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

Skip to comments.

Christians Prepare to Defend Ten Commandments in Alabama
CNSNews.com ^ | July 29, 2003 | Robert B. Bluey

Posted on 07/29/2003 7:17:32 AM PDT by microgood

CNSNews.com) - Two ardent defenders of the Ten Commandments display at the Alabama Supreme Court are growing increasingly worried that the monument's days are numbered with a federal judge's decision expected as early as Tuesday controlling its fate.

The Rev. Patrick Mahoney, director of the Christian Defense Coalition, and the Rev. Rob Schenck, president of the National Clergy Council, headed to Montgomery, Ala., where they laid the groundwork Monday to defend the monument.

"The eyes of the nation are on Montgomery," Mahoney said. "We are going to see a very strong, massive response should these Commandments be ordered removed from the court."

U.S. District Judge Myron H. Thompson is expected to decide as early as Tuesday on the fate of the Ten Commandments display. In a ruling last December, Thompson allowed Alabama Supreme Court Chief Justice Roy S. Moore to keep the monument in place until the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 11th Circuit heard the case.

Now that the 11th Circuit has ruled - finding earlier this month that the 2.5-ton monument was unconstitutional - Thompson is expected to lift his stay. There is a possibility, although unlikely, that he will renew the stay until the U.S. Supreme Court considers Moore's appeal.

Ever since Moore installed the King James Version of the Ten Commandments in July 2001, it has served as a lightning rod for controversy. Groups like Americans United for Separation of Church and State, the American Civil Liberties Union and the Southern Poverty Law Center all filed suit to have it removed.

Moore lost the first round before Thompson in federal district court in November 2002, then he lost a unanimous decision at the appeals court. Moore is currently preparing his appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court, which has no obligation to hear the case.

Tuesday is the first day Thompson can revoke the stay, meaning the monument would be removed 15 days from then or on Aug. 13. Moore would have little legal recourse at that moment, and therefore, his backers have vowed to protect the monument.

Schenck said many Christians have already contacted him and busloads of people from Louisiana, Minnesota, New Jersey and Florida are planning trips to Montgomery.

While Schenck expects most people to peacefully pray outside the courthouse, he said others would sacrifice arrest to prevent the monument from being moved.

"We certainly need several hundred people here to be effective; that would not take a lot of effort," Schenck said. "With several thousand, we could sustain this for a long period of time. With tens of thousands, we're almost assured to have some measure of victory."

Moore has indicated he has no intention of removing the monument himself. Schenck was with him on the evening of July 31, 2001, when the chief justice installed the Ten Commandments display.

Just last week, U.S. Rep. John Hostettler (R-Ind.) successfully inserted an amendment into an appropriations bill that bars the use of federal funds to remove the monument. While that bill hasn't been signed into law, Thompson would have to rely on the state rather than U.S. marshals if he didn't want to seek federal assistance.

Americans United spokesman Rob Boston called the congressman's move "political grandstanding" and decried the efforts of Mahoney and Schenck to ignore a federal judge's decision.

"If they want to hold rallies and engage in non-violent forms of protest, that's their right," Boston said. "But when the time comes for this monument to be removed, and I think that day will come, everyone has to understand that this country operates under the rule of law, and if necessary, we will pursue all legal recourses to have the court order enforced."

Boston said a demonstration defending the Ten Commandments display would be reminiscent of 1960s, when then-Gov. George Wallace stood in a schoolhouse door to block integration of Alabama public schools.

Larry Darby, Alabama director of American Atheists, said Mahoney and Schenck are contradicting Moore's message about the Ten Commandments.

"They are undermining one of Judge Moore's arguments," Darby said. "He says there's a secular purpose to this monument, that it's a moral foundation of law. Well, the people who are upset about this ruling ... what do they do if not go and pray like it's an altar."

Darby and a handful of atheists gathered near the courthouse Monday to counter Mahoney and Schenck's appearance in Montgomery. Their message stressed the waste of taxpayer money, and in particular, Moore's devotion to the cause of the Ten Commandments when he should have been serving the citizens of Alabama, Darby said.


TOPICS: News/Current Events; US: Alabama
KEYWORDS: patrickmahoney; tencommandments
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-24 next last
Could get interesting this week. I imagine the court will wait for a Supreme Court action as they want to delay the outcome as long as possible.
1 posted on 07/29/2003 7:17:32 AM PDT by microgood
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: microgood
SPOTREP
2 posted on 07/29/2003 7:26:29 AM PDT by LiteKeeper
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: microgood
Christians should applaud the removal of the Ten Comandments since Christianity is based on faith in the resurected power of Jesus. Judaism is based on the law of Moses.
3 posted on 07/29/2003 7:30:45 AM PDT by normy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: microgood
I agree. Civil disobedience has been used successfully at times throughout our history to alter the public conscience. Hopefully, this can be such a time.

Also, why is this display unconstitutional when there are numerous biblical references on federal buildings in DC which have stood for years?
4 posted on 07/29/2003 7:33:00 AM PDT by bereanway
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: normy
Christians should applaud the removal of the Ten Comandments since Christianity is based on faith in the resurected power of Jesus. Judaism is based on the law of Moses.
More to the point, the Bill of Rights protects the right to violate at least three of the Commandments.

A display of, or teaching of, the Ten Commandments in the context of a history of the written law, perhaps in conjunction with the Code of Hammurabi, the Magna Carta, etc. does not violate Separation. A government endorsement of the Commandments as a whole does.

-Eric

5 posted on 07/29/2003 7:38:04 AM PDT by E Rocc
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: normy
Christ came to fulfill the the requirements of the law, not to destroy the law which he explicitly stated would never pass away. The law is still the rule of conduct for the believer, to state otherwise is the heresy of antinomianism, which the church has fallen into at various times in its history.
6 posted on 07/29/2003 7:39:56 AM PDT by bereanway
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: microgood
""...everyone has to understand that this country operates under the rule of law"

sometime; and sometime it's law by judicial decree
7 posted on 07/29/2003 7:41:47 AM PDT by Texas_Jarhead
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: microgood
While that bill hasn't been signed into law, Thompson would have to rely on the state rather than U.S. marshals if he didn't want to seek federal assistance.

Thats OK - I kinda like the idea of a pretty much indefinite contempt sentence on a white trash grifter of an Alabama Chief Justice. He can't do any more damage from a jail cell.

8 posted on 07/29/2003 7:42:26 AM PDT by Chancellor Palpatine (...ignorance can be fixed, but stupid is forever...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: normy
Normy - you are wrong - the old testament is as relevant as the new testament. Gods laws are not changing or evolving. The moral laws provided in the old testament are timeless and can not be discarded.

I notice that you joined 07/23/03 - its good to have a liberal, like yourself, stir up discussion.
9 posted on 07/29/2003 7:44:53 AM PDT by sasafras (sasafras)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: normy
Christians should applaud the removal of the Ten Comandments since Christianity is based on faith in the resurected power of Jesus. Judaism is based on the law of Moses.

You took the words right out of my mouth. "Whoever is under the old law is under a curse, for it is written, cursed is he who continues not in ALL things, to do them."

10 posted on 07/29/2003 7:45:10 AM PDT by BSunday
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: bereanway
Did Abraham ,Isaac, Jacob, Noah live by the Ten Comandments,did David eat the show bread which was against the law of Moses, did Jesus recieve rebuke from religous leaders for breaking the Sabath (satuday). Does the Paul say if you break one you break them all and as far as I know Christians break the law every Sunday. Abraham commited adultery, Noah was so drunk he passed out naked and his son mocked him, David commited adultery and sent a man to his death to get his wife but God said he was a man after his own heart. All these including Jesus lived by faith so the law is not imputed because the just live by faith, the law is for the ungodly, dissobediant ond so on.
11 posted on 07/29/2003 7:50:08 AM PDT by normy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: bereanway
Christ came to fulfill the the requirements of the law, not to destroy the law which he explicitly stated would never pass away. The law is still the rule of conduct for the believer, to state otherwise is the heresy of antinomianism, which the church has fallen into at various times in its history.

Ephesians 2:15 Having abolished in his flesh the enmity, even the law of commandments contained in ordinances; for to make in himself of twain one new man, so making peace;

You like countless others, have taken Christs statement out of context. He essentially said, "I came to fulfill the law, not BREAK it." Much different than your take, which forces a contradiction with practically all of Paul's writings.

12 posted on 07/29/2003 7:51:04 AM PDT by BSunday
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: bereanway
"Also, why is this display unconstitutional when there are numerous biblical references on federal buildings in DC which have stood for years?"

Read the opinion. It is very clear on this issue - it even explains why the same Court upheld a 10 Commandments display in a Georgia court two weeks before this decision. In a nutshell, it is because this Judge displays his 10 Commandments in an effort to promote his faith over others and does so to the exclusion of other views.

13 posted on 07/29/2003 7:56:11 AM PDT by lugsoul
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: sasafras
Thanks for the welcome, I think thats the first time I have ever been called a liberal, my friends think I am a narrow minded conservative. I may be narrow but I am deep.
I never said the Old Testement was not relevent, I said the law of Moses is not relevent to a rightous man but it applies to those who live by them. the law of Moses is much more than the Ten. The Old Testement is relevent and Gods law never changes but the law of Moses did not come until the Isrealites were in the wilderness and it was given because of dissobediance. Did the law apply to the Isrealites including Abraham Isaac Jacob Noah Adam before they even knew about it?
14 posted on 07/29/2003 8:02:47 AM PDT by normy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: normy
As I understand this, there are no righteous men - except Jesus. All men have a sinful nature even from conception and can only hope to approach righteousness.

The law of Moses and the 10 commandments, while at one time were the law sent to us by which to abide by Yahweh, have taken a different role since the new covenant created by the death and ressurection of Jesus. That role is to act as a basis of our conscious while we continue to approach righteousness just as during the covenant of Moses and Abraham . I view this as an ever decreasing orbit (erratic in nature from our imperfection) towards godliness and righteousness. These laws are to remain for that purpose.

One interesting facet of the New Testament treatment of the commandments is the clarification that these laws can be broken even in the heart without actually doing the deed itself. This is one of the most enlightening aspects of Christianity: fight the influence of the old evil one by staying clean of spirit and clean of heart. Keep the laws - but keep them in your heart too. Beautiful.

I see no reason to remove the "10 in Montgomery" - I also see no reason to mind if this fleeting government sees fit to do so. The underlying truths and the covenants in place make this issue, in reality, inconsequential. Any effort spent protesting would be better spent showing the truth and beauty of Christianity to more people...

15 posted on 07/29/2003 8:32:02 AM PDT by Will
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Will
You need to read the writings of Paul more closely. The Law of Moses required a high priest, just as the New Testament does. Jesus is not qualified to be a preist, much less a high preist, under the Law Of Moses. So if you want to stick by your Ten Commandments then Jesus can no longer be your high priest. For where there is a change of law, there must also be a change of priesthood. See Hebrews, which was written to convince the Jewish Christians they no longer had to follow the Law of Moses. Also, how many wills can be in effect at one time? Answer - ONE
16 posted on 07/29/2003 8:45:54 AM PDT by BSunday
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: microgood
Christians arguing in favor of the Ten Commandments makes just as much sense as Jews arguing in favor of the Koran.
17 posted on 07/29/2003 8:47:58 AM PDT by BSunday
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: microgood
There's an article in Washington Times today about the House refusing to fund the removal of the Ten Commandments, if I understood it correctly. But I guess the Senate would have to do the same, which IMO is unlikely.

Carolyn

18 posted on 07/29/2003 9:49:37 AM PDT by CDHart
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: BSunday
The laws of Moses may have required a high preist to be administered to those of the covenant of Moses and Abraham but to those of the new covenant it doesn't require such. I don't recall just where written, but I understand that those laws are to remain a basis of conscience. After all , it is still the same G-d to those of the new covenant as to those of the covenant of Abraham and Moses (and the covenant of Noah before that as well). I could be wrong. I do need to read and study the Bible more. You could be wrong as well...
19 posted on 07/29/2003 9:56:19 AM PDT by Will
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: Will
The Law of Moses is not even valid anymore!

Colossians 2
13 And you, being dead in your sins and the uncircumcision of your flesh, hath he quickened together with him, having forgiven you all trespasses;
14 Blotting out the handwriting of ordinances that was against us, which was contrary to us, and took it out of the way, nailing it to his cross;
15 And having spoiled principalities and powers, he made a shew of them openly (ie the ordinances = Mosaical Law), triumphing over them in it.

20 posted on 07/29/2003 10:03:38 AM PDT by BSunday
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-24 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