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

Skip to comments.

Vanity: My Letter to Alabama Attorney General Pryor
Self | 11/11/2003 | Self

Posted on 11/11/2003 11:43:08 AM PST by farmer18th

Dear Mr. Pryor:

Your actions with respect to Judge Moore confuse me.

Is "Thou Shalt Not Steal" offensive to you? (I'm glad I don't own property in Alabama)

Is "Thou Shalt Not Murder" problematic for you? (I'm glad I don't live in Alabama)

Is "Thou Shalt Not Commit Adultery" hurtful to you? (I'm glad you don't know my wife.)

Is "Thou Shalt not Bear False Witness" repugnant to you? (I'm glad I never had to seek justice in your state.)

Is "Thou Shalt Have no Other Gods Before Me" distasteful to you? (What with lightning bolts and all, I'm glad I dont worship next to you.)

We are a nation of laws, Mr. Pryor, and not of men. I'm just confused as to which laws you follow.


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; News/Current Events; US: Alabama
KEYWORDS: billpryor; judgemoore; pryor; tencommandments
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 161-180181-200201-220 ... 521-539 next last
To: Texas Federalist
Perhaps you didn't read the order and judgment issued by the Federal Court either. It was the impending enforcement of that order that led Moore's colleagues on the Court to end his circus.
181 posted on 11/11/2003 2:19:54 PM PST by lugsoul (And I threw down my enemy and smote his ruin on the mountainside)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 174 | View Replies]

To: Texas Federalist
Senator Wayne Allard (R-CO) has introduced a much-needed Bill (the Religious Liberties Restoration Act, S.1558) that is designed to limit the jurisdiction of the Federal Courts in matters of religious freedom; using Article 3, Section 2, of the Constitution.

Representative Chip Pickering (R-MS) is sponsoring the House version (the Safeguarding Our Religious Liberties Act, H.R. 3190).

182 posted on 11/11/2003 2:20:11 PM PST by EternalVigilance
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 177 | View Replies]

To: farmer18th
On the influence of Roman law on the Common Law of England.

Of course, we know where the Constitution came from, and it wasn't Deuteronomy.

183 posted on 11/11/2003 2:22:35 PM PST by Chancellor Palpatine
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 125 | View Replies]

To: Texas Federalist
Since you don't like the overly broad nature of my statement, let me narrow it. It is not a good idea to tell the judge that it doesn't matter how they rule because you are not going to abide by their ruling anyway.

Moore, the judge, is well aware of this. Anyone with an ounce of legal sense can see that he lost this case on purpose. He then purposefully filed an out of time motion to stay the execution of the order, and pursued an appeal of his untimely motion all the way to SCOTUS, so he could get a little news coverage. He deserves neither sympathy nor support. This entire case is nothing more than the use of the legal system for self-aggrandizement.

184 posted on 11/11/2003 2:23:19 PM PST by lugsoul (And I threw down my enemy and smote his ruin on the mountainside)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 174 | View Replies]

To: Chancellor Palpatine
Is God really so pathetic that He requires the aid of government to advance?

God requires no aid. Your statement asserts that which is intrinsically illogical. You should know better than that.

The debate is about whether we need aid.
185 posted on 11/11/2003 2:23:53 PM PST by farmer18th
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 179 | View Replies]

To: farmer18th
So you would steal from the pocket of those who don't follow your faith, in order to advance your faith.

What makes you different from any other thief?

186 posted on 11/11/2003 2:25:44 PM PST by Chancellor Palpatine
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 185 | View Replies]

To: jimt
So when a rogue judge tries to advance his religion using his state office, he gets slapped down.

"Advancing a religion" and "making a law" are not synonymous. The First Amendment doesn't prohibit "advancing a religion", as long as no law was made in doing so.

187 posted on 11/11/2003 2:25:53 PM PST by usadave
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 170 | View Replies]

To: Chancellor Palpatine
What makes you different from any other thief?

Tax revenue, raised by consent of the governed, is not theft. Perhaps I could remind you though, that the placement of the ten commandments is common to the vast majority of American faith traditions. Those who object do so out of a misunderstanding of the establishment cause (Jefferson used federal dollars to pay for Indian bibles) or because they are moral anarchists. Which group do you fall into?
188 posted on 11/11/2003 2:32:19 PM PST by farmer18th
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 186 | View Replies]

To: lugsoul
The order and judgment are irrelevant if the executive branch doesn't enforce the order or the legislative branch withholds funding from the executive branch like they did.
189 posted on 11/11/2003 2:33:02 PM PST by Texas Federalist
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 181 | View Replies]

To: EternalVigilance
Great! Thanks for the info. I'll keep myself updated on the progress of these!
190 posted on 11/11/2003 2:34:04 PM PST by Texas Federalist
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 182 | View Replies]

To: Texas Federalist
They are both in their respective Judiciary Committees at present. That is where the pressure needs to be applied now, especially on the Chairmen; Senator Orrin Hatch and Representative Jim Sensenbrenner.
191 posted on 11/11/2003 2:36:40 PM PST by EternalVigilance
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 190 | View Replies]

To: farmer18th
As a woefully inadequate and sinful Christian of a more contemplative branch of Christendom, I don't like pharisaic displays of hick theology, and I look upon somebody picking my pocket to pay for it as nothing less than theft.

How am I consenting to that? What about the atheist? What about the Shinto practitioner, the Buddhist, the Hindu? Where is their consent?

192 posted on 11/11/2003 2:37:19 PM PST by Chancellor Palpatine
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 188 | View Replies]

To: Texas Federalist; EternalVigilance
Hey--

Are we outlasting these guys?
193 posted on 11/11/2003 2:38:14 PM PST by farmer18th
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 190 | View Replies]

To: lugsoul
I'll give you the fact that his appellate brief was simply awful.
194 posted on 11/11/2003 2:38:40 PM PST by Texas Federalist
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 184 | View Replies]

To: lugsoul
As people tout Judge Moore for the governorship of Alabama (and if so, Florida looks better and better all the time), I wonder if anyone has asked Judge Moore exactly how he plans on solving Alabama's budgetary crisis? Where's he going to cut the budget? Is he going to raise taxes? Being governor is a whole lot more than photo ops--and establishing his version of Christianity as the state religion of Alabama.
195 posted on 11/11/2003 2:38:40 PM PST by Catspaw
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 181 | View Replies]

To: Texas Federalist
Fines. That was the method. Which could be collected simply by withholding funds due to the state. Clean, easy and simple.
196 posted on 11/11/2003 2:40:45 PM PST by lugsoul (And I threw down my enemy and smote his ruin on the mountainside)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 189 | View Replies]

To: usadave
The framers of the U.S. Constitution could have made it easier for all of us if they had just included this line in the First Amendment...

Ha ha. Yes, the writers of the Bill of Rights would have saved us all a lot of time if they had ben more diligent drafting those short articles. They worked on them for only a day or two.

Those goofs even specified "freedom of the press!" I guess that means that radio, TV, and internet can be censored by the Feds. (Not!)

197 posted on 11/11/2003 2:41:11 PM PST by Looking for Diogenes
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 176 | View Replies]

To: Catspaw
He's just planning on winging it, handing out some plum state contracts to cronies in the televangism racket to reward them for donations and favors, all while blaming all the shortcomings on all those who have the audacity to oppose Him as being part of some Satanic conspiracy.
198 posted on 11/11/2003 2:42:44 PM PST by Chancellor Palpatine
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 195 | View Replies]

To: Texas Federalist
[The Framers] didn't leave us with a Supreme Court to interpret the COnstitution.

Oh that's right. They appointed you to do the job.

199 posted on 11/11/2003 2:43:05 PM PST by Looking for Diogenes
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 177 | View Replies]

To: Looking for Diogenes
Can you show me where the Code of Justinian is heavily influenced by Christianity?

From Book 1:

We desire that all peoples subject to Our benign Empire shall live under the same religion that the Divine Peter, the Apostle, gave to the Romans, and which the said religion declares was introduced by himself, and which it is well known that the Pontiff Damascus, and Peter, Bishop of Alexandria, a man of apostolic sanctity, embraced; that is to say, in accordance with the rules of apostolic discipline and the evangelical doctrine, we should believe that the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit constitute a single Deity, endowed with equal majesty, and united in the Holy Trinity."

"We order all those who follow this law to assume the name of Catholic Christians, and considering others as demented and insane, We order that they shall bear the infamy of heresy; and when the Divine vengeance which they merit has been appeased, they shall afterwards be punished in accordance with Our resentment, which we have acquired from the judgment of Heaven."

"Let no place be afforded to heretics for the conduct of their ceremonies, and let no occasion be offered for them to display the insanity of their obstinate minds. Let all persons know that if any privilege has been fraudulently obtained by means of any rescript whatsoever, by persons of this kind, it will not be valid. Let all bodies of heretics be prevented from holding unlawful assemblies, and let the name of the only and the greatest God be celebrated everywhere, and let the observance of the Nicene Creed, recently transmitted to Our ancestors, and firmly established by the testimony and practice of Divine Religion, always remain secure."

"Moreover, he who is an adherent of the Nicene Faith, and a true believer in the Catholic religion, should be understood to be one who believes that Almighty God and Christ, the son of God, are one person, God of God, Light of Light; and let no one, by rejection, dishonor the Holy Spirit, whom we expect, and have received from the Supreme Parent of all things, in whom the sentiment of a pure and undefiled faith flourishes, as well as the belief in the undivided substance of a Holy Trinity, which true believers indicate by the Greek word amounsioV . These things, indeed do not require further proof, and should be respected."

How's that?

200 posted on 11/11/2003 2:43:06 PM PST by jwalsh07
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 168 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 161-180181-200201-220 ... 521-539 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