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

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 101-120121-140141-160 ... 621-630 next last
To: Dog Gone
If Judge Moore can do this, then Judge I.M. Antichrist can put up whatever he wants in the rotunda of his Supreme Court Building.

Constitutionally, he can. Realistically, it's unlikely that Mr. Antichrist will be confirmed as Chief Justice in the first place.

121 posted on 07/01/2003 5:16:35 PM PDT by inquest
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 120 | View Replies]

To: inquest
Constitutionally, he can't. That's the point.
122 posted on 07/01/2003 5:18:24 PM PDT by Dog Gone
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 121 | View Replies]

Comment #123 Removed by Moderator

Comment #124 Removed by Moderator

To: Dog Gone
You're jumping from your argument in support of your conclusion to the conclusion itself. Why bother stating the argument if you're just going to say "That's the way it is and that's that."?
125 posted on 07/01/2003 5:24:43 PM PDT by inquest
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 122 | View Replies]

To: Dog Gone
There was a fellow once who banned all religious symbols from the public square. Do you think that was a good idea?
126 posted on 07/01/2003 5:26:45 PM PDT by jwalsh07
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 122 | View Replies]

To: inquest
Well, I thought I had made it earlier in the thread, so I guess I was trying to avoid repeating myself.

Have you read the actual opinion?

127 posted on 07/01/2003 5:27:41 PM PDT by Dog Gone
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 125 | View Replies]

To: SkooldBiDaStayt
Of course you're right, but that doesn't change my point that things are likely to get ugly. Judge Moore isn't going to back down on this. It is his 10 Commandments schtick that got him elected Chief Justice to begin with. Believe it or not, that was the biggest plank in his platform when he ran for the office (welcome to Alabama). You ask me, he's going to ride it all the way to the governor's chair, and the feds are only helping him to get there by making an issue out of it.
128 posted on 07/01/2003 5:30:58 PM PDT by squidly
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 123 | View Replies]

To: jwalsh07
There was a fellow once who banned all religious symbols from the public square. Do you think that was a good idea?

Tell me the full facts. While law, even constitutional law, is about principles, facts play a very important role.

Read the opinion here, and you'll see what role they played.

But, as a very preliminary response to your question, I don't think the Constitution requires that.

129 posted on 07/01/2003 5:32:00 PM PDT by Dog Gone
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 126 | View Replies]

To: Dog Gone
Tell me the full facts. While law, even constitutional law, is about principles, facts play a very important role.

I'm not sure what facts you need, the question is a simple one.

Is it your understanding that the first amendment prohibits religious displays on public property?

130 posted on 07/01/2003 5:35:00 PM PDT by jwalsh07
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 129 | View Replies]

To: Lurking Libertarian
>>...That discussion is accompanied by citations to the court decisions from 1962 and 1963 which forced Governors Wallace and Barnett to obey school desegregation orders...<<

Court decisions didn't force them to obey, the National Guard did, as I recall.

Question is, would George W. Bush call out the National Guard to force a conservative judge to remove the 10 Commandments??

And how would that look during a re-election bid??

131 posted on 07/01/2003 5:37:31 PM PDT by FReepaholic (Freepers, a fierce warlike tribe from FreeRepublic.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: oldironsides
As a born and raised Chadds Fordian (now in NYC), I'm glad to know that.
132 posted on 07/01/2003 5:40:14 PM PDT by speedy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

Comment #133 Removed by Moderator

To: Lurking Libertarian
>>...violates the constitutional separation of church and state. ...<<

Somebody show me where this is in the Constitution.

Where does it apply to a soveriegn State??

The First Amendment applies to Congress.

134 posted on 07/01/2003 5:41:57 PM PDT by FReepaholic (Freepers, a fierce warlike tribe from FreeRepublic.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: jwalsh07
I'm not sure what facts you need, the question is a simple one.

You're the one who mentioned a fellow, so you introduced a fact situation. I'm not sure why you're refusing to expound.

And I did give you an answer. Please read my response again.

135 posted on 07/01/2003 5:46:55 PM PDT by Dog Gone
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 130 | View Replies]

To: inquest
No...mr. Antichrist will assume the mantles of chief justic, congress, senate, and president all at once!
136 posted on 07/01/2003 5:50:06 PM PDT by mdmathis6
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 121 | View Replies]

Comment #137 Removed by Moderator

To: TheCrusader
Vote for me! Whoo hoo! :p
138 posted on 07/01/2003 5:54:16 PM PDT by Constantine XIII
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: Dog Gone
Yes, I've read it. The court's lame attempt to distinguish this from the "In God We Trust" on our money is utterly unconvincing. They basically were trying to say that we really don't mean what we say on the money - it's just window dressing. Sounds like an atheist in denial to me.

There is no substantive difference between what appears on our coins and the Decalogue in that rotunda. They both express the exact same worldview.

139 posted on 07/01/2003 5:56:13 PM PDT by inquest
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 127 | View Replies]

To: SunStar
Maybe you're just wrong.
140 posted on 07/01/2003 5:57:53 PM PDT by ItisaReligionofPeace ((the original))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 101-120121-140141-160 ... 621-630 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