Panel Rules Justice Moore Failed to Respect & Comply with Law; Judge removed from Supreme Court

[Hillary's Lovely Legs]

More to follow

[george wythe]

So you want to flush the First Amendment?

I'd rather keep it, thank you very much.

Actually, no.

The First Amendment protections should apply to federal matters.

State constitutions should apply to state matters.

My state has very strong protections of of our basic rights, probably stronger than those found in the US Constitution.

[OldFriend]

What a sad day for America.

I believe Justice Pryor voted to remove Judge Moore in an attempt to sweeten his image before the ung-dly senate so he can be confirmed.

[Chancellor Palpatine]

You believe wrong.

[exmarine]

Ditto...I read somewhere that Longstreet of Civil War fame wished the slaves had been freed...and that Fort Sumpter had still been fired upon!(A state's rights issue!) I can't remember the source...someone can set me right if he never said it!

Yes, most in the south did not fight for slavery as the idiot liberals at the NAACP would have us believe. They fought for their States, to defend their homes against an INVADER, for each other, and for their sense of duty and honor.

[Labyrinthos]

Judge Moore is not from a Trailier Park as you state. However, he is a decorated Veteran. Is is sad to see the hatred for him and his religious beliefs on FR. This contempt is only rivaled by those at DU.

I don't hate him or his religious beliefs. I do hate his use of the Alabama Supreme Court to advocate his personal religious beliefs in a way that is patently unconstitutional (as 13 Federal judges have found) and strongly suggests that justice is more just for those who subscribe to Moore's particular brand of Christianity.

[OldFriend]

The organization that brought the suit has said they will immediately make the effort to get the Judge disbarred.

[BlueNgold]

No surprise here. Just because he disagreed with the decision of the Federal Courts did NOT give him reason to refuse their order. He knew this was coming, and I think he played his hand out all the way to the end. I expect him to file to run for either Senator or Governor in rather short order.

[Modernman]

Everyone has freedom of religious expression in this country, including Moore.

Okay- I demand the right to put an idol of Baal up in the courthouse. If you'll agree that I have the right to do that, I'll agree that Moore has the right to put up the TC.

[Jason_b]

What law did he defy?

[Chad Fairbanks]

Interesting read on that... :0) I think it was meant more towards looking inward rather than outward, though, but that's my own perspective on it...

[WackyKat]

I pray this is the beginning of the 2nd American Revolution where Christians demand their God-given rights! The ACLU does NOT DECIDE MY RIGHTS FOR ME. I will fight them to my last breath.

If you're thinking of joining your local militia, be aware that having a big beer gut is usually required for membership

[Chancellor Palpatine]

You're a Ba'alist, too? Conservative or Reform?

[Porterville]

That is true, I look at it that way, but I also look at it - if a person feels they need to hurt someone, they ought to do everything in their power to restrain themselves... if not they can be judged because they are being selfish and therefore open themeslves up to judgement of others; something like that....

[dmz]

I'll jump in and say that referring to Stalin, Mao, Pol Pot, Castro, Kim Il-Sung as secular humanists is absurd.

They may be secular, but they ain't no humanists.

secular humanism
n.
An outlook or philosophy that advocates human rather than religious values.
Secularism.

No part of secular humanism advocates the gulag, as that is clearly antithetical to the notion of humanism.

[concerned about politics]

He's in the same position as a sales person who constantly asks prospective customers if they are "saved", prosletyzing those who say no, is asked by their boss to desist, and refuses.

No one was being forced to walk to the back of the room to read it. No one was being forced to be read to.
Who decided PC was the countries new theology? Who decided athiesm would be the new government mandated religion?
What about taxes. Christians are forced to pay taxes for public lands, yet are the only group not allowed to use that land for their Christian activities. Why do you think that is?

[Doctor Stochastic]

Slavery was made legal in Massachussets in 1641. Was this before or after the Pilgrims and puritans arrived.?

Stonewall Jackson may have taught Sunday School to slave children, but he fought to keep them slaves.

[Modernman]

When they die of AIDs, it was their choice. No one else did it for them. When they have so many children and no father to feed them, it's their call. When they find themsleves in prison for rape, theft, murder - it's their call. When they're imprisoned for purgery or slander, it too was their decision. If they're run away teens living on the streets, they did it. You see, those who chose to follow their own way will suffer by their own hand. I don't make these people second class citizens. They do it to themselves

And these things only happen to non-Christians? Right.....

[TrueBeliever9]

Fundamentalist Christians of the American South and Midwest have no concept whatsoever of what persecution is about

You should read "Red Hills and Cotton" by Ben Robertson. You are not balanced or well rounded in your opinions. Your posts are very slanted with bigotry and ignorance.

[Chad Fairbanks]

We agree on that, for the most part... except for the "judgement by others" part, as we are not supposed to "judge" - it's not our duty. That role belongs to God, and God alone.

Then, of course, we get into man-made laws, and that opens up a whole 'nother can of worms ;0)

[george wythe]

Renquist called the phoney doctrine of separation of church and state "bad history" and bad law. So, I don't know what you are talking about.

There is a difference between claiming that the First Amendment does not apply to the states and claiming that a particular interpretion of the First Amendment is flawed.

Once you allow the camel's nose into the tent, it's just a matter of time before the whole camel takes over the sleeping mat. The SCOTUS applied the First Amendment to the states, the current conservative judges have also applied the First Amendment to the states, and how we are left arguing whether a certain interpretation of the incorporated First Amendment is valid.

That was Judge Moore's point all along: the First Amendment does not apply to the states, and in that issue, Moore has no supporters in the SCOTUS.

At any rate, as far as religious symbols being displayed in government buildings, you think that such displays are not a "law," and therefore, displays in a public courtroom cannot be a violation of an incorporated First Amendment.

That was my initial assessment also. Then I was surprised to read about the conservatice Justices take on this.

Addressing this issue, Rehquist, Scalia, and [now retired] White wrote on their dissenting opinion in County of Allegheny v. ACLU

Excerpt:

But coercion need not be a direct tax in aid of religion or a test oath. Symbolic recognition or accommodation of religious faith may violate the Clause in an extreme case. ¹ I doubt not, for example, that the Clause forbids a city to permit the permanent erection of a large Latin cross on the roof of city hall. This is not because government speech about religion is per se suspect, as the majority would have it, but because such an obtrusive year-round religious display would place the government's weight behind an obvious effort to proselytize on behalf of a particular religion.