Day Before 10 Commandments D-Day: Ambassadore Keyes on Hannity

[BamaG]

You've got him pegged. It is sad to see Freepers lining up and blindly supporting him without a critical eye.

I can think of better ways to spend my tax dollars than to advance his career.

Just wait, he will challenge Richard Shelby for Senator, or at the least Bob Riley for Gov, he is using this for publicity and publicity hounds like Keyes and Falwell are joining in.

[Chancellor Palpatine]

So?

[Vindiciae Contra TyrannoSCOTUS]

We are not a theocracy.

When you are finished reading all of post 39, see Ten Commandments Case Of Chief Justice Moore

[rwfromkansas]

Could you describe more of what you see as his arrogance?

If so, that is definitely a problem, though I struggle with pride myself.

[Chancellor Palpatine]

Keyes and Falwell - They, along with their grinning, grifting little goon friend Robertson were the first ones to blame the terrorist attacks of 9/11 on the American people. I can't forgive them for that - they're con men, grifters, doomcryers - all so they can rake off more donations.

[BamaG]

Let's just say temper tantrums and very spiteful towards those that he feels have slighted him. Very physically vain. He looks very well groom in all pics, don't you think? That's something he is quite proud of.

[BamaG]

Don't forget Robertson bending over backward to defend Charles Taylor in Liberia, calling him a "fine Christian leader"......and oh...by the way, Robertson owns an 8 million dollar diamond mine in Liberia.

[Chancellor Palpatine]

That would be the same Charles Taylor who was using 13 year old soldiers dressed in rags to terrorize his civilian population with random violence and cannibalism? The same Charles Taylor who was an escaped Massachusetts convict?

[jwalsh07]

Just wait, he will challenge Richard Shelby for Senator, or at the least Bob Riley for Gov, he is using this for publicity and publicity hounds like Keyes and Falwell are joining in.

Moore is certainly not advancing a theocracy but it could certainly be argued that Riley is when he argues that the Bible requires you to tithe to the states in the form of taxes for the poor.

[jwalsh07]

He looks very well groom in all pics, don't you think? That's something he is quite proud of.

Certainly damning.

[BamaG]

I am not a Bob Riley fan, and it has nothing to do with Moore, other than the fact that Moore might want his job.

I don't care what Moore's religious convictions are. He is paid to interpret the Constitution, not to advance his publicity machine (and not to advance the plaintiff's bar...look at the record, he is the worst for business on the court) If he refuses to obey a court order, he is unfit for the job.

[jwalsh07]

Well, you have animus toward Moore, that's clear.:-}

But it's not the heart of the matter. The heart of the matter is the following three questions.

What law did he make?

When did Congress enact it?

What religion was established?

[Aquamarine]

What law did he make?

When did Congress enact it?

What religion was established?

Those are some good questions!

[BamaG]

Here is my main objection, well said in an editorial from my local paper, the Montgomery Advertiser:

Defying order indefensible



As an American citizen, Roy Moore is entitled to his opinions on the law or religion or any other subject. What he is not entitled to -- and what is appalling for a person in his position to even contemplate -- is defiance of a court order.

For the chief justice of Alabama to flatly state that he will not comply with a court order -- an order that stems from a case Moore lost at the trial level and lost again on appeal -- is indefensible. A complaint was promptly filed with the Judicial Inquiry Commission, and rightly so.

The commission is an investigatory body in the judicial system and can refer cases to the Court of the Judiciary. There, a judge accused of improper conduct can be tried and, if convicted, disciplined or removed from office. If Moore persists in defying the court order, he should be brought before this court.

The deadline for removing the Ten Commandments monument that Moore placed in the Judicial Building two years ago is Aug. 20, so he has a few days to come to his senses and to recognize that his conduct is utterly unacceptable in a judge, that his actions threaten to undermine the integrity of the judicial system.

Alabama's Canons of Judicial Ethics require judges to "respect and comply with the law" and to conduct themselves "at all times in a manner that promotes public confidence in the integrity and impartiality of the judiciary." Moore plainly has not done that.

It was heartening to see more responsible public officials speak out quickly and forcefully after Moore's declaration on Thursday. Attorney General Bill Pryor, a staunch conservative and a man of deep religious faith, said he would not aid Moore in defying the court order. "As attorney general, I have a duty to obey all orders of courts even when I disagree with those orders," he said.

Moore has the same duty, but he has chosen to ignore it.

Justice Gorman Houston, the senior associate justice on the state Supreme Court, convened the other associate justices "to assure that the state of Alabama is 'a government of laws and not of men,' as our Constitution requires."

The associate justices, Houston said, "will take whatever steps are necessary to make certain that the state of Alabama and the Unified Judicial System of the state does not have to pay fines." Under state law, a majority of the associate justices can override an administrative decision of the chief justice.

Houston, another conservative, cited the famous words of United States v. Lee: "No man in this country is so high that he is above the law. No officer of the law may set that law at defiance with impunity. All of the officers of the government, from the highest to the lowest, are creatures of the law and bound to obey it."

One wonders whether Moore has ever read that case. In a statement read by one of his lawyers, Moore said Houston "does not understand the importance of this case to our state and nation."

What supreme arrogance. What an insult to a distinguished Alabamian who has had a long and honorable career on the court. Houston doesn't lack understanding; what he lacks -- and we applaud him for it -- is any tolerance for an individual placing himself above the law.

Justice Thomas Woodall, like Moore a Republican, said he was "disappointed" in the chief justice. It's hard to see how any lawyer, any officer of the court, could not be. Ours is a government of laws and not of men.

Moore is deeply, profoundly wrong in vowing to defy the court order. He has lost the case in court -- twice. He cannot simply will the outcome to be something else.

Moore would do well to heed the words of the Rev. Michael Thurman, pastor of Dexter Avenue King Memorial Baptist Church: "It's more important for me that people should try to live according to the precepts and principles of the Ten Commandments, rather than have a public display. I'd much rather see it lived out than to see the big fight and hoopla over a monument."

Sadly, the "big fight and hoopla" appears to be what Moore wants. Ten Commandments representations -- first a wooden plaque when Moore was a then-unknown circuit judge and now the 5,000-pound granite monument in the Judicial Building -- have been Moore's ticket to notoriety. He has capitalized on the reverence people of faith hold for these Biblical admonitions, unabashedly mixing religion and law in the sure knowledge that, at least in politics, the emotional usually wins over the intellectual.

For all his talk about the foundation of law, Moore clearly is willing to strike at the very foundation of the judicial system in which he serves.

[jwalsh07]

You and the editorialist are both intent on arguing the man when the point of contention is a federal judiciary morphing into an elite oligarchy.

You would both do well to keep your eye on the ball. I don't know Moore, can't argue for his character or against but I'd be more than happy to engage you in the nonsensical precedent of "separation of church and state".

Ask yourself this. Why do the justices cite a letter written by a President, Thomas Jefferson in judicial opinions when the primary author of the First Amendment was Fischer Ames, not Thomas Jefferson.

Food for thought.

[jwalsh07]

Those are some good questions!

Feel free, give it a go. :-}

Short answers are more than acceptable!

[BamaG]

Why should we obey Moore's court orders if he will not obey higher court orders? Should we all live according to our own interpretations, and not be accountable to law?

Everyone on Free Republic was angered (and rightly so) by the lawlessness of the clintons, and their lack of respect for the law......so why would we celebrate the same disrespect for the law and the court systems? We are a nation of laws, Roy Moore is not bigger than our system.

We are facing the biggest fiscal crisis the state has had since the depression, and this con man wants the state to pay a contempt of court charge every day he grandstands?

[comnet]

Its time for the Christians to stand up for GOD in America

[Aquamarine]

I was waiting for BamaG to answer those questions but I'll give some short answers in the meantime.

What law did he make? None

When did Congress enact it? Never

What religion was established? None

Guess that's the reason for the personal attacks on Roy Moore and even then all they can come up with is that he cares about his personal appearance!

[BamaG]

I am proud to say that I am one of the few on this board that will have an opportunity to vote against him.