Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Federal Court Sides With ACLU in Fight for Ten Commandments in Courtroom
News Journal | July 15, 2004 | News Journal Staff Report

Posted on 07/15/2004 6:39:29 PM PDT by bimboeruption

CINCINNATI -- Richland County Common Pleas Judge James DeWeese's fight to return the Ten Commandments to his courtroom wall suffered a setback Wednesday.

The United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth District's three-judge panel ruled 2-1 that displaying the plaque violates the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment.

"We're obviously pleased with the ruling," Gary Daniels, litigation coordinator for the American Civil Liberties Union of Ohio, said.

A federal judge forced DeWeese to remove the Ten Commandments in 2002 after a lawsuit by the ACLU.

"We've contended such a display is offensive to the Establishment Clause and violates the separation of church and state," Daniels said.

The American Center for Law and Justice, a public-interest law firm representing DeWeese, said it was disappointed with the appellate court's ruling and will appeal further.

DeWeese also had a poster of the Bill of Rights in his Mansfield courtroom. He put the words "the rule of law" atop both posters, contending they are part of the historic foundation for modern law.

The ACLU sued to challenge the display of the Ten Commandments, arguing that its posting in a public courtroom gave it the appearance of an unconstitutional government endorsement of religion.

DeWeese failed to establish a legally permissible secular reason for displaying the Ten Commandments in the courtroom, appeals judges Joseph Hood and R. Guy Cole Jr. wrote in their majority ruling. They upheld a June 2002 decision by U.S. District Judge Kathleen O'Malley in Cleveland.

Appeals Judge Alice Batchelder dissented. Batchelder said she believes DeWeese is entitled to include the Ten Commandments in a display he uses to educate the public on the history and philosophy of law.


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Culture/Society; Government; News/Current Events; Philosophy; US: Ohio
KEYWORDS: aclj; aclu; constitution; establishmentclause; federaljudge; firstamendment; judgejamesdeweese; purge; tencommandments
More proof that we are suffering under a tyrannical oligarchy -- Federal Judges.
1 posted on 07/15/2004 6:39:30 PM PDT by bimboeruption
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: bimboeruption

Wow, these guys sure would have hated our Founding Fathers.

History lesson: Summer 1775- Continental Congress issues a call to all citizens to fast and pray and confess their sin that the Lord might bless the land.

"And it is recommended to Christians of all denominations, to assemble for public worship, and to abstain from servile labor and recreation on said day."

Notice also, it was recommended to all Christians, not all religions...


2 posted on 07/15/2004 6:50:32 PM PDT by AfghanIraqVeteran (IYAAYAS)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: bimboeruption

Judges, as well as most lawyers, have taken too much power from the system and are now running amok.


3 posted on 07/15/2004 6:52:25 PM PDT by wrathof59 (semper ubi sub ubi)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: bimboeruption
...and violates the separation of church and state,"

Same old shiite.

I have updated my FMCDH sign-off with the addition of (BITS).....Blood In The Streets, which I foresee coming soon, due to the enormous increase of the communist progressive movement being shoved down the throat of this failing REPUBLIC through the Judicial tyranny of fiat law, and the passing of unconstitutional laws by the Legislative and Executive branches of our government. FMCDH(BITS)

FMCDH(BITS)

4 posted on 07/15/2004 6:55:17 PM PDT by nothingnew (KERRY: "If at first you don't deceive, lie, lie again!")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: AfghanIraqVeteran
Yes, they certainly would have hated our Founding Fathers.

Thanks for the history lesson.

When the righteous are in authority, the people rejoice: but when the wicked beareth rule, the people mourn.
Proverbs 29:2
5 posted on 07/15/2004 6:59:31 PM PDT by bimboeruption
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: nothingnew

I too see a Civil War on the horizon.
I think it will begin if Bush wins.


6 posted on 07/15/2004 7:06:14 PM PDT by bimboeruption
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: bimboeruption
Now, right now, more than ever before,

It's All About The Judges!


7 posted on 07/15/2004 7:08:08 PM PDT by upchuck (Attention politicians of all persuasions: Talk that is not actionable is better left unsaid.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: bimboeruption
I too see a Civil War on the horizon. I think it will begin if Bush wins.

The Civil War is coming, no doubt about it. But if President Bush wins reelection, the war will be muted and probably over quickly with minimal loss of life. If sKerry is elected, the war will all out, lengthy and bloody.

I'm ready either way.

8 posted on 07/15/2004 7:13:04 PM PDT by upchuck (Attention politicians of all persuasions: Talk that is not actionable is better left unsaid.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: bimboeruption
LYING HEADLINE!

Federal Court Sides With ACLU in Fight for Ten Commandments in Courtroom

should read:

Federal Court Sides With aclu in Fight AGAINST Ten Commandments in Courtroom

Since most people do not read beyond the headlines, they assume the activist judges and the commie aclu are helping America - oh, how sweet.
9 posted on 07/15/2004 7:14:29 PM PDT by steplock ( www.spadata.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: bimboeruption

The socialists in the county, calling themselves "liberals", seemed poised to let nothing, including elections or the US Constitution, stand in between themselves and power. The RINOS would not put up much resistence.

The Southern States, along with a few western states, would be the only solid defense against them.
The population within the socialist states would just do as they were told, like they do now. IMHO


10 posted on 07/15/2004 7:18:29 PM PDT by wrathof59 (semper ubi sub ubi)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: bimboeruption

ACLU= Anti Christian Litigation Unlimited.


11 posted on 07/15/2004 7:31:21 PM PDT by sgtbono2002 (I aint wrong, I aint sorry , and I am probably going to do it again.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: upchuck
If Bush wins, the liberal factions (God-haters, homos, pro-aborts, enviromentalist-extremists, the welfare culture, pornographers, etc.) are going to go ballistic. The thought of 4 more years under a president who believes in God and whom they consider an idiot will drive them to the streets.
On the other hand, if Kerry wins, I don't think anything will happen because Christians for the most part are apathetic.
12 posted on 07/15/2004 7:32:22 PM PDT by bimboeruption
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: bimboeruption

the decisions of men who work on an occasional basis attired in black dresses are unlikely to be good ones.


13 posted on 07/15/2004 7:32:25 PM PDT by mathurine
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: steplock

Good point...I missed that.


14 posted on 07/15/2004 7:34:19 PM PDT by bimboeruption
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: bimboeruption
Amendment I
"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; ..."

Amendment X
"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."

Amendment XIV
Section 1.
" All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws."

Article. IV.
Section. 4.
"The United States shall guarantee to every State in this Union a Republican Form of Government, ..."

Article. I.
Section. 1.
"All legislative Powers herein granted shall be vested in a Congress of the United States, ..."

---------------------------------------------

I see a prohibition against any law regarding an establishment of religion or its exercise. I see guarantees of liberty for the states and all the people and for all the protections of the U.S. Constitution. I see that the states are prohibited from making any laws which violate the U.S. Constitution.

I see nothing about the judiciary making laws. I see nothing about separation of church and state. I see nothing about the judiciary ruling on anything but the law.

WTF?

15 posted on 07/15/2004 7:34:58 PM PDT by TigersEye (Intellectuals only exist if you think they do!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: bimboeruption
"A federal judge forced DeWeese to remove the Ten Commandments in 2002 after a lawsuit by the ACLU. "We've contended such a display is offensive to the Establishment Clause and violates the separation of church and state," Daniels said."

Taking bets in how long it will take before the Constitution is completely re-interpreted and the "Year of our Lord" clause changed to 'Year of the ACLU?'

16 posted on 07/15/2004 7:39:12 PM PDT by Eastbound
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: bimboeruption
The United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth District's three-judge panel ruled 2-1 that displaying the plaque violates the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment.

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof."

I wonder what law Congress made in this case that violated the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment?

17 posted on 07/15/2004 7:40:16 PM PDT by usadave
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: bimboeruption
On the other hand, if Kerry wins, I don't think anything will happen because Christians for the most part are apathetic.

I may not know enough Christians to speak knowledgably about it but I don't think it is apathy that you are seeing. Christians, as well as all people of good conscience, do not anger quickly. They are cautious about the use of force and the rejection of established authorities. It has to do with ethics, honor and convictions about the sanctity of life and consequences of actions.

That's the big difference between 'compassionate' conservatives and compassionate 'liberals.' For a liberal compassion is all talk and feelings. Talk is just hot air and feelings change. The value of life is relative and there's no such thing as consequences. Just blame. So they blame others.

18 posted on 07/15/2004 7:54:21 PM PDT by TigersEye (Intellectuals only exist if you think they do!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: TigersEye

"Christians, as well as all people of good conscience, do not anger quickly."

What is your definition of "quickly?"
It's been over 40 years since prayer was removed from public schools.
It's been over 30 years since the Supreme Court decriminalized baby killing resulting in the deaths of over 50 MILLION children.
For over 10 years, homosexuals have been shoving their agenda down Believer's throats.

What does it take for people of good conscience to become angry enough to take action?


19 posted on 07/15/2004 8:17:05 PM PDT by bimboeruption
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: bimboeruption
You're talking about a revolution. Against the mighty U.S. government. Wanna take the first shot?

(That was a rhetorical question. It would be wise not to answer it.)

20 posted on 07/15/2004 8:39:42 PM PDT by TigersEye (Intellectuals only exist if you think they do!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: bimboeruption

maybe the fed judges should be ignored in this case, what can they do???


21 posted on 07/15/2004 8:45:37 PM PDT by markman46
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: sgtbono2002
ACLU= Anti Christian Litigation Unlimited.


22 posted on 07/15/2004 8:46:34 PM PDT by SandRat (Duty, Honor, Country. What else needs to be said?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: TigersEye

"Wanna take the first shot?"

I think some liberal extremist will do it for me.

My God have mercy on us.


23 posted on 07/15/2004 9:42:33 PM PDT by bimboeruption
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson