has no power to make any law about the matter. Nor do they have any power to pass law prohibiting our free exercise of our new found faith.
When it comes to religion, it's strictly "hands off".
If the federal courts had any regard for the constitution they would simply have told the plaintiffs in the Moore case, "Sorry, not a federal issue! Go take it up with the state of Alabama."
Which brings up another point. If the folks in Alabama want to prevail upon their state legislators to declare the Baptist faith or the Church of the Nazarine as the state religion of Alabama, let 'em. I can't find a single thing in the federal constitution that says they can't. Remember, it's CONGRESS that can't establish a state religion. Doesn't say a thing about what the Mormans can or can't do in Utah.
From Jordan
I didn't like the ten commandments display for a reason which I haven't seen mentioned much, if at all: The version that is displayed here and there in America is a gross mistranslation and abridgement of the "Esser Dbrim" (means "ten words"), and which therefore ends up contradicting both the letter and the spirit of those ten statements.
For example, the meaning of the sixth commandment is clearly "Thou Shalt not Murder," not "Thou shalt not kill." Also, the final commandment doesn't say "Thou shalt not covet." It says "Thou shalt not covet/desire what belongs to someone else." Big Difference. Human beings are supposed to covet all sorts of things (pursuit of happiness for example), especially what God has presented for our well-being. In fact, putting a mistranslated or abridged version of God's word on display is a violation of the SECOND "commandment," which is also grossly abridged: "thou shalt not make any graven image." (In short, this means not to attribute to the God of truth something which isn't the truth.)
Furthermore, a modern revelation from God says that the ten commandments were never meant to be commands, or orders, nor even recommendations! --but simply a description of what a person would naturally do, or not do, if he or she worships God in sprit and in truth.
--Jordan S.

From John C
Why should this man impose his Religious beliefs on any Citizen. I thought Judges
are supposed to be impartial.
John C Down Under.
From Terence McQueen
I applaud Judge Roy Moore for what he did, at least stood up for what he believed in. That's more than I can say for the majority of Americans these days. Yes he was wrong in that he violated the law, and that within itself is a sin because the Bible plainly tells us to obey the laws of the land. He was right in that he stood for the principles of the Bible, and God bless him for that.
We have a country full of counterfeit religions that force us to separate church and state because one religion offends another. Had our forefathers not been deceived while drafting of the 1st Amendment to the Constitution, this would never have become an issue of today. Instead of guarding our country against false teachings as the Bible warns us, they opened the doors for anything and everything that wants to call itself relgion.
Terence McQueen
From Terrance
Judge Roy Moore is neither a criminal nor a freedom fighter; he is simply a man who is ignorant.
Most Americans today are ignorant -- of their own history, their own rights and the restrictions of power and authority placed upon the federal government of the United States -- an authority and power it has greatly exceeded over the past 140 years.
This ignorance is not surprising when one considers the cumulative effect of generations of Americans schooled in government schools that have finally become little more than government run propaganda mills, the misinformation spoon fed from most major media sources, and the disinformation tripping off the tongues of the majority of politicians on both sides of the aisle.
A reading of the personal papers and histories of many of the men who were the "founding fathers" of the original confederation, and then those who fought for, and against, the centralization of power brought about by Alexander Hamilton, reveals that many of the founders were deists. They believed in a Creator or "Providence," but condemned, or at best, tolerated, organized religions (including Christianity).
Many of the founding fathers saw organized religions as irrational, especially in the age of the "Great Awakening." They also had first-hand knowledge of how unholy alliances between religious groups and governments in Europe had inevitably led to loss of individual freedoms, suppression, oppression and the destruction and/or confiscation of private properties.
Unfortunately, many of these men later found themselves in a losing battle in the newly founded country of the United States of America, as they battled, then finally compromised with none other than Christian churches (primarily in the colonies of Virginia and Carolina) who refused to sign on as states of the new country unless they could continue to practice slavery.
That compromise eventually led to the Civil War, the weakening of State's Rights and the racial problems between whites and blacks that still haunts America today.
Thus, this is not a "Christian country," it is a country in which a portion of individuals choose to practice the theology of Christianity, or other religions or no religion at all. It is a country with a secular government which is expressly forbidden from aligning itself or promoting or legislating in any way laws favoring any religious group or organization. This prohibition was instituted to protect the rights of the individual.
We have forgotten that, despite media bromides and politician's incantations to the contrary, we are NOT a "nation of laws," but a nation of rights.
From C.F.
When I was in grade school we said the "Pledge of Allegiance" and "The Lord's Prayer" at the beginning of every school day. I hear that this ritual has been extinct for some time now. Back in my school days the students were not bringing weapons to class or murdering their teachers and classmates on regular basis such as goes on today. For all these "heretics" who feel it is wrong for the government to even mention "God": I have to ask; Do you shun our nations currency because it says "IN GOD WE TRUST"? Or do you refuse your paycheck? or refuse to accept cash money due to the Christian referance to "God" inscribed upon it? If not then you are a HYPOCRIT. There is nothing in our Constitution that I am aware of that says it is unlawful to display the Ten Commandments, and we might be better off as a nation if they were displayed in EVERY public School and Courthouse! I agree with the comments of : Warren Palin, Antonietta, CC, Russ, and Humberto Nunez.
Thank You

From Jeff Staples
Please allow me to address the Judge Roy Moore / Ten Commandments Monument brouhaha with some points that don't seem to have been made as of yet.
a.. The furor with which advocates insist upon placement of religious symbols on government property smacks of nothing less than idolatry - worship of a graven image. If the engraving cited the Ten Commandments Monument enumerated in Exodus 10 (the original set of Commandments, by the way), the second commandment clearly prohibits worship of an idol carved in stone. The presence of a stone idol in the courthouse does not magically invoke God's power, nor does its removal somehow weaken God's authority over His dominion. My God is supremely powerful, and doesn't require an icon of stone to proclaim sovereignty. I believe that the Holy Spirit alone provides the desire of everyone involved in the judicial process to render justice. It is up to the individual - whether judge, attorney, juror, plaintiff or defendant - to heed the Holy Spirit, a choice, not forced upon anyone, to seek God's perfect Will in making important decisions.
The individual disregards the counsel of the Holy Spirit at his / her own peril. b.. Our courts represent a secular system - one that draws upon a tradition of codified law that reaches back through English Common Law by way of Greco-Roman courts to the Babylonian Code of Hammurabi. Although our system is far from perfect, it represents our best effort to render justice in a secular society. As I have been personally been subjected to the latest version of "America - Love it or Leave it" for my opposition to the effort at empire-building in Iraq, let me suggest to those who desire to live under a religious judiciary system that they move to, say, Iran, where the ayatollahs claim a direct line to Divine Justice. We cannot design a legal system that takes into account the religious interests of everyone; therefore, we should continue to rely on codified law that represents the best of human efforts to interpret God's Law. c.. I feel certain that those who condemn removal of icons from government places for violation of the First Amendment don't extend the benefits of non-Christians. Imagine the outrage if statues of Buddha or Vishnu were to appear in the courthouse square!
Let's not neglect other "pagans," either: how about a mural of the Moon Goddess on the wall in the hallway, or a Satanic mobile hovering overhead in the rotunda. d.. Perhaps most importantly, let's consider the rancor surrounding this icon and see who benefits: Globalists and New World Order minions, most certainly. Having taken a page from Machiavelli's playbook, those who seek to inflict their vision of world domination on all of us must be now laughing up their sleeves.
This issue divides the unwashed masses, keeps us bickering to the point of violence, all the while ignoring the bigger issues that face us. In the same way that a magician distracts the audience with his left hand while performing trickery with his right, our attention is drawn by issues of this sort - along with professional sporting events, the latest episode of "Friends," Rosie O'Donnell in court, Kobe Bryant in court, ad nauseum. Meanwhile, decisions are being made behind closed doors that influence our very existence to a greater extent than any of our petty squabbles or the splashiest of "media events." In conclusion, let me suggest that if a jurist wants to follow the Ten Commandments, as long as it doesn't violate codified law, let him / her carry a printed copy at all times. Tuck a copy of the Constitution alongside it, as well. Just don't waste our tax dollars generating controversies that distract from more important issues.
From Jim Mortellaro
A good question. But Judge Moore is not the issue. The issue is also, _not_ separation of church and state. The issue is religious intolerance. And the one group to which intolerance is practiced more than with any other is Christianity.
On each dollar bill the statement is made, "In God We Trust." In New York City, as in many other places, it is not permitted to display the Nativity Scene. However it is permitted to display the Menorah.
This nation is being driven by those who would destroy our religious freedom and our _expression_ of that religious freedom. But only if one believes in Jesus Christ. One must wonder why this is so.
In the state of Alabama, one man threatened to sue the state over an issue of religious expression. This writer has forgotten the exact nature of the issue, whether a statue or some other written statement of the Ten Commandments. However based on that one threat by a bigoted atheist, the statue was taken down. Lickety split.
Notice that the loudest voices in this issue are the voices of the atheists?
As usual, the only voices not loud enough, not willing to work hard, put themselves on the line, make their voices heard, are the ones who are in the right. The Christian whose religious beliefs are being withdrawn one by one and relegated to the point of illegality. If that is not the intent, it sure seems so.
Take heed, Christian Citizen; your rights and liberties are being taken from you one at a time. The right to keep and bear arms, the right to a free expression of your religious beliefs, the right to speak out, the right to security and protection under the law for all the above and many more rights.
And your obligation, Christian Citizen, is to fight harder than the atheist, speak louder, make more threats of action and elect the proper politicians to represent _your_ rights; your needs and your wants. Otherwise, you will no longer be a Christian Citizen. You will be a lemming.
Jim Mortellaro
"All truth passes through three stages. First, it is ridiculed, second it is violently opposed, and third, it is accepted as self-evident." --Arthur Schopenhauer, Philosopher, 1788-1860

From Jerry L. Gardner
Hi Jeff,
Religion: 1. Belief in God or gods to be worshiped, usually expressed in conduct and ritual; 2. ANY specific system of belief, worship, etc.
Below, I am listing some information which hopefully supports Judge Roy Moore's valiant stand for God. I find it interesting, yet not surprising, that after six thousand years, Satan and his minions are still crying "foul" every time God is exalted and lifted up by a courageous few. I find it even more interesting that those who offer the greatest arguments against the question of "church and state" are not only totally deceived in it's true application and meaning, but have no knowledge of the author of the written scriptures (Holy Bible) whatsoever. They do not even know Jesus, but they do seem to know their master. Consequently, God's word is true again, wherein; Ephesians 6:12 For we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in high places.
What absolute hypocrisy! Our nations capitol is replete with not only symbols of Christianity, such as the magnificent church structures that stand in Washington, which is a federal district, not a state, and often used by the frauds who reside there, implying to the world that America is a Christian nation. Those churches or symbols of our heritage do not reach out and "make" people believe in, or accept God as they walk by them each day to shaft America, just as the monument of Ten Commandments in Alabama didn't somehow slap visitors in the face who came to the Federal building and force them to accept what they stand for. All that was necessary was for unbelievers to walk right past it, just as they walk right on past God in their everyday affairs. Maybe, just maybe the sight of the Ten Commandments was too much of a reminder of just how terribly low America has sunk morally and spiritually. They (Ten Commandments) are a constant reminder of our degeneracy.
Are we to take down and hide these gargantuan symbols and testimonials to our savior located in Washington? If not, then why do our federal dictators (Judges) not have the courage to come on out and declare America to be a fascist, anti God atheistic nation? They (the structures/churches) are of course on federal grounds. If these sanctimonious Federal Judges are so keen on "upholding, the law" then every Masonic, and Christian, and Jewish symbol in Washington DC MUST come down or placed out of sight. This is the law isn't it? The Jewish Menorah is by definition illegal to be viewed from a public vantage point. Where is the blind, impartial justice in America today? Does justice only apply in favor of the ungodly secular world? No one tells people in America how, or in whom to worship, Satan's massive following would seem to verify that there is indeed "freedom of worship" in America today. The freedom of witchcraft worship is flourishing in America, are their symbols being removed from public viewing? I don't think so. Check out the Denver airport. Do airports receive federal funding? I believe they do.
America is either a nation of laws, or, it has by definition become a nation of dictatorial statist rule, law interpreted for convenience and by personal secular decree, or, under the "religion" of humanism.
OH! Where is the argument now? Ye hypocrites.
Please note agnostic, please note atheist, removing symbols will not harm true believers in the one true God, it will only re-enforce it. Symbols are contrary to God's word anyway. Symbols cannot dwell in the heart, the heart is God's abode.
Washington is also filled with the most demonic of occult symbolism, just check out the Masonic symbolism, yet the hypocrites aren't removing those because of possibly offending the immoral majority, both in and out of Washington, the backslidden church in America, along with the witches and warlocks, which are also religions by definition by the way. Religious, occult, witchcraft subjects which are taught in many of our public schools today. What absolute gross hypocrisy!
The law! get real! The law (legal system) in America today is totally Satanic and a law system unto it's self, totally self serving for the NWO Illuminati devils.
Let's get one point out in the open and made absolutely certain. Regardless of what the heathen do or say, GOD WILL PREVAIL, HE WINS! The Madeline Murray O'Hare's of today will continue their hate filled attacks on Jesus until he returns, Jesus warned of this in His word, but although demonic forces seems to be in control at the moment, and they are, America is about to learn the true definition of righteous judgment. As a matter of fact, it has already begun, most are simply too stupid and too spiritually blind to see it, just as in the days of Noah. Only this time it won't be water, it will be by fire, perhaps nuclear, but it will come.
If I didn't know Jesus on a very personal level, I would begin to believe in Him simply by virtue of all the extreme hatred and contempt directed against this man (Jesus), especially as time grows shorter. The same level of hatred that caused one of the most hideous and gruesome of torturous acts against a human being ever inflicted on a man, the crucifixion of God. This same spirit is gaining ground in America and the world today, it's called antichrist. It all began the same way, through "religious" people driven by demonic jealousy and a hatred of righteousness. There is no other religious figure that draws the degree of hatred and vile condemnation as our lord. He is still crucified today. These so called "fundamentalist Judges" need to go back to Bethel, or take another dip in the muddy Jordan. "Christians?" They are deceiving no one but themselves. Jesus will say unto them, "I never knew you."
Psalms 2:1 Why do the heathen rage, and the people imagine a vain thing?
Jerry L. Gardner

From Chuck Baldwin
The Covenant News
The American Inquisition Has Begun I was in attendance at Alabama Chief Justice Roy Moore's trial in Montgomery this past Wednesday and Thursday. "Trial" is not really the proper word, however. A better word is "inquisition."
There was never a doubt that the "judges" had made up their minds to remove Chief Justice Moore from the bench before the proceedings ever began. They sat like wooden Indians throughout the trial, taking few notes and, with only one exception, making no comments, and asking no questions.
Furthermore, Moore's attorneys had some 20 pieces of evidentiary material that they could have presented. This was denied. There were also several credible witnesses, including former Alabama Governor Fob James, that could have been called to testify on Moore's behalf. This was also denied.
The trial took upon itself a distinctive tone of inquisition when Alabama Attorney General Bill Pryor questioned Chief Justice Moore. Here is an exchange between Pryor and Moore taken from the official transcript of the trial:
Pryor: Mr. Chief Justice? And your understanding is that the Federal court ordered that you could not acknowledge God; isn't that right?
Moore: Yes.
Pryor: And if you resume your duties as Chief Justice after this proceeding, you will continue to acknowledge God as you have testified that you would today---
Moore: That's right.
Pryor: ---no matter what any other official says?
Moore: Absolutely. (Chief Justice Moore then elaborated.)
Pryor: The only point I am trying to clarify, Mr. Chief Justice, is not why, but only that, in fact, if you do resume your duties as Chief Justice, you will continue to do that [acknowledge God] without regard to what any other official says; isn't that right?
Moore: (He responds by listing numerous examples of the public acknowledgement of God, and concluded answering the question.) I think you must.
Does any reader of this exchange not see what Bill Pryor was demanding? He was demanding that Chief Justice Roy Moore not acknowledge God! Pryor did not even refer to the Ten Commandments. He repeatedly asked Moore if he would continue to acknowledge God. To acknowledge God was deemed an impermissible activity and for this Roy Moore was removed as Alabama Chief Justice.
Watching Bill Pryor examine Roy Moore in such a fashion reminded me of the movie "Luther." It was shockingly similar to the moment when the great reformer stood in front of the Roman council and heard the inquisitor shout, "Will you recant? Will you recant? Will you recant?"
It is more than interesting that Bill Pryor asked Chief Justice Moore three times whether he would continue to acknowledge God, because Satan asked the Lord Jesus three times to fall down and worship him, and Simon Peter denied Christ three times. There does seem to be a pattern!
The point that all Americans must understand is that Chief Justice Roy Moore was removed from the bench, not for committing any crime, not for participating in unethical conduct, and not even for posting the Ten Commandments in the Alabama Judicial Building. He was removed from office for acknowledging God!
Americans must understand that people such as judge Myron Thompson and Alabama Attorney General Bill Pryor actually believe that the public acknowledgement of God is illegal activity. Even more dangerous, they believe that a federal judge's order, not the U.S. Constitution, is the supreme law of the land. Pryor said as much during the trial.
There is yet another similarity of Roy Moore's trial to a Dark Ages-style inquisition. Not only was he commanded to recant his public acknowledgment of God, the trial itself was conducted out of public view. No television cameras or recording devices were allowed. Obviously, the inquisitors did not want the American people to see and hear for themselves what took place inside the Alabama Judicial Building on that day. > However, reminiscent of Dark Ages-style punishment, while the trial took place in obscurity, TV cameras were allowed in the courtroom the next day when the verdict to remove Moore from the bench was announced, so all America could witness the "hanging."
The removal of Chief Justice Roy Moore as Alabama Supreme Court Chief Justice is a travesty of justice, a reproach upon our national honor, and an insult to the voters of Alabama! It is also painfully obvious that since the American inquisition has begun, it is now time for an American reformation!
The American reformation should begin with the voters of Alabama electing Roy Moore to the highest office of that state and by the American people electing men and women to Congress who will immediately put a stop to these black-robed inquisitors!
Let the reformation begin!
From J R
Judge Moore Is Not Alone
Did you know...
As you walk up the steps to the Capitol Building which houses the Supreme Court you can see near the top of the building a row of the world's law givers and each one is facing one in the middle who is facing forward with a full frontal view-it is Moses and the Ten Commandments!
As you enter the Supreme Court courtroom, the two huge oak doors have the Ten Commandments engraved on each lower portion of each door.
As you sit inside the courtroom, you can see the wall right above where the Supreme Court judges sit a display of the Ten Commandments!
There are Bible verses etched in stone all over the Federal Buildings and Monuments in Washington, D.C.
James Madison, the fourth president, known as "The Father of Our Constitution" made the following statement "We have staked the whole of all our political institutions upon the capacity of mankind for self-government, upon the capacity of each and all of us to govern ourselves, to control ourselves, to sustain ourselves according to the Ten Commandments of God."
Patrick Henry, that patriot and Founding Father of our country said, "It cannot be emphasized too strongly or too often that this great nation was founded not by religionists but by Christians, not on Religions but on the Gospel of Jesus Christ."
Every session of Congress begins with a prayer by a paid preacher whose salary has been paid by the taxpayer since 1777.
Fifty-two of the 55 founders of the Constitution were members of the established orthodox churches in the colonies.
Thomas Jefferson worried about that the Courts would overstep their authority and instead of interpreting the law would begin making law an oligarchy, the rule of few over many.
The very first Supreme Court Justice, John Jay, said, "Americans should select and prefer Christians as their rulers."
How then, have we gotten to the point that everything we have done for 200 years in this country is now suddenly wrong and unconstitutional?
nullus exspecto aqua oriundus absque aqua
From SC
Judge Moore needed to remember that true freedom is directly proportional to the distance kept between Church and State. Mixing Fundamentalism with governance is a deadly mix and divides the world into "we , the good people" and "you, who disagree, the bad people"
Since religion thrives on division, Judge Moore will keep this going to his personal advantage and end up doing the Church Circuit quest speaker thing. Narcissistic personalities tend to place themselves above the law.
From 'Skeeter'
I am a born again Christian. I do not however, allign myself with the unfortunate stereotype that being "born again" has become. The plain fact is, if our goverment is indeed "by the people, for the people" then the courthouse land of topic belongs to "the people".
"The people" are ALL people who paid taxes to appropriate the land, and who currently pay taxes to maintain it. I don't particularly agree with homosexual activity. I do not agree with satanism. I do not agree with abortion. HOWEVER, I do recognize that homosexuals, satanists, and abortion doctors are citizens that help pay taxes to maintain that property. The unfortunate thing that many of my fellow beleivers fail to see is, that the very same freedoms that allow us to practice our Christianity also allow others not to. Unless we as Christians are ready to see stone peckers, the law of Hamurabi, writings from the Koran, or pentagrams on our state, city, and federal buildings, then we need to wake up and realize that the very same rights we demand are also extended to non-Christians. We live in a society of implied parity, which is to say, laws cannot be made (adverse OR advantagious) to benefit specific social, economic, or religious groups. Any right we demand is a general right that is extended to everyone, not just people of our preference. SO, as I say, unless you want Islamic fundamentalists or budhists or satanists leading your children in prayer in schools, or placing their religious artifacts on state owned property, or "rallying around your flagpole", be thoughtful and selective about what you demand. In other words, be carefull what you wish for, you may just end up with the nightmare of getting your wish.
From Dennis Mundorf
I keep hearing that Judge Moore broke the Law? Did he lie? Steal? Murder? Fornicate? Commit adultrey? Covet? I would like to do a background check on all those who oppose him or said HE broke the law!
Here is Article I, Section 3 of the Alabama Constitution:
"That no religion shall be established by law; that no preference shall be given by law to any religious sect, society, denomination, or mode of worship; that no one shall be compelled by law to attend any place of worship; nor to pay any tithes, taxes,or other rate for building or repairing any place of worship, or for maintaining any minister or ministry; that no religious test shall be required as a qualification to any office or public trust under this state; and that the civil rights, privileges, a capacities of any citizen shall not be in any manner affected by his religious principles."
Judge Moore Violated the State Constitution? What religion was established by law? What preference was given by LAW to a religious sect,society,denomination or mode of worship? Who was compelled by LAW to attend a place of worship,pay tithes,taxes,or other rate for building or repairing a place of worship or for maintaining any minister or ministry? What law was enacted to force anybody to do any of these things? NONE OF COURSE!!! The civil rights, privileges, and CAPACITIES of any citizen shall not be in any manner affected by his religious principles. Judge Moores were. Just because you dont agree with Judge Moores Religious Principles doesnt mean he loses his rights in private or public. What law can a federal judge rule on when they are forbidden by law in the first Amendment. "no law can be established" Remember? I hope he runs for Governer. As I am almost sure they will disbar Judge Moore, knowing that the PEOPLE would vote him back in as Judge. We need more like X Judge Moore Because what we got now is the blind leading the blind!
From Robert Felix
WE EXCERPT FROM THE NEW TESTAMENT OF THE VULGATE:(known as Bible to Protestants) ..."But he perceived their craftiness and said unto them,Why tempt ye me? Show me a penny. Whose name and superscription are on it? They answered and said: Caesar's And he said unto them: Render therefore unto Caesar the things that are Caesar's and unto God the things which be God's..." [Luke 20, 23-25]
Is not a courthouse where the laws are applied and enforced primary among "the things that are Caesar's"-along with the Legislature the seat of Governmental power? Are not the Ten Commandments "the things which be God's", according to the story of their origin in the Old Testament: given by the Deity personally to Moses to guide the Hebrew peoples/tribes? If Jesus made a sharp distinction between "'the things that are Caesar's" and "the things that are God's", then why does not former Judge Moore and his cohorts do likewise? Is this not a clear injunction for the separation of Church and State from the founder of the Christian religion himself?
As to what happens when this is not observed-look to Northern Ireland in the United Kingdom where two supposedly 'Christian' factions-the Catholics(Green) and the Protestants(Orange) have been fighting and killing each other for centuries up to the present day. Could the same thing happen here in America where we have a growing non Christian population-Moslems,Jews,Buddhists and others of a secular persuasion?
Robert Felix
From Harlan Ellis
Let's break this down so it can viewed in very simple terms.
Was this nation founded on a basic code of moral and ethical laws and traditions rooted in part in Judeo-Christian heritage and culture?
YES. To deny this is to attempt to erase and revise a living history which is maintained to this very day. One would have to be a complete liar to suggest otherwise. It is noted in the declaration of independence and constitution (or reliance or authorization from a higher power called "God" or "Creator") and evident in the writings of the founding fathers and the culture which emerged from this newly established repubic.
Does this mean that the state authorized any given religion or deity?
NO. The founders were not ignorant of the many names of God, neither were they ignorant of the many sects and factions of religion in their day. They simply left it as "God." it can be any God. Our money is not minted with "In YHWH We Trust" and official documents do not say that all men are created equal, endowed by Jesus Christ with certain inalienable rights. By leaving this supreme deity unidentified, it allowed all people to recognize whatever deity they so chose. Those who had no religion or deity would simply ignore it. It doesn't add to or take away anything from them. As Thomas Jefferson said "If my neighbor has one god or ten, it neither breaks my fence nor robs my pocket." The founders sought to establish a republic based on rights and liberties and empowerments against oppression, from which they fled, but they by no means sought to eradicate historical, venerated, honorable philosophical elements from their foundation, such as God, such as the creator. But in doing so, they did not impose upon any free man a religion. The Ten Commandments as well as the Beatitudes of Jesus' Sermon on the mount were openly displayed in the congress of then. Had they also had the sayings of Buddha, they might very well have incorporated those words of wisdom as well, but being of a judeo-christian heritage, it didn't happen that way.
When drafting the Bill of Rights the founders made a wise decision. They realized the secular state was going to grow up along side a clearly, majority-ruled religiously inclined culture, and wanted to protect both the state and the church from unacceptible breaches of reasonable territory. Hence, "congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, nor prohibiting the free exercise thereof." They put no bounds or restrictions on this whatsoever save those here mentioned. Congress cannot make laws regarding religious institutions or religion itself in any way. And above all, Congress cannot stop the free exercise or practice of religion by the people, wherever and whenever. Why did they do this? Because they themselves practiced religion by displaying the ten commandments, by displaying the beatitudes, by opening every meeting of the congress and house with Christian prayer. Who were they protecting? Themselves! It's a fail safe. And one which insure religious liberty for all people everywhere in the nation by right, and the state cannot interfere in any way. Had the founders wanted to erect a giant crucifix on the lawn in front of the Capitol, they could have. Nothing about this is violating the amendment. Only if congress attempted to pass a law with respect to that monument would it be a violation. It being on state property meant nothing. The property belongs to the people! The people ARE the state. Those in congress are merely their represntatives, their intellectual and legal proxies.
So if you want to rid this nation of any symbols of religion in the public arena, and if you want to prohibit the free exercise thereof, you'll have to undo the bill of rights. It's that simple.
Anyone THAT stupid wanna do it?




This Site Served by TheHostPros