Posted on 08/17/2003 6:36:11 PM PDT by comnet
Thousands Rally In Support Of Ten Commandments Monument Moore: 'It's About The Acknowledgement Of God'
MONTGOMERY, Ala. -- Alabama Chief Justice Roy Moore told thousands of supporters Saturday that he would be guilty of treason if he didn't fight to keep a monument of the Ten Commandments in the rotunda of the state judicial building. Drawing cheers and shouts of "amen" at a Montgomery rally, Moore said his crusade to keep the 5,300-pound monument was not about bolstering his own political career, as some have claimed.
"Let's get this straight," said Moore. "It's about the acknowledgment of God."
Buses and vans from as far away as California brought Moore supporters to Montgomery for an enthusiastic rally on a hot and muggy morning. Evangelist Jerry Falwell and former presidential candidate Dr. Alan Keyes were among a half-dozen speakers urging the crowd to take back America from what Keyes described as the "unruly courts."
"We stand here today in a great tradition," Keyes said. "Not as our lying critics would have it in the tradition of those who defied courts in order to oppress and destroy fellow human beings, but those who stood against unjust laws in order to stand for rights of all people. This is where we stand."
The rally was organized after Montgomery Federal Judge Myron Thompson ordered Moore to remove the monument from the judicial building by Wednesday. Thompson and a three-judge panel of the 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals have ruled that the monument is an unconstitutional endorsement of religion by government.
Police would not estimate the size of the crowd, which appeared to be several thousand people, possibly as many as 10,000.
Falwell said Moore is right to defy Thompson's order if he believes he is obeying God.
"Civil disobedience is the right of all men when we believe breaking man's law is needed to preserve God's law," he said.
Evelyn Bradley, 73, of Norwalk, Calif., said she made the trip to Montgomery because "the Ten Commandments is the most precious and most important thing in my life right now.
"No judge has the right to tell us we can't post them," she said.
After the rally hundreds of people walked several blocks to the judicial building, where they lined up to view the monument inside. Some debated with about 35 atheists holding a counterprotest across the street.
"Civil disobedience is the right of all men when we believe breaking man's law is needed to preserve God's law," he said.
Then be willing to pay the price. I'll be more impressed when Jer does the civil disobedience...and pays the price.
Yes.
Why is it that just recently the liberals are trying to change things? Did you see the article the other night listing the 45 goals of the Communist party, that were entered into the Congressional Record in 1963?
It was frightening to read because so many have already come to pass!!
This makes sense. About a year ago there was a national story about a spirituality center being discovered in man's brain. It may be biologically unhealthy to avoid stimulating this region of the mind by prohibiting any acknowledgement of God's existence in the public square. This seems to go against the liberals' hedonistic credo: If it feels good, do it.
What I don't understand is this: If I were a liberal atheistic 'Rat, I'd endorse other people bowing to religion, as I would see it as mostly a good influence that helps preserve order in society. However, the libs do just the opposite. I assume that this is because: (1) religion jeopardizes their hedonistic agenda, and (2) libs are so damned narcissitic that they are unable to see the big picture of what's in society's best long-term interest and they're more interested in being "right."
Liberals are short-sighted sick people.
[T]he answer is appeal and if necessary amendment, not to defy the law and pat yourself on the back for it.
An appeal is underway. However:
We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. --That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, --That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.
No, we don't totally disagree. I'm a law abiding person. But if it comes to the day when we have to renounce God for man, then I will break the law, and I'm not a religous fanatic.
We had a neighbor with 25 dogs, 17 cats, and a pot-belly-pig in her yard next door to us. The noise and smell drove us and other neighbors to complain to the city.
Each time she was fined, she opted for a court trial. We went through about 8 of those in two years. She had two different lawyers, who lied their heads off in court. She also said that she 'had something' on the judge, so he wouldn't go against her!!
It certainly taught us something about the law and lawyers, LOL! Regards, Carol
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.