Any being worthy of worship would not want it.Worshipping a being which does NOT deserve it insults the person doing the worshipping.
http://www.cnn.com/2003/LAW/08/21/cnna.commandments.debate/index.html
Same story here: trying to pretend that this case is about public’s right to talk about God or reffer to God in public.
I hope it isn’t seminary where a guy like this learns how to violently assault the truth with misleading rhetoric.
And that lady is the best defender of the federal courts CNN could find? Half the people on this board are more articulate and informed.
For an adherent of monotheism, it’s hard to pick the wrong one.
The fact that Moore drug the thing in there in the middle of the night after being told by a lower court that it could not be put in the building should tell you that he is not at all objective about god catering to anyone but those that believe as he does.
:dubious:
Oh, and as no law shall be made respecting an establishment of religion, neither shall law be made that prohibits the free exercise of religion.
How is it that forcing a court of a sovereign state to remove a display of the Ten Commandments is not considered a violation of the 'free exercise clause"?
A judge forcing the Judeo-Christian god on all who enter the court house is not free exercise of religion, it is state establishment, which is prohibited.
Woohoo,
Update on this debacle:
It’s a little light of hope for the state of Alabama, but of course you get this amusing paragraph from the same article:
I must have missed when God said upon Judge Moore, “Thou shalt install a 5280 lbs statue much to the chagrin of any thinking person”.
Oh, and Razorsharp, how does a state that has to answer to a country suddenly become sovereign?
How many times does it have to be explained to you? The government is not set up for the benefit of judges or elected officials. It is set up for the benefit of the people. If Moore wants to exercise his religion, nothing stops him from doing so. He just can’t drag the public or a court into doing it for him.
He obviously thinks that his court is really and truly HIS court, to do with whatever he pleases. This is the height of arrogance, and anyone who claims to be against government tyrrany would be a hypocrite to claim that this egomaniac inflated idea of his powers is anything but dangerous.
The court in question does not belong to Justice Moore, it belongs to the people, whether they be Christian, Jew, Moslem, Buddhist, atheist, or whatever. Each person, no matter of what faith or lack thereof, must be able to walk into any public building, especially a courthouse, and say “This building belongs to me as much as anyone and I will be treated fairly here.” I dare say that a Hindu or a Buddhist or an atheist is not going to say that when entering the court in question. Therefore the monument must go.
The case raises other questions:
1- Should a state chief justice be allowed to flagrantly disobey federal court orders?
2- Does Justice Moore expect his court orders to be obeyed? If so, is it not hypocritical to expect your own orders to be obeyed while disobeying those of superior courts?
3- Who paid for the monument? Is Justice Moore spending state money on furthering his own faith?
When the monument comes down, Christianity will still be safe. The Ten Commandments will still be in the church of your choice, and in the Bible, or tattooed on your person if that’s your thing. The First Amendment has served us well over the years, keeping government out of the churches and churches out of government. It will survive Justice Moore.
Wrong again.Rationally speaking, your god is no more likely than ANY god, be it Vishnu, Zeus, Odin or what have you.The probability of your god existing and being the supreme ruler of the universe is exactly the same(given the available data we have right now) as it is for any god.Therefore even if we make the HUGE leap to assuming that SOME god exists and will judge us in the afterlife and firther assume that this god is one of the 5,000 which have been claimed to exist at one time or another, then you still would have, at best a 1 in 5,000 chance of being correct in your wager(or Pascal’s wager rather).
You know, it’s at a point like this that I really wish libertarian and SOCAS-minded Christians would speak up, and speak up loud. The news seems to always pair a fundamentalist Christian Nation guy with some sort of atheist or other non-Christian: but in a way this just feeds the myth that this is all about atheists trying to tear down Christianity. A large group of Christians making a big public statement about Moore defaming their religion and the importance of the government not pretending it has the right to decide when and how people acknowledge God.
Too true.I just saw something from one of the network news about how only two people were at the Alabama courthouse in opposition to Judge Moore’s actions in contrast to the scores of fundies who were trying to block removal of the monument.
I do not agree with the way Moore has handled this situation.
The confrontation that is happening is the result of a power struggle and has nothing to do with separation of church and state. Having polled a large number of people, most believe it is a silly, stupid, money wasting event.
The Fundamentals are on their way, busses unloading the believers on TV last night. People who believe in God have grown tired of having their beliefs bashed and their rights taken away from them. I sincerely hope that this does not turn into something ugly.
Either way it goes the liberals have lost a great deal in the battle.
I know I will be using my vote to get people in office that respect the rights of all beliefs.
Where will the stupidity end. There are symbols of God everywhere in our public sector. This is to be expected, since this country was founded on religious freedom.
Love
Leroy
Well, here’s how it is, anyone who equates the displaying of the Ten Commandments to the making of law, ain’t got the faculties to explain nuthin’ to me.
You know what just chaps my ass about many of those who are applauding the Federal Court decision to force the state of Alabama to remove a display of the Ten Commandments from its Supreme Court Building. They seem just a wee bit too happy about it.
While masquerading as honorable protectors of the Constitution, a peek behind the mask reveals an ugly hostility toward both religion and the religious.
Yes, the First Amendment does forbid the making of any law respecting an establishment of religion, but, to groups such as the American Civil Liberties Union and their minions, the mere display of the Ten Commandments constitutes an establishment of religion.
See, it’s all about twisting and perverting the words and meaning of the Constitution to accomodate an agenda. No one, within reason, can legitimately make the claim that the displaying of the Ten Commandments is tantamount to making law with respect to establishing an official religion.
No one is required in any mannor to acknowledge it.
Because the Free Exercise Clause refers to people, not government, and the sovereign state is subject to federal law under the Supremacy Clause.
I have no personal objections to the monument. If I practiced in the courthouse I might find it a little distasteful, but so long as it didn’t find its way into the judicial opinions, I wouldn’t have a big problem with it. When you get right down to it, I really couldn’t care less if the good people of the State of Alabama wanted to erect a Golden Calf of Cthulu in the courthouse, but when a jurist defies a federal court order to engage in political grandstanding, that’s when I put the brakes on. When he defies the federal courts under the guise of upholding his oath to the Constitution, I’m appalled.
Moore is willing to admit the authority of the District Court, the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals, and the Supreme Court so long as rulings go his way; as soon as he get an adverse ruling he starts in with “states right” and “civil disobedience” at the same time he remounts an appeal to the federal courts. Why appeal if you’re just going to do whatever the hell you want anyway? Moore is a disgrace to the profession, to the bench, and to kickboxing.
Hmm, I’ll ignore the double negative and go to the meat of your statement about “the making of law”. Judges interpret law, they don’t make it.
Speaking solely for myself, yes, yes I’m very happy about it. Religious agendas should not be pushed by anyone whose job it is to represent the people.
Acknowledge a 2 and a half ton piece of iconography stuck in a place where you can’t help but see it even if you don’t want to? Oh, ok then, I’ll just close my eyes and hope not to walk into it. :rolleyes: Let’s just say for instance…I’ve erected a statue to Buddha in my front yard, according to the “Ten” commandments, that’s against the law. So if I have a neighbor that deems it offensive, even though I have every legal right to do so, how do you think the judge who wears his religion on his sleeve going to rule? You think he might just right his own laws even though the laws for Alabama say I can have it, the ten commandments don’t?
Ahh, a poll tells so much, please tell me where this poll is, how it was done, who it was done to et al (In other words, cite.) Not that I disagree with the results anyway.
What rights? Am I missing something? The right to go against the Constitution of the United States?
This is not, is not, a constitutional issue. The people who don’t believe in God are trying to force those that do, to remove all representations of their beliefs from public places.
Since the believers outnumber the non-believers 10 to 1, this is unlikely to happen. What will happen is that liberal causes will be damaged by the fallout. I believe Bush has been guaranteed another four years by this event. The government will serve the majority of the people. If it doesn’t, the people will vote the conservatives in that will make the laws they want.
Even if you guys win, you will lose. Just haven’t figured that out yet. The majority of people believe in God, and they are correct. God does exist.
God Bless America
…and the principles on which it was founded.
If you’re not aware, the principle is that the Constitution protects the minority even if they are outnumbered 10 to 1.