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

Skip to comments.

Ala. Judge Loses Ten Commandments Appeal
Washington Post ^ | July 1, 2003 | Associated Press

Posted on 07/01/2003 2:47:12 PM PDT by Lurking Libertarian

ATLANTA - A federal appeals court ruled Tuesday that a Ten Commandments monument the size of a washing machine must be removed from the Alabama Supreme Court building.

The 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals unanimously affirmed a ruling by a federal judge who said that the 2 1/2-ton granite monument, placed there by Alabama Chief Justice Roy Moore, violates the constitutional separation of church and state.

[snip]

Moore put the monument in the rotunda of the courthouse in the middle of the night two summers ago. The monument features tablets bearing the Ten Commandments and historical quotations about the place of God in law.

[click link to read remainder of article]

(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonpost.com ...


TOPICS: Breaking News; Constitution/Conservatism; Front Page News; US: Alabama
KEYWORDS: churchandstate; roymoore; tencommandments
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-50 ... 101-150151-200201-250 ... 601-630 next last
To: dogbyte12
"California, Texas, Arizona, Florida, and New Mexico for example will soon be overwhelmingly Catholic"
They will also overwhelmingly NOT be US citizens.
151 posted on 07/01/2003 6:37:50 PM PDT by freeangel (freeangel)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 116 | View Replies]

To: Lurking Libertarian
The ACLU started this and their judges (non partison) haters of God and the America of its founders....
Another....Sad day for America
Diversity, Sodomy, Alchemy and con-servatives delivering conservatives to the god of the new world order
152 posted on 07/01/2003 6:38:56 PM PDT by joesnuffy (Moderate Islam Is For Dilettantes)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Centurion2000
Think Alabama State Guard and National Guard ... with tanks and attack helicopters and other assorted instruments of mayhem. This Judge is not going to take this laying down.

Think Citizen's militia called out. The Feds had best tread lightly on this. This is the stuff of Lexington and Concord.

Think about laying off the sauce before posting.

Should clear that problem you have with proportion right up.

153 posted on 07/01/2003 6:39:31 PM PDT by Pahuanui (when A Foolish Man Hears The tao, He Laughs Out Loud.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 142 | View Replies]

To: Chancellor Palpatine
Anyone know a web site with the exact wording on the monument?
154 posted on 07/01/2003 6:39:33 PM PDT by qwertyz
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 150 | View Replies]

To: Kevin Curry
That'd be Kevin and his lover?
155 posted on 07/01/2003 6:40:36 PM PDT by takenoprisoner (stand for freedom or get the helloutta the way)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

Comment #156 Removed by Moderator

To: qwertyz
There was a link to the opinion above,and that had what was on there.
157 posted on 07/01/2003 6:42:29 PM PDT by Chancellor Palpatine
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 154 | View Replies]

To: Kevin Curry
Oh, Mr. Curry, you dazzle us all with your knowledge. Have you ever argued a 1st Amendment case? I have. Sit back down.

Your post seems to indicate you believe a state can establish a state religion. That is such a ridiculous position it is not worthy of discussion. And if you took the time to read Judge Moore's own words, you would know that is exactly what he wants, as least as far as the law is concerned, in his court.

Tell us all why it is okay if Judge Moore orders a giant cross erected in the chambers of the Supreme Court. Otherwise, read his words and tell us why this is any different.

158 posted on 07/01/2003 6:42:57 PM PDT by lugsoul
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 73 | View Replies]

To: Chancellor Palpatine
Our founding fathers advocated it.

When everything we have held dear for our 200+ years of existence as a nation state is in danger of being demolished by small groups of sexually deviant, morally challenged, lawyers and judges I think it is time to consider all options.

And remember sir, name calling is the first reaction of the communist/socialist leftists we lament here by the hour.

Are you sure this is the right place for you?
159 posted on 07/01/2003 6:45:28 PM PDT by Stopislamnow (Rope, ammo, guns, and a new affirmation of the Constitution are the only ways to take America back.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 150 | View Replies]

To: Sir Gawain
Oh wonderful. You'll characterize, and criticize, the case without even reading it. Typical.

If you had read it, you'd see that the panel of the 11th (good men all) who decided the case are hardly more enamored with Establishment Clause jurisprudence than you are. Unlike Judge Moore, however, they know when they are duty bound to follow the decree of a higher court.

Go ahead. Explain to us with your obviously vast wisdom how the judicial system functions when binding precedent is ignored.

160 posted on 07/01/2003 6:46:44 PM PDT by lugsoul
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 72 | View Replies]

To: Stopislamnow
And calling a nameless screenname "sir" on an internet bulletin board while advocating ignoble murder over putting up a shrine to your religion on public property is the surest sign that someone is an underachieving, underearning dolt who wants to sound infinitely more important than he is.
161 posted on 07/01/2003 6:50:36 PM PDT by Chancellor Palpatine
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 159 | View Replies]

To: Dog Gone
Nobody wants to look at the flip side.

The point is very simple..congress made no law respecting what Judge Moore did concerning religion. People like you trying to convince everyone else that they cannot comprehend the simple meaning of words are dispicable.

162 posted on 07/01/2003 6:52:35 PM PDT by rottweiller_inc
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 120 | View Replies]

To: TheCrusader
How much longer before Christians will be worshipping in the catacombs again?

Just worship some place other than public buildings and there will be no problems.

163 posted on 07/01/2003 6:53:39 PM PDT by FreeLibertarian (You live and learn. Or you don't live long.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: Lurking Libertarian
A federal appeals court ruled Tuesday that a Ten Commandments monument the size of a washing machine must be removed from the Alabama Supreme Court building.

Didn't Old Hickory say something about the "Supreme Court has spoken, now let them enforce it?"

Someone posted that on another thread the other day and it jogged my memory.

164 posted on 07/01/2003 6:55:19 PM PDT by Mulder (Live Free or die)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: tscislaw
The entire Bill of Rights applies to the states, via the 14th Amendment. That's law older than your grandmother.

Next.

165 posted on 07/01/2003 6:57:14 PM PDT by lugsoul
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 134 | View Replies]

To: Sir Gawain
After he got out of jail for contempt, he would run for Gov. or AG and win in a landslide.

Are convicted felons eligble for public office in Alabama?

166 posted on 07/01/2003 6:57:18 PM PDT by FreeLibertarian (You live and learn. Or you don't live long.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: Chancellor Palpatine
Here's a link to the exact wording on the monument: http://www.tencommandmentsdefense.org/TenCommandmentsMonument.htm
167 posted on 07/01/2003 6:58:24 PM PDT by qwertyz
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 157 | View Replies]

To: jwalsh07
I'll answer that one: no. But that's not what this case was about. Does the Constitution prohibit religious displays placed by the government for a strictly religious purpose, limited to a single religion to the exclusion of others? Yes. And that is exactly what Judge Moore said he was doing.

Just read the case. Why are so many compelled to spout off about things they know nothing about?

168 posted on 07/01/2003 6:59:55 PM PDT by lugsoul
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 130 | View Replies]

To: qwertyz
It is right there in the opinion, linked on this thread. And while you're at it, read what the good Judge had to say about the motives for putting it up.
169 posted on 07/01/2003 7:02:25 PM PDT by lugsoul
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 154 | View Replies]

To: Chancellor Palpatine
Where did I advocate ignoble murder?

DU is calling to you, can you hear it?

170 posted on 07/01/2003 7:02:43 PM PDT by Stopislamnow (Underearning, Underachieving dolt, apparently.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 161 | View Replies]

To: Dog Gone
And I did give you an answer. Please read my response again.

Yes you did. My apologies.

171 posted on 07/01/2003 7:06:59 PM PDT by jwalsh07
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 135 | View Replies]

To: Spiff
Oh, Spiff. The 10th refers to rights NOT set forth in the Constitution - or reserved to the people under the 9th. It does not give the states the right to trump the Federal Government on the issue of interpreting the U.S. Constitution. If you think it does, please indicate where.
172 posted on 07/01/2003 7:09:29 PM PDT by lugsoul
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 89 | View Replies]

To: SunStar
Great. We're getting screwed by our own guys...

Wake up to reality. There are "no" conservatives in public office. The move toward Marxism/Socialism is complete and now only a "slow" progression that the masses of the dumb cannot invision is necessary. The culture war has already been decided. Only a revolution could stop the tide, and the people don't have the character and will for that. Enjoy America while you can. It's going to be gone very, very soon.....in our lifetimes.

173 posted on 07/01/2003 7:09:36 PM PDT by YoungKentuckyConservative
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Stopislamnow
Think hundreds of armed civilians.

It's time to get bloody and defend our rights.

So what you're advocating is the murder of US Marshals?

174 posted on 07/01/2003 7:10:07 PM PDT by Catspaw
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 144 | View Replies]

To: freedomsnotfree
They were the "black robed" brigade.

Lenin called them the "Black Hundreds"

175 posted on 07/01/2003 7:12:38 PM PDT by DPB101
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 156 | View Replies]

To: FreeLibertarian
Not even that, FL - you can worship in a public building as much as you like - as long as the government isn't assisting, participating, or endorsing the worship of your religion. Why Christians, or members of any other faith, have a problem with this is beyond me.
176 posted on 07/01/2003 7:12:45 PM PDT by lugsoul
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 163 | View Replies]

To: dogbyte12
California, Texas, Arizona, Florida, and New Mexico for example will soon be overwhelmingly Catholic, not protestant.

New Mexico has been overwhelmingly Catholic for several hundred years.

177 posted on 07/01/2003 7:14:06 PM PDT by FreeLibertarian (You live and learn. Or you don't live long.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 116 | View Replies]

To: lugsoul
Why are so many compelled to spout off about things they know nothing about?

I dunno. Perhaps so we can be lectured to by pompous asses?

I didn't mention Judge Moore. I asked a simple question, not directly referencing this case, to get a feel for where Dog was coming from.

His answer, which I failed to read the first time, was sufficient for me to understand his views here.

Your answer was sufficient for me to put you in the category mentioned above.

FR is great, ain't it?

178 posted on 07/01/2003 7:14:07 PM PDT by jwalsh07
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 168 | View Replies]

To: FreeLibertarian
Just worship some place other than public buildings and there will be no problems.

Who gave you the right to tell people where and when they can worship?

For over 70 years, church services were held in the House of Representatives every Sunday. Jefferson attended regularly. Was Jefferson supporting an unconstitutional act?

179 posted on 07/01/2003 7:15:34 PM PDT by DPB101
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 163 | View Replies]

To: Catspaw
"So what you're advocating is the murder of US Marshals?"

That's what it sounds like to me.

The shallowness of comprehension on this issue is astounding. Don't you people understand that this Judge openly states that he put up this monument to further the influence of Christianity on the operation of the law in his court? That's not what I say - that's what HE says. Do you people really believe that the Constitution endorses a theocracy?

180 posted on 07/01/2003 7:17:00 PM PDT by lugsoul
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 174 | View Replies]

To: Dog Gone
I can envision the year 2400 when Islam or Gaia or some other religion has gained predominance in America. This ruling would protect me and uphold the Constitution.

You have got to be joking. You seriously think that in some future Islamic-majority America that Muslim government officials who would otherwise want to quash Christianity will be shaking in their boots, their plans thwarted because of the 1st Amendment, much less some dumbass ruling on courthouse decor? I can imagine it now... "Darn it, Achmed -- we would have gotten away with it, too, it weren't for those 11th Circuit infidels and their meddling Constitutional interpretation!"

181 posted on 07/01/2003 7:18:26 PM PDT by Sloth ("I feel like I'm taking crazy pills!" -- Jacobim Mugatu, 'Zoolander')
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 115 | View Replies]

To: jwalsh07
Yep, and your question amply demonstrated that you didn't even know what the case was about before you went off expressing opinions about it - opinions you are clearly entitled to state, no matter how uninformed they are.
182 posted on 07/01/2003 7:23:17 PM PDT by lugsoul
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 178 | View Replies]

To: jwalsh07
Yep, and your question amply demonstrated that you didn't even know what the case was about before you went off expressing opinions about it - opinions you are clearly entitled to state, no matter how uninformed they are.
183 posted on 07/01/2003 7:23:18 PM PDT by lugsoul
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 178 | View Replies]

To: Centurion2000
This is the stuff of Lexington and Concord.

No it's not. This is about a publicity seeking politician trying to abuse the Ten Commandments and the Constitution to get himself elected.

184 posted on 07/01/2003 7:23:18 PM PDT by FreeLibertarian (You live and learn. Or you don't live long.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 142 | View Replies]

To: jwalsh07
Yep, and your question amply demonstrated that you didn't even know what the case was about before you went off expressing opinions about it - opinions you are clearly entitled to state, no matter how uninformed they are.
185 posted on 07/01/2003 7:23:18 PM PDT by lugsoul
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 178 | View Replies]

To: lugsoul
You're just covering up for 'em.
186 posted on 07/01/2003 7:23:42 PM PDT by muawiyah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]

To: lugsoul
You're just covering up for 'em.
187 posted on 07/01/2003 7:23:42 PM PDT by muawiyah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]

To: lugsoul
Not even that, FL - you can worship in a public building as much as you like - as long as the government isn't assisting, participating, or endorsing the worship of your religion.

Where do you get all that? Because that is what you want? There is no basis in the constitution nor history for that view of the first amendment. Only after FDR filled the court with socialists were Americans not allowed free exercise of religion.

Read some history. Congress not only hired ministers, Congress gave thousands of acres of land to Christian ministries. Even today, billions are spent every year on promoting religion. The Rev. Floyd Flake receives Federal money for his day care program--one in which children are required to memorize Bible verses. We even have religious prisons--Otisville is Kosher, New Mexico allows Native Americans certain programs others do get, ministers all over are on the public payroll.

188 posted on 07/01/2003 7:23:42 PM PDT by DPB101
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 176 | View Replies]

To: Centurion2000
This is the stuff of Lexington and Concord.

No it's not. This is about a publicity seeking politician trying to abuse the Ten Commandments and the Constitution to get himself elected.

189 posted on 07/01/2003 7:23:42 PM PDT by FreeLibertarian (You live and learn. Or you don't live long.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 142 | View Replies]

To: Sir Gawain
And the people of this state would be stupid enough to do just that! We got rid of (former govenor) Guy Hunt and the people of this state would make the same damn mistake all over again by voting in Moore if (unfortunately) he were to run!
190 posted on 07/01/2003 7:23:46 PM PDT by proudofthesouth
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: jwalsh07
Yep, and your question amply demonstrated that you didn't even know what the case was about before you went off expressing opinions about it - opinions you are clearly entitled to state, no matter how uninformed they are.

Or perhaps it is your opinion, like Judge Moore's, that the Constitution allows any religious display in a government building, even when that display is expressly intended to promote a single religion to the exclusion of others. If that is your view, enough said.

191 posted on 07/01/2003 7:23:47 PM PDT by lugsoul
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 178 | View Replies]

To: Dog Gone
The Koran acknowledges the Prophets and the Law. Didn't you ever wonder what that meant? BTW, it's not likely you would see the words of the Koran rendered into a large statue - that's un-Koranic. On the other hand, Moslems are in the habit of writing phrases on banners which are then hung on buildings.

Before you create these negative comparisons you might well educate yourself about what the adherents of other religions really do and what they think. I know you will be startled when you check out Islam.

192 posted on 07/01/2003 7:24:53 PM PDT by muawiyah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: lugsoul
Not even that, FL - you can worship in a public building as much as you like - as long as the government isn't assisting, participating, or endorsing the worship of your religion.

Where do you get all that? Because that is what you want? There is no basis in the constitution nor history for that view of the first amendment. Only after FDR filled the court with socialists were Americans not allowed free exercise of religion.

Read some history. Congress not only hired ministers, Congress gave thousands of acres of land to Christian ministries. Even today, billions are spent every year on promoting religion. The Rev. Floyd Flake receives Federal money for his day care program--one in which children are required to memorize Bible verses. We even have religious prisons--Otisville is Kosher, New Mexico allows Native Americans certain programs others do get, ministers all over are on the public payroll.

193 posted on 07/01/2003 7:24:55 PM PDT by DPB101
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 176 | View Replies]

To: lugsoul
You know what they say about people who assume.

You know what they say about people who assume.

You know what they say about people who assume.

You know what they say about people who assume.

194 posted on 07/01/2003 7:24:59 PM PDT by jwalsh07
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 185 | View Replies]

To: Chancellor Palpatine
He is an egomaniac as well as (spit!) Chief Justice of the Alabama Supreme Court.
195 posted on 07/01/2003 7:26:02 PM PDT by proudofthesouth
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: DPB101
Can you read? I didn't say anything about the government prohibiting free exercise. What I addressed was prohibiting the government from promoting the exercise of a specific religion. I don't know how you read history if that is a demostration of your reading comprehension skills.
196 posted on 07/01/2003 7:26:20 PM PDT by lugsoul
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 188 | View Replies]

To: Texas_Jarhead
You must have referred to something ~ have no idea what it is. Maybe you didn't like my remark that someone else's religious sensibilities are nothing more than a narrow sectarian bias.

Besides, what are all you guys doing going to church on Sunday when you should be in full attendance on Saturday, as well as Wednesday night.

197 posted on 07/01/2003 7:27:23 PM PDT by muawiyah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 64 | View Replies]

To: lugsoul
Yep, that will ensure the already impending death of the State of Alabama

Explain this statement please.

198 posted on 07/01/2003 7:28:39 PM PDT by proudofthesouth
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 52 | View Replies]

To: muawiyah
Muawiyah -

Since your post is so far up the thread, why not be clear what you are saying? You are saying that these three judges want to kill Jews in gas ovens.

Yep, you've got class.

199 posted on 07/01/2003 7:28:39 PM PDT by lugsoul
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 187 | View Replies]

To: lugsoul
Now back to the first amendment.

Are Chaplains in the armed forces Constitutional?

Are prayers in Congress Constitutional?

They are both paid for with public funds and take place on public property, no?

Does the DOI have to strike the words "endowed by the creator".

Do the words "in the Year of Our Lord", have to be struck from the Constitution?

200 posted on 07/01/2003 7:28:44 PM PDT by jwalsh07
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 191 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-50 ... 101-150151-200201-250 ... 601-630 next last

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