[dirtboy]

You must have an objection, then, to the Boston Tea Party.

Uh, dude, you're running in circles here. First you get after Pryor for not following the law when he was, and then you say I must have had an objection to the Boston Tea Party when I clearly stated twice on this thread that I wished Pryor had stood up to the feds. Please try to make your arguments consistent with what the other person is doing or saying.

[farmer18th]

Uh, dude, you're running in circles here

Not really. I think you failed to understand the point of the original post. We ARE a nation of laws, but when one set of laws violate a higher law, we have a holy obligation to disobey. Pryor just wasn't man enough--or Christian enough--to engage in the sort of righteous defiance that characterized Daniel, Cromwell, Patrick Henry, Samuel Adams, Bonhoeffer and thousands of others. Pryor belongs with those appeasers of history who couldn't rise to the standard of truth.

[EternalVigilance]

The First Amendment clearly and simply forbids the federal government from making any laws in this area. Ergo, it is the Federal judges who are the lawbreakers in this instance.

Those like Judge Moore who are actively opposing their lawless orders deserve our support and protection.