An Open Letter in Support of Alabama Chief Justice Roy Moore's Defense of the Most Important Religious Liberty and States' Rights Test Case in Decades Posted on 08/15/2003 4:06:45 PM PDT by cpforlife.org
An Open Letter in Support of Alabama Chief Justice Roy Moore's Defense of the Most Important Religious Liberty and States' Rights Test Case in Decades
(Please forward this important message to friends, family members, and fellow American Patriots)
A monument of the Ten Commandments placed in the rotunda of Alabama's Supreme Court building by Chief Justice Roy Moore, is the front line of the war over the First, Ninth and Tenth Amendment restrictions on the central government by our Constitution's Bill of Rights. Ordered by a federal court to remove the monument by August 20, Justice Moore has been warned by U.S. District and Appellate Courts that his states' rights argument will not be tolerated.
Judge Moore, of course, is rightly defending the original intent of the Founders, who drafted and approved the Bill of Rights, against erroneous interpretation by an activist Leftjudiciary, even as he prepares his appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court. This case is a major test case for states' rights and the so-called church-state "separation clause," and ultimately will determine the fundamental nature of government and the Constitution. To assess the importance of this case, consider this evaluation from 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals Judge Ed Carnes, who ruled against Chief Justice Moore: "If Alabama Chief Justice Roy Moore's Ten Commandments monument were allowed to stand, it would mean a massive revision of how the courts have interpreted the First Amendment for years." Indeed, it would.
Join fellow Patriots signing this Open Letter in support of Justice Moore, First Amendment rights, limited government and the sovereignty of the several states as guaranteed by our Constitution.
Link to -- http://patriotpetitions.us/openletter
If you don't have Web access, please send a blank e-mail to: Each e-mail sent to this address will be counted as one signature for the petition.
(Circulation of this petition is being sponsored by The Federalist, the most widely read conservative e-journal on the Internet. If you have not already joined the ranks of Patriots receiving The Federalist, we encourage you to do so. This highly acclaimed conservative digest of news, policy and opinion will be delivered FREE by e-mail to your inbox each week. Simply link to --http://www.federalist.com/subscribe/patriots.asp If you don't have Web access, send a blank e-mail to and you will be subscribed automatically.)
Founder's Quote:
"The States supposed that by their tenth amendment, they had secured themselves against constructive powers." --Thomas Jefferson
Copying and pasting quotes is as great a thing as the Internet. After we look up the relavant recorded quotes, we copy and paste them so as not to get the quote wrong.
Sure, they said it. But at this point we're often times left with a lot of Monday-morning quarterbacking about what the person may have really meant. In relation to even the last 100 years, we unfortunately have precious little info about most of the Founding Fathers & what they really thought.
Cutting & pasting quotes left & right does little to educate and often times mis-educates because they are often taken so badly out of context & it paints a woefully inadequate picture.
It also doesn't allow for evidence that a person may have later changed their mind or evidence that politicians then -- just like now -- say one thing & do another.
I mean, if recordkeeping, etc in 2003 was the same as it was 200+ years ago, people in the year 2203 might be left with the impression that Arnold Schwarzenegger was a conservative
That's all well and good, but consider what the consequences are if the supreme court sides with Moore. Do you honestly believe that the judgement by the current court will limit future "expressions of judges" to "icons of western thought and american history?"
Of course not.
Agreed...but Monday morning quarterbacking does not change the wording of the quote. If taken literally, as worded, and not subject to interpretation, the wording of the quote must stand, as is, on it's own.
Mondy morning quarterbacking of the Constitution has given us people who BELIEVE that the Constitution is an evolving document.
No one's going to believe Arnie's a conservative as long as that quote about being ashamed of being Republican during the impeachment trial goes down in history.
Well, that answers the question about drugs. How about gay marriage (if/when a state law gets passed) and assisted suicide? Again, those are both states' rights issues.
Maybe you are completely consistent across the board on states' rights. (I'll admit that I'm not & I think it makes me the same as about 99% of other people, whether they know it or not).
The USSC's ~job~ is to decide on [interpret] the constitutionality of laws, whichever level [fed/state/local] of government makes them.
Judge Moore says no. I say no. It will be a very sad thing if the Supreme Court again disregards their mandate, the interp of the constitution, and rules on how they think things should be.
You agree that the supreme court can intrepret our U.S. Constitution law, but cannot judge upon those of the states?
Not so. States are bound to our supreme 'Law of the Land'. [see Art. VI.]
It will be time to look for a different place to live.
If states are allowed to violate our constitution, there would soon be no good place to go.
In fact, I think the Constitution demands that.
All these suits are hard to keep up with.
Yeah...there's one in Ohio where some teenager and the ACLU are suing for the right to put up a giant statue of a penis because the kid says he's started his own penis worshipping religion. Even though he's the only member of it, he says it's his right to erect his statue alongside the Ten Commandments.
This stuff is why I opt for the historical/cultural argument whenever possible.
Actually, the suit in Ohio involves one guy in his 60s or 70s & the suit is to remove the Ten Commandments monuments totally, not to display his on the same grounds. A suit he filed after the school rejected his penis monument. (I have a feeling it was more to make a point instead of him being an actual....uh....penis-worshipper).
LOL...I sort of got that impression too, but you never know about people. The point of demanding he be allowed to erect his statue beside it was to have the Ten Commandments taken down. He found them offensive and didn't care what others thought. He therefore found an effective counter offense. (no puns intended)
Devious. Effective. Almost brilliant in a sophmoric way. That must be why I keep thinking it was a teenager.
Your views re: states' rights are the rare exception among many, including Freepers. (I don't mean that in a bad way, just an observation).
Which is why I tend to bring up the medicinal marijuana, etc examples whenever some people start talking about states' rights. Jim Crow laws are also a good example of throwing a firecracker into a discussion about states' rights.
Teenagers are a pain-in-the-ass but in a much different way. Their methods of being a pain-in-the-ass tend to not be so well thought out.
You'd be surprised at how devious and well thought out the plans of teenagers can be. Sometimes, their plans are even successful.
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.