Posted on 08/15/2003 2:30:08 PM PDT by Lurking Libertarian
Ala. AG Won't Help Judge in Federal Fight By BOB JOHNSON Associated Press Writer
MONTGOMERY, Ala. (AP)--The attorney general and Alabama Supreme Court associate justices are distancing themselves from the state's chief justice, who has pledged to defy a federal court order to remove a Ten Commandments monument from the state's judicial building.
Chief Justice Roy Moore said Thursday he had ``no intention'' of obeying the order to remove the monument from the building, where he moved it in the middle of the night in 2001. He has said that the Ten Commandments represent the moral foundation of American law.
Attorney General Bill Pryor said Thursday he would refuse to help Moore violate the court order, which could result in contempt fines of about $5,000 a day against the state. He declined to say what specific action he would take.
At the same time, Moore's colleagues on the state Supreme Court met to discuss whether they can invoke a state law that lets a majority of the nine justices overrule an administrative action by the chief justice.
Senior Associate Justice Gorman Houston said the justices ``will take whatever steps are necessary'' to make certain that the state of doesn't have to pay fines.
But the justices took no immediate action as Moore prepared to file his initial pleading Friday with the U.S. Supreme Court to stop any removal of the monument.
Meanwhile, attorneys suing to remove the monument filed a complaint Thursday with the Alabama Judicial Inquiry Commission accusing Moore of violating judicial ethics by refusing to obey a court order.
Supporters cheered Moore's claim that a federal court doesn't have the legal authority to make a state judge remove the monument.
``It's so rare to find someone who would make a stand,'' said Rick Scarborough, president of Vision America, a national association of churches and pastors who have supported Moore.
Pryor said he personally believes the Old Testament laws can be displayed legally but that doesn't change his responsibility as attorney general.
``I have a duty to obey all orders of courts even when I disagree with those orders,'' Pryor said in a statement.
Moore's declaration came six days before the courts' Aug. 20 deadline for the 5,300-pound granite monument to be removed from the judicial building rotunda, where it is in clear sight of visitors coming in the main entrance.
With Christian groups planning several rallies over the next week to show support of the monument, the executive director of Americans United for Separation of Church and State, Barry Lynn, accused Moore of creating a circus out of the Ten Commandments issue.
``If Judge Moore can't in good conscience comply with a lawful federal court order, he ought to resign,'' Lynn said.
Take your pick. Who you ask will determine your answer.
now answer this... What leads anyone to believe there was ever such a thing as ANY just law?
Scripture itself seems to indicate that "by the law shall no flesh be justified." The law of moses commanded the woman taken in adultery was to be stoned. Jesus ruled out the death penalty for that woman... apparently he, being God could rule justly, where mankind was not able.
We don't have an indisputable basis for human law being just. But we sure as heck fight about it a lot. No matter where YOU come down on fighting bout the basis, folks who are just as smart and learned will find room for disagreement.
Suffice it to say what is NOT the basis for just law... a stone monument in some court building in Alabama, kept by a Judge who is spending 125,000,000 to make a point that none of us can reach full consensus on.
the lemon test will be applied.
the supremes will either allow it to stay or not.
the judge will obey the ruling or face the appropriate consequences of the law he swore to uphold.
or the judge will get the ok from the supremes on the monolith as a testimony to history (ok by me really) with no endorsement of religion per se... and life will go on.
I can see the historical monlolith, art thingie, unless folks in his state have reason to believe it's a religious symbol... and win their day in court.
it is ridiculous... in some ways, understandable in others.
Salem Oregon, two years ago, would not light a christmas tree in the capitol, because it upset the tree huggers and wiccans...
WE need to resolve it once for all. Either everybody gets a monument or nobody does. endorsement of an particular religion, will never pass muster in the nation, though it may in the past.
We are no longer a homogenous mixture of various "christian" sects... but a multi-nationalist, multi-faithed pluralist republic.
...
#1) The printing of the CHRISTIAN BIBLE - the most dangerous book ever printed
#2) The 'invention' of GUNPOWDER - the great equalizer between peasants and tyrants
#3) A very big OCEAN - between the OLD WORLD and the NEW WORLD
...theses three things directly set the field for the construction of:
the CONSTITUTION of THE UNITED STATES of AMERICA - the most dangerous document ever written
GOVERNMENT BY THE PEOPLE - The Constitution provides the legitimate foundations of this country as a nation that is of the people and by the people.
We, the people, are the caretakers of the Constitution of the United States. Our charge is to pass on to future generations of Americans the rights and privileges that have been passed to us for over two centuries. It is a trust.
The notion that Supreme Court Justices, government officials or elite scholars are the only Americans who may offer worthwhile opinions on constitutional issues is far too narrow. At most, their years of study and review offer a snapshot view when put into perspective along side the centuries the document has existed.
The Constitution, and interpretations of it, belong as much to the proprietor of a small business, the homemaker, the college freshman, the taxi driver, and the newly naturalized immigrant as it does to any American.
We must guard this document and the Bill of Rights with vigilance.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
REF: Myths that this nation was founded with a design to separate govenment from religion and the people from their arms.
I wish that most of you could have seen what I have seen in my life about this world we live in - we all might gain an appreciation or how fragile this Republic by the People really is. And, we all might have a better appreciation for the entire Bill of Rights and REAL AMERICAN HISTORY vs. the POLITICALLY CORRECT AMERICAN HISTORY that is reflected in today's media, public schools and colleges across this nation.
Both my wife and I have served in our military in combat zones in Korea and Desert Storm and we do not take this country with its freedoms and its dangers lightly. Today, she is a Congressional aide and professor of History and I teach college Political Science and Sociology. There is no greater cause for either of us than to hand down to our 4 children the right of individual self government.
The notion that the founding fathers, in designing the Bill of Rights were correct in the importance of freedom of the press and freedom from an official 'state church' yet incorrect when it came to the necessity of armed citizens in the space of two paragraphs reflects ignorance or duplicity at best. Our constitution should not be trifled with.
Our forefathers knew well that kings made state churches to perpetuate their power and that tyrants understood guns are designed to kill. This is still very true. The founders never mentioned 'a wall of separation between church and state' until Jefferson was quoted out of context. Because the founding fathers knew that the experiment they were proposing was contingent upon a moral majority of Christian citizens armed with Bibles and Gunpowder!
They didn't mention hunters, or sportsmen, or home protection - they were well aware that guns were intended to equalize people - the wealthy or the poor - the powerful and the weak. Pity the person who actually believes that the powerful would negotiate the domain of governments, commerce, individual rights and liberties out of some sense of benevolence or righteousness.
They didn't mention Allah or Buddah or Darwin, or Krishna - they were well aware that it was the Christian God who intended to equalize the people - the wealthy or the poor - the powerful and the weak.
Even a foolish person who examines the line of time for 'civilization' will be presented with the cold clear fact that participatory power sharing between the rulers and the ruled did not occur until two events and one singular condition existed: Bibles - Gunpowder - and a New World separated from the old by geographical circumstance.
This concept of individual self government where the people are 'endowed by their Creator with inherent and inalienable rights' equal and unquestionable did not spring forth when it did without reason.
To assume that the people in all of the ages of this earth who lived prior to 1776 submitted to royalty or tyrants because of satisfaction or cowardice is intellectually naive. This new nation came into being because the means coincided with the concepts of the Enlightenment.
Even the most powerful king, chief, or dictator understands the usefulness of negotiation when confronted with an armed Christian citizenry that makes two things clear; #1) citizens are willing to kill to secure certain rights and #2) that they, the citizens, are willing to die in the process.
If this nation is to remain free for future generations, the rights of the people to arm themselves and to freely exercise their religion both privately and publicly, is much more than merely a right to be exercised. It is a necessity to freedom that the means of securing all the rights of individual man and self government be obvious and openly apparent to all who govern.
However, founder John Adams added a warning to all of us today with regards to our ability to suststain our independence: ..."Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other." October 11, 1798
I would suggest that anyone opposed to the BIBLE or GUNS in the hands of our citizens, review their early American history. If they do, they'll find that their rights to speak their minds freely owes much to the Christian Bible and the right to bear arms and the threat of death to tyrants provided only by a 'culture of guns' and the 'integration of Biblical scripture' in the hands of ordinary people who are free.
If a person truly loves liberty and freedom, the only thing that should be feared more than ordinary citizens who have the freedom to arm themselves is an armed government who is the only one who possesses arms, and a government who uses God to arm only themselves.
- Van Jenerette - www.jenerette.com
more thoughts...
"No free man shall ever be de-barred the use of arms. The strongest reason for the people to retain their right to keep and bear arms is as a last resort to protect themselves against tyranny in government."
"Independence can be trusted nowhere but with the people in mass."
"What country can preserve its liberties if its rulers are not warned from time to time that their people preserve the spirit of resistance?"
"The spirit of resistance to government is so valuable on certain occasions, that I wish it to be always kept alive."
- Thomas Jefferson
"Firearms stand next to the constitution itself. They are the American people's liberty teeth and keystone under independence."
- George Washington
"The said constitution shall never be construed to authorize congress to prevent the people of the United States who are peaceable citizens from keeping their own arms."
- Samuel Adams
"Hold on, my friends, to the Constitution and to the Republic for which it stands. Miracles do not cluster, and what has happened once in 6000 years, may not happen again. Hold on to the Constitution, for if the American Constitution should fail, there will be anarchy throughout the world."
- Daniel Webster
"We have no government armed with power capable of contending with human passions unbridled by morality and religion...Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other."
- John Adams
"A more beautiful or precious morsel of ethics I have never seen; it is a document in proof that I am a real Christian; that is to say, a disciple of the doctrines of Jesus."
"I have always said, I always will say, that the studious perusal of the sacred volume will make better citizens, better fathers, and better husbands."
Jefferson declared that religion is: "Deemed in other countries incompatible with good government and yet proved by our experience to be its best support."
POST SCRIPT:
Clearly, it must be understood that the concept of 'individual-self-government' was a unique one in 1776.
It's basis, just as with anyother form of human 'government,' had to have a foundation of legitimacy.
In our American case, the legitimacy was founded on the Judeo-Christian idea of 'free will,' specific moral boundaries, and individual 'self-determinism' with the 'citizen' being the architect of their own destiny.
Now, had the founders - instead of being products of 'Western Civilization' and Judeo Christian civilization - been, say, Hindu or Muslim, or Atheists; could the concept of each individual having specific license to rights; granted by natures GOD, not other men; and the idea of construction rather than predestination - have taken root and grown as it has here in America?
Bottom line: Even if you don't believe in God or believe in Chritianity, you are better off living within a system where the majority of people - and the form of government - believes or even pretends the Judeo-Christain God exhists and is the origin of man's rights.
The American Revolution must continue today as a Resistance to those who advise to limit GUNPOWDER and BIBLES in todays American society or the constitution of our forefathers. Freedom will DIE if they succeed.
Our Republic...If we can keep it...
Van & Katherine Jenerette �
The only way to square Jefferson is to understand that his actions on behalf of the federal government and those of the state of Virginia were different.
Cripes.
R-P's colors in full bloom!
Exactly.
And no doubt, those who work to purge our system and society of every trace of Judea-Christian values, if they should succeed, would not be very pleased with the result.
"Reputable" meaning secular humanist and anti-religion.
It's cheaper to drink hemlock.
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.