Skip to comments.
Ala. Judge Loses Ten Commandments Appeal
Washington Post ^
| July 1, 2003
| Associated Press
Posted on 07/01/2003 2:47:12 PM PDT by Lurking Libertarian
ATLANTA - A federal appeals court ruled Tuesday that a Ten Commandments monument the size of a washing machine must be removed from the Alabama Supreme Court building.
The 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals unanimously affirmed a ruling by a federal judge who said that the 2 1/2-ton granite monument, placed there by Alabama Chief Justice Roy Moore, violates the constitutional separation of church and state.
[snip]
Moore put the monument in the rotunda of the courthouse in the middle of the night two summers ago. The monument features tablets bearing the Ten Commandments and historical quotations about the place of God in law.
[click link to read remainder of article]
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonpost.com ...
TOPICS: Breaking News; Constitution/Conservatism; Front Page News; US: Alabama
KEYWORDS: churchandstate; roymoore; tencommandments
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80 ... 621-630 next last
To: Lurking Libertarian
That was no surprise. Bucks to donuts he twists the tiger's tail - ever to his regret, too.
To: Lurking Libertarian
That court is tyrannnical. How can they order another branch of govt. what to do?
22
posted on
07/01/2003 3:25:45 PM PDT
by
rwfromkansas
("There is dust enough on some of your Bibles to write 'damnation' with your fingers." C.H. Spurgeon)
To: Lurking Libertarian
[Amendment I (Ratified Effective December 15, 1791): Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of the speech, or of the press, or the right of the people to peacably assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.]
This raises the question. Is the judge, by placing the ten commandments in the courtroom prohibiting the free exercise of other religions? For all rights are equal until they impede upon another man's rights. This is why freedom of press is viable until the publication suppresses another's freedom of speech. If the answer to the above question is yes, the judge's ruling was what the Constitution of our great nation called for. Further evidence must be understood before making a hasty generalization, so I am off to study this case
23
posted on
07/01/2003 3:25:51 PM PDT
by
Derrald
To: Lurking Libertarian
24
posted on
07/01/2003 3:27:15 PM PDT
by
Catspaw
To: rwfromkansas
That court is tyrannnical. How can they order another branch of govt. what to do? What other branch are you referring to?
25
posted on
07/01/2003 3:27:52 PM PDT
by
Dog Gone
To: Derrald
Chief Justice Moore had the 10 Commandments in his courtroom before he was elected to the Alabama Supreme Court. This is a large chunk of engraved granite just inside the entryway in the State Supreme Court building.
26
posted on
07/01/2003 3:29:07 PM PDT
by
Catspaw
To: Derrald
I am off to study this case You can find a link to the full decision here (scroll down to 2:50 p.m. on today's date).
To: Kevin Curry
Now to replace it with a statue of two men engaged in anal sodomy.SCOTUS would approve it 5 to 4.
We are sure leaving our children a wonderful world. </sarcasm off.
28
posted on
07/01/2003 3:31:03 PM PDT
by
zip
To: muawiyah
Besides, it's really not a legitimate act of any governmental body or official in this country to decide what is or is not religion. Those judges may have their own prejudices and personal beliefs, but they have no right to impose them on the rest of us.
Does that mean you think we should all be able to start a religion and get tax exemption?
29
posted on
07/01/2003 3:31:25 PM PDT
by
KCmark
(I am NOT a partisan.)
To: Lurking Libertarian
As Michael Savage would say, the stench from the bench is making me clench.
30
posted on
07/01/2003 3:32:53 PM PDT
by
jpl
To: Chancellor Palpatine
Bucks to donuts he twists the tiger's tail - ever to his regret, too.After reading the opinion, the Court of Appeals is not kidding around.
31
posted on
07/01/2003 3:33:41 PM PDT
by
Catspaw
To: muawiyah
"That's your narrow sectarian belief. You have no right to use a federal court to impose it on me, and if you do attempt it, both you and the judges you mislead can fairly be accused of being bigots".
Ah, here we go with the worn out "bigot" label again. The Ten Commandments appear on the walls of the U.S. Supreme Court, and in the halls of hundreds and hundreds of other Courts, City Halls, State Legislature Buildings, and other public buildings. The U.S. Senate begins each daily session with the "Lord's Prayer", as given by Jesus Christ in the New Testament. The fingerprints of Christianity are all over the foundation, walls and documents of our government. From the 1st Continental Congress' Declaration for a National Day of Prayer, to President Abraham Lincoln's national holiday of Thanksgiving to God, to President Harry Truman's national radio address where he called the United States a "Christian Nation". George Washington also said that the "office of Christian is ever higher than that of Patriot". Bigot? I'm in some pretty good company. btw, the mere display of Christian or Jewish religious icons in no way forces one to convert or believe in them. I think your phoney "fears" are a cover for something you're too afraid to admit.
To: sweetliberty
ping. You wondered what are options are if all else fails, we may find out soon in Alabama. Something tells me that judge Moore is not gonna take the 10 Commandments Down.
33
posted on
07/01/2003 3:34:30 PM PDT
by
Ahban
To: Lurking Libertarian
I've read the decision-- it includes a strongly-worded warning to Judge Moore not to try to defy the court's order. Then let the asshat judges come and enforce their ruling.
34
posted on
07/01/2003 3:34:57 PM PDT
by
Spiff
(Liberalism is a mental illness - a precursor disease to terminal Socialism.)
To: Spiff
Then let the asshat judges come and enforce their ruling.After reading the decision, I do believe that's exactly what they're going to do if Chief Justice Moore does not comply with the court order.
35
posted on
07/01/2003 3:36:36 PM PDT
by
Catspaw
To: Ahban
I think he has already said he will not take them down. Whatever happened to the purchasing of the property they sit on by private parties?
36
posted on
07/01/2003 3:36:42 PM PDT
by
sweetliberty
("Having the right to do a thing is not at all the same thing as being right in doing it.")
To: sweetliberty
Whatever happened to the purchasing of the property they sit on by private parties? Kind of hard for private parties to buy the rotunda of the courthouse.
To: Lurking Libertarian
I thought it sat outside the courthouse, or was that another case? Or maybe I just misunderstood.
38
posted on
07/01/2003 3:39:57 PM PDT
by
sweetliberty
("Having the right to do a thing is not at all the same thing as being right in doing it.")
To: Catspaw
He's a moron. A dolt. An idiot.
Its farcical that he even defended it that way. And he is Chief Justice of the Alabama Supreme Court???????
To: Catspaw
After reading the decision, I do believe that's exactly what they're going to do if Chief Justice Moore does not comply with the court order. Robes and all? I hope they put it on pay-per-view. Do you think the judges can lift the granite by themselves or will they drive a forklift or something?
40
posted on
07/01/2003 3:40:48 PM PDT
by
Spiff
(Liberalism is a mental illness - a precursor disease to terminal Socialism.)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80 ... 621-630 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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson