The people's judge: Justice Roy Moore. Joseph Farah on why Moore is genuine national hero

WorldNetDaily.com ^ | Friday, August 22, 2003 | Joseph Farah

[JohnHuang2]

"We have staked the whole future of American civilization, not upon the power of government, far from it. We have staked the future of all our political institutions upon the capacity of mankind for self-government, upon the capacity of each and all of us to govern ourselves, to control ourselves, to sustain ourselves according to the Ten Commandments."

– James Madison

Alabama's Chief Justice Roy Moore is a national hero.

He became one in 1995 when, as a circuit-court judge in the state, he placed a hand-carved wooden plaque of the Ten Commandments on his courtroom wall.

That act set off legal challenges that led to him becoming known as "The Ten Commandments Judge" and eventually his election by the people of the state to the top judicial position in Alabama.

It should have surprised no one when, upon assuming his new position as chief justice of the Alabama Supreme Court, he installed a two-ton, washing-machine-sized granite monument of the Ten Commandments in the courthouse.

Predictably, the American Civil Liberties Union and Americans United for Separation of Church and State filed suits against Moore, charging his action violated the establishment clause of the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. Last month, the U.S. 11th Circuit Court of Appeals ruled against Moore and ordered him to remove the monument. Moore vowed once again to fight the ruling.

Is there any validity to the charge that positioning the Ten Commandments in a state courthouse violates the First Amendment?

The First Amendment states: "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances."

For starters, Congress never entered the equation when Moore made his decision to erect the monument. Secondly, and most importantly, which religion is established by the posting of the Ten Commandments?

The Ten Commandments are not only revered by all believing Christians and Jews, they are the very basis of Western civilization and, more specifically, the cornerstone of American self-government.

Just ask James Madison, the author of the U.S. Constitution. He said the founders staked their entire experiment – and it remains an experiment more than 200 years later – of self-government. The only alternative to a free society of individuals governing themselves under the simple yet profound precepts of the Ten Commandments, he understood, was a society coerced to behave by the power of government.

That's what the debate is all about in Alabama today. Do we wish to live in a society of self-governing individuals who behave themselves because of a consensus around some eternal truths, an absolute morality, a simple code of right and wrong uniting people of many faiths? Or, do we prefer to live under the rule of men and a system of ever-changing, always-evolving morality and subject to the whims of unaccountable judges and the fads and fashions of democracy?

That's the choice. We can argue whether Judge Moore made the right tactical or strategic legal choices, as one Southern Baptist leader has done. But this fight and this choice is much more important than that. There's a much bigger issue at stake – that issue is what kind of a country we want.

I want the kind of a country James Madison, Thomas Jefferson, George Washington and our founders envisioned for us. That's what Judge Roy Moore wants, too.

It's time for Americans to rally around this man, his cause and tell the ACLU to take its meddling to some other country.

America was founded on the principle of self-government. We can't have self-government without the Ten Commandments, without biblical principles of right and wrong, without a basic code of morality.

This is not a question of separation of church and state. No church is being established in Alabama or the U.S. when we acknowledge the power and principality of the Ten Commandments in our lives and in the life of our country.

---

[the gillman@blacklagoon.com]

Oh, maybe you should move to Providence, Rhode Island, where the Ten Commandments are nowhere to be seen, but the flag of the Gay Nazis flies proudly higher than the state and national flags.

No mix of religon and state there. Just the place for you.

[sweetliberty]

"Alabama's Chief Justice Roy Moore is a national hero"

Funny, I was just thinking exactly the same thing last night.

[sweetliberty]

"Do we wish to live in a society of self-governing individuals who behave themselves because of a consensus around some eternal truths, an absolute morality, a simple code of right and wrong uniting people of many faiths? Or, do we prefer to live under the rule of men and a system of ever-changing, always-evolving morality and subject to the whims of unaccountable judges and the fads and fashions of democracy?"

That's what it really comes down to, isn't it?

"It's time for Americans to rally around this man, his cause and tell the ACLU to take its meddling to some other country."

AMEN! Kinda makes you wonder how an organization that is firmly rooted in communism ever got so much power here in the first place.

[sweetliberty]

"If we can't acknowledge the universal foundation of American law, I'm afraid we will go the way of Rome."

I've thought that for a long while. The scum has taken over the country, and they're not going to give it back willingly.

[Non-Sequitur]

What Judge Moore and his supporters are doing should have been done long ago when prayer and posting of the Ten Commandments were removed from the classrooms in our schools.

And which version of the 10 Commandments would you post?

[sweetliberty]

What part of "Congress shall make NO law with the respect to the establishment of religion NOR PROHIBIT the free exercise thereof" do you ot understand? The judge is right! It is the courts that are running amok and have WAY overstepped their authority. The federal courts have NO business touching this issue. Of course, now the Supreme Court will likely have to because the lower federal court is out of line.

[texgal]

And which version of the 10 Commandments would you post?

The version that goes something like this . . .

TEN COMMANDMENTS

I. Thou shalt have no other gods before me.

II. Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image.

III. Thou shalt not take the name of the LORD thy God in vain.

IV. Remember the Sabbath day, to keep it holy.

V. Honour thy father and thy mother.

VI. Thou shalt not kill.

VII. Thou shalt not commit adultery.

VIII. Thou shalt not steal.

IX. Thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbour.

X. Thou shalt not covet any thing that is thy neighbour's.

[sweetliberty]

Yeah, what you said.

[gridlock]

It is my understanding, and I am a Constitutional scholar by no means, that the Judge falls under the prohibition portion of this Amendment, and that he is restricted with the respect to the establishment of religion. The Judge not prohibited from the free exercise of his religious freedom. He can exercise his religious freedom all he wants. He just can't use his office to do so.

By placing the Ten Commandments in a central location, and stating vociferously and repeatedly that it is the one true basis for morality, he is establishing religion.

[gridlock]

So, would you codify I, II, III, IV, V, VII and X into law?

How do you feel about burquas?

[Non-Sequitur]

And if as a Catholic I say that you are wrong, that the 10 Commandments actually are:

I. I am the Lord, thy God. You shall not have other gods besides me.
II. You shall not take the name of the Lord, your God, in vain.
III. Remember to keep holy the Lord's Day.
IV. Honor your father and your mother.
V. You shall not kill.
VI. You shall not commit adultery.
VII. You shall not steal.
VII. You shall not bear false witness.
IX. You shall not covet your neighbor's wife.
X. You shall not covet your neighbor's goods.

What then? Why didn't Judge Moore post this version?

[reasonseeker]

It's a sad day when conservatives think using PUBLIC money for a PRIVATE expression of religion is FREE EXERCISE of an establisment of religion. So many conservatives have the exact same attitude as so many liberals who want to ram their beliefs down everyone's throat -- only the particulars differ.

[texgal]

You're straining at gnats - or trying to define the meaning of "is".

[Chancellor Palpatine]

One poster put it like this - the radical gays and Roy Moore deserve each other - each is looking to repeatedly ram their agenda down the throats of people who aren't interested in it, don't like it and who are sick of hearing about it.

[Non-Sequitur]

You're straining at gnats - or trying to define the meaning of "is".

So defending my faith is 'straining at gnats'? If there's nothing to it then why not carve the Catholic version instead? Instead of 'straining at gnats' I am pointing out that you and Judge Moore are demonstrating a remarkable lack of respect and tolerance for the faiths of other people.

[sweetliberty]

As Alan Keyes put it so eloquently last night on Hannity and Colmes, the courts are trying to enforce a law that doesn't exist, therefore they are out of the boundaries of the authority of their office. Congress shall make NO LAW, means just exactly that....that the federal government has no business meddling with what a state chooses for itself. As usual, these judicial vigilantes are acting as dictators and puppets of the COMMUNIST ACLU.

[Dante3]

Intersting article.

[texgal]

So, would you codify I, II, III, IV, V, VII and X into law? How do you feel about burquas?

At one time or another all of these have been codified into law in one form or another. It has been only recently - since our activist juges took to "making law" - that much of this has been removed.

I don't see the mention of a burqua anywhere within the 10.

[Northern Yankee]

Absolutely right on with your remarks.

It is about time that someone take stands against this kind of nonsense.

Why is it that the ACLU's opnions be more valued than those who disagree?

If we continue to allow the ACLU to dictate policy, then we have lost. They don't represent the beliefs of most people, so why not stand up to them?

[texgal]

So defending my faith is 'straining at gnats'? If there's nothing to it then why not carve the Catholic version instead? Instead of 'straining at gnats' I am pointing out that you and Judge Moore are demonstrating a remarkable lack of respect and tolerance for the faiths of other people.

There is no substantial difference in the version I posted and the verion you posted. You are not defending your faith, you're spoiling for a fight. You're free to go out a get a monument with the "version" you want posted and display it where and when you like. Or at least that was the case until this latest court ruling.