Posted on 08/22/2003 7:08:16 AM PDT by xzins
It is reported that Napoleon Bonaparte once said, “It is religion that keeps the poor from murdering the rich.” Rich is, of course, a relative term. One can be “rich” in money, and in the world of religion one can be “rich” in spirit, and in the political realm one can be “rich” in power.
Who is in danger of being murdered?
James Dobson, the leader of “Focus on the Family” has recently voiced his displeasure with the Republican Party over their failure to deliver benefits to the Christian conservatives for their support over these many years. Despite a Senate majority, despite a ‘conservative’ President, despite an iron-grip conservative hold on the House of Representatives, there is precious little (nothing?) from the conservative Christian agenda that has been successfully guided to implementation. In fact, there appears to be backward momentum.
Abortion is as big as ever. School vouchers are little experiments here and there but not under federal authority. Sexuality is now considered under the heading of a newfound freedom of ‘privacy’ that allows any sexual practice to escape even the most reasonable bio-medical review by a state legislature. Marriage is in jeopardy from Massachusetts to California as liberals successfully redefine that institution, considering any form of partnering leading to sexual release on the same par with a man and woman creating and rearing a family.
And now activist judges, seemingly in league with the ACLU, are excising our country’s religious symbols at what can only be described as a hostile pace. They are being permitted to dismantle America’s historic culture of Judeo-Christian morality and replace it with a culture that these judicial architects claim will be neutral, but which is in fact anti-theistic.
Permitted? Who is permitting it?
The religious conservatives would say, “Those we placed our hope in have permitted it. None of the big names stood with us on the firing line. None of them picked sides, went public with their verbal support, and then went public with their actions which demonstrated support.” Not even Attorney General John Ashcroft, the supposed insider religious conservative, spoke up. (John hasn’t spoken up in some time now. Is he gagged?)
We are reminded of the words of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.: "In the End, we will remember not the words of our enemies, but the silence of our friends."
The Republican Party, very rich in power, is in danger from the common people who make up its religious base.
And right now Judge Roy Moore has immense “good will” with that same religious conservative base of the Republican Party. Where did this good will come from? In the eyes of those conservative Christians, Moore was willing to sacrifice himself for one of their concerns. Make no mistake, they trust this man. His stock is very high in that group at this moment.
We’re told that if Al Gore had received even one percent less of the African American vote, that the 2000 election wouldn’t have even been close. How much more if George W. Bush had received one percent less of the Christian conservative vote? We’re told that Bill Clinton won two elections without ever having a majority of the vote because Ross Perot took up to nineteen percent of the Republican vote away from them. The message is clear. A third candidate popular with religious conservatives will kill the Bush Re-election.
"Flatter me, and I may not believe you. Criticize me, and I may not like you. Ignore me, and I may not forgive you...." (William Arthur Ward.)
To refuse a hearing at the highest level is an insult to a man who in his own sphere has reached the top rung. Chief Justice of the Alabama Supreme Court, Judge Roy Moore, has definitely worked his way to a high enough position to have earned the right to be heard. And, in giving a hearing to Moore, they give a hearing to his supporters. Whether the powers in the Republican Party understand the necessity of giving him his hearing is entirely a different subject.
But, if I were an operative for the Constitution Party, and if I were a disgruntled conservative Christian, I would definitely see a man with tremendous name recognition, a solid base of support, and a whole boatload of determination.
Someone needs to talk real-politik to the Republican members of the Supreme Court.
At the same time it is a real concern of mine.
Nah, he's been too busy speaking and begging for more powers to know all about us.
How would James Dobson pass any of this legislation if he were president when the votes are not there in the Senate?
Considering some of the court decisions of late, coupled with the administration's actions (especially on the 'Patriot' Act), I have a distinct feeling you're going to find out. Many conservatives may be sitting at home in 2004. I vote on belief in the candidate, not a letter in the alphabet
Judge Roy Moore ran this whole "Ten Commandments" scam for the express purpose of gaining publicity so that he can run for Governor or Senator.
It is the cheapest demagogery that he learned from George Wallace's standing in the schoolhouse door.
He knew he was going to lose, but did it anyway just to stir people up and gain publicity.
He snuck the stone into the building in the dead of night, because he knew he was in the wrong.
When his apeal to the District Court was denied he did not ask for a stay of the order as any other lawyer would have while apealing to the Supreme Court, because it was his intention to be in contempt and be "martyred".
He is one of the worst scoundrels and flim flam men produced by the South in a generation, fully as cynical and ruthless as Bill Clinton, and no more to be trusted.
Don't bother wondering about his sincerity, he is a lawyer and a politician, he doesn't know the meaning of either.
So9
It adds to my concern.
I think Moore could pull the vote of nearly all evangelical, religious conservatives in America.
He could certainly pull the 3 or 4 percent it takes to allow a democratic candidate to win.
I think that governor or senator of Alabama is too low a target. Chief Justice is as significant as either of those.
He has a national following. I think he would be a solid vote-getter for one of the smaller conservative parties.
How do I know this? Simple: He says that Roe v. Wade is "law" and that he will "enforce the law." That is, if anyone interferes with the killing of a baby in America, John Ashcroft will swoop down and take all actions necessary to ensure that the baby gets killed.
The proposition that Roe is "law" IS the pro-abortion position. The proposition that when people interfere with the killing of babies they should be arrested, bankrupted, and imprisoned, IS the pro-abortion position.
John Ashcroft is pro-abortion. He takes the pro-abortion position, and he ACTS consistently with the pro-abortion position. He PROMISED the Senate that he would ACT pro-abortion once he became Attorney General. He BOASTED on Larry King that he voted, as a Senator, to bankrupt people who interfere with the killing of babies.
Ashcroft is a former Christian and a current pro-abort.
Someone is certain to respond to this post saying: "Don't you understand that he has to ENFORCE THE LAW?" My answer: The proposition that abortion is "legal" is a fiction. Murder cannot ever be legalized, anytime, anywhere. The proposition that abortion is "legal" is PRECISELY what the pro-life movement denies. Anyone who takes the position that Roe v. Wade must be "obeyed" or "enforced" is pro-abortion. Second, the proposition that ALL laws must be obeyed, without consideration of whether they are just, is the Totalitarian position, not the "consrvative" or American position, regarding what law IS.
You're very quick to believe lies. Interesting.
Lie: He snuck the stone into the building in the dead of night, because he knew he was in the wrong.
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.