Justice Clarence Thomas GETS IT! (Vanity)

The crux of your argument above hinges upon the words of Judge Moore.

And my argument has a solid basis. If a judge stands up in public -- or during legal hearings on record -- and says that he can't enforce the state's drug laws, or that he won't rule against corrupt officials if they come before him in the court, or if he says that he will abridge citizens' freedom of speech with his rulings in the courtroom, then he should be removed. The question becomes how to do that?

Whereas the state of Alabama invokes the grace of God in its preamble, the federal government has no authority to "prohibit the free exercise" of their religious expression.

If you're unwilling to acknowledge that the Alabama state constitution does not specify which God that is, then I can't really argue with you. But since it is so majestic, let me repost what it says in toto:

We, the people of the State of Alabama, in order to establish justice, insure domestic tranquillity, and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity, invoking the favor and guidance of Almighty God, do ordain and establish the following Constitution and form of government for the State of Alabama

Furthermore, Alabama -- the farsighted state that it is, has a whole third Constitutional section on religious freedom:

That no religion shall be established by law; that no preference shall be given by law to any religious sect, society, denomination, or mode of worship; that no one shall be compelled by law to attend any place of worship; nor to pay any tithes, taxes, or other rate for building or repairing any place of worship, or for maintaining any minister or ministry; that no religious test shall be required as a qualification to any office or public trust under this state; and that the civil rights, privileges, and capacities of any citizen shall not be in any manner affected by his religious principles.

This is a rock-solid foundation on which officials of Alabama can stand as they defend their co-religionists' right to practice their beliefs and be free from paying taxes or fees in order to support any particular sect. It doesn't get any clearer than that. The real issue, as I've said before, is that pseudo-patriots think these implications aren't useful. This is proof-positive that they have no interest in defending religious freedom. They want to uphold Alabama as a Judeo-Christian state, and they'll do anything they can to do so. The same applies nationally, and this is why they face fierce resistance from Christians as well as other kinds of believers. Anyone who thinks his own particular God needs the government to be acknowledged personally by government is neither an American patriot, nor a democratically minded citizen. On technicalities, I have needed civics lessons from you. On the fundamentals, you are the one who needs to examine your ideals and intentions. Get it straight: we have legal protection against men like Moore from one end of this country to the other.

He is referring to the fact that removal would be in compliance with a federal decision rendered outside of its jurisdiction.

Since we disagree about the authority of the federal government, I would be willing to concede that impeachment of Moore would have been more suitable to the good people of Alabama. However, justice was served because a demagogue was removed and Alabama is once again safe from those who would establish the word of Jehovah above Vishnu as supreme in the state with their official language.

But why doesn't the state of Alabama elect another, more circumspect Christian supreme court justice who can admit that the State of Alabama's constitution and laws, as well as the American federal constitution and its laws were inspired by the 10 commandments? That's all that was required in this situation. Moore was either a fool or a demagogue or both. He also wasted hundreds of thousands of dollars of taxpayer money defending his untenable notion that the 10 commandments -- even the first four -- were the basis of Alabama law.

If a judge stands up in public -- or during legal hearings on record -- and says that he can't enforce the state's drug laws, or that he won't rule against corrupt officials if they come before him in the court, or if he says that he will abridge citizens' freedom of speech with his rulings in the courtroom, then he should be removed.

All I can say to this strawman is "Duh!". Find me a citation where Judge Moore says he won't faithfully discharge his duties as Chief Justice in a fair and impartial manner. I'll wait right here...

They want to uphold Alabama as a Judeo-Christian state, and they'll do anything they can to do so.

I won't deny that zealots exist. Moore wasn't one of them. He purposely picked this fight to STAND UP for the First Amendment. His other state officials backed him. They backed down in the face of a federal court order and reasoned that it was more important to follow a court ruling than to argue whether that court lacked jurisdiction to rule as it did. Moore lost not on principle but on expediency. It was a far easier task to allow the federal bench to have its way than to argue the foundations of our federalist structure.

I'm sorry. You're absolutely right. Judge Moore had no business putting up a monument that was religious in nature. It's very outside our national character. I guess it's time I got to work and joined the ACLU in their work. Let's see... where to begin?

Inscription at the Jefferson Memorial: "I have sworn upon the altar of God eternal hostility against every form of tyranny over the mind of man." Thomas Jefferson September 23, 1800

Washington Monument: The monument is an obelisk which is an ancient symbol in Egypt representing immortality.

The Lincoln Memorial includes the text of the Gettysburg Address underneath a mural of the Angel of Truth. It includes these words:

...that this nation, under God, shall have a new birth of freedom—and that government of the people, by the people, for the people, shall not perish from the earth.

Time to get to work!

ping

I'll wait right here...

No you won't. You'll keep insisting that Moore could hold up Judaic law as Alabamian and American law (yes, he said American -- that's me). You'll insist over and over that there is no danger to religious freedom or your personal interpretation of the preamble of the Alabamian constitution or the third section of the Alabamian constitution or the first amendment. None of those things mean anything to you.

I won't deny that zealots exist. Moore wasn't one of them.

He was one of the worst, and Alabamians should be proud that they have officials like those on of Alabama Court of the Judiciary defending their religious and political freedom.

You're absolutely right. Judge Moore had no business putting up a monument that was religious in nature.

Where did I say that? If I even implied it, I apologize. I have no objections to any display of the 10 commandments anywhere in our country, nor do I have any objections to prayer in schools, or to the word "God" in the pledge, or to any other symbols of Judeo-Christian beliefs. What I have repeatedly stated is that we all should object to men like Moore saying that our law is directly based on Judaic, sectarian, spiritual commandments. Our law is based on rationality, debate, and reason. That reason includes the deep faith that freedom comes from something we call "God" that is beyond ourselves. It in no way implies Jesus Christ, Jehovah, the Holy Spirit, or St. Mary.

I dare you to find any proof that our Constitution or the Constitution of Alabama proves that Judaic law is incorporated into either our national or their state law. As Moore failed in a blaze of inglorious demagoguery, you too will fail.

You'll keep insisting that Moore could hold up Judaic law as Alabamian and American law

One LAST time... MOORE DIDN'T DO THIS!

I'm done wasting time with you. You are the black hole of knowledge. No matter how many times I refute your idiotic rantings of Moore ESTABLISHING a religion in Alabama, you keep coming back... WITHOUT SUPPORT. I've supported my position through numerous articles and citations. You change the debate and start again with nonsensical allegations. Enough already!

Go back and read the quotes in #86 and tell me whether they are "better", "worse" or nearly the same as Judge Moore's. Better yet, don't tell me. Just read and learn.

Good day.

"It is a sad day in our country when the moral foundation of our law and the acknowledgment of God has to be hidden from public view to appease a federal judge," said Moore, suspended by the Alabama Judicial Inquiry Commission last week for refusing to obey Thompson's order. -- CNN, November 14th

Moore must be your light and inspiration, because you like him insist on saying that God was denied by the rulings that curtailed his rogue, unconstitutional behavior.

That's what he said, over and over. It's plastered all over the web. It was in the media. He said it in public, while testifying before panels and in defense of his nocturnal installation of the 10 commandments. You, like him, insist that removing the 10 commandments from his courthouse due to their association with God. They were removed because he failed to argue that he hadn't put them there to establish Judaic law over Alabamians. He was removed by his Alabamian peers because they agreed with the higher court's ruling and declared that he was in ethical violation of his duties to Alabamians. They were correct.

Of course this doesn't mean establishment to you. That's a hopeless argument with you. But most Americans understand this language. Men like you and Moore think that you're fighting tyranny. You think you're fighting for religious freedom. But your revisionist rejection of the ideas of the Enlightenment are in themselves advocacy of tyranny.

Your most egregious error is to think that Moore's fight was for religious liberty. It was anything but. The wall between religion and state is there to protect us, not to oppress. Moore broke it in the eyes of the higher court, in the eyes of his peers, and in the eyes of every American patriot who believes that religion is the domain of the individual and not the government.

Some excellent Madison quotes follow. I think they are quite relevant to our discussion.

[T]he Constitution and laws of the United States are declared to be paramount to those of the individual states, and an appellate supremacy is vested in the judicial power of the United States...
Freedom arises from a multiplicity of sects, which pervades America, and is the best and only security for religious liberty in America.
Disobedience or evasion of a constitutional mandate may not be tolerated, even though such disobedience may, at least temporarily, promote in some respects the best interests of the public.
When any court violates the clean and unambiguous language of the Constitution, a fraud is perpetrated and no one is bound to obey it.
I cannot subscribe to the omnipotence of a state legislature, or that it is absolute and without control;

Some additional loud and clear Moore-ist theocracy follows. When Moore says God, he made it clear he refers to Jehovah of the KJV. He said that over and over again. This isn't the non-sectarian Creator of the declaration of independence.

In homes and schools across our land, it's time for Christians to take a stand. This is not a nation established on the principles of Buddha or Hinduism. Our faith is not Islam. What we follow is not the Koran but the Bible. This is a Christian nation.
Many judges and government officials deny any higher law and forbid the teaching to our children that they are created in the image of an Almighty God, while they purport that it is government, and not God, who gave us our rights. ...in order to establish justice we must invoke the favor and guidance of Almighty God.

Compare this to Iran's constitution, section one, article two:

The Islamic Republic is a system based on belief in:

the One God (as stated in the phrase "There is no god except Allah"), His exclusive sovereignty and the right to legislate, and the necessity of submission to His commands;
Divine revelation and its fundamental role in setting forth the laws;
the return to God in the Hereafter, and the constructive role of this belief in the course of man's ascent towards God;

America is founded on the law of reason, not Judaic law. Moore's courtroom behavior, his public comments, and his refusal to obey state and federal authorities were anything but democratic.

"I'm sure you would agree that freedom of speech in your state is protected by the federal Bill of Rights."

That's true. However, the definition of "speech" is defined by the USSC, not my state supreme court. I, and 300 million other Americans, must honor the USSC definition.

However, he also pointed out that he did not consider the phrase "under God" in the Pledge of Allegiance an element of that ceremonial deism -- primarily because it was incorporated in the Pledge in the 1950s, but also because it was added to the Pledge specifically with the intent of identifying the United States as a "religious" nation (in comparison to the Soviet Union).

Also, it would make it convenient to spot any infiltrating Kohms, for their tongues would burn with fire if they dared speak the holy words.

"State government support for Congregationalist churches did not end until 1818 in Connecticut and not until 1834 in Massachusetts."
-- mb-soft.com/believe/text/congrega.htm

I don't believe the citizens were prevented from being a member of another church.