[Tax-chick]

The state hasn't passed a law, either. This is about imposition of Federal power, what else is new?

Judge Moore's having the Ten Commandments up in the courtroom is a statement, in effect, "I'm a religious person while functioning in my official position." He could write those words on poster board and tape it to the wall, but it wouldn't be as decorative.

The opposition is aimed as his message, and in general at the presence of religious values in public life. This is the same fight we're having over the Federal judges - thought control by the secularists.

[lugsoul]

Well, you are just wrong. This is about Moore and his own stated goals. And its not in his courtroom. It dominates the rotunda of the judicial building and Moore refused to allow other "lawgiver" and religious displays.

I really wish some of the knee-jerk people on here would do a little research on Judge Carnes, who wrote the 11th Circuit opinion. If every Federal judge shared his conservatism, no one here would be complaining about Federal judges.

This is create-an-issue, courtesy of Judge Moore and his political ambition. Your blind and non-factual support of him only furthers his personal cause.

[lugsoul]

Oh - as far as passing a law is concerned, it is well-settled that a state can't act in a way that would be illegal if it passed a law to the same effect. This is simple, common sense. A state can't act in an unconstitutional way and avoid the legal issue by simply not passing a law justifying its actions. An example - is it constitutional for state officials to arrest and jail persons for practicing a certain religion, if there is no law against it?

[Woahhs]

You, my dear, "get it!"