Posted on 08/20/2003 3:36:00 PM PDT by chance33_98
Supreme Court Denies Judge Moore Plea For Stay; Midnight Removal Deadline Remains, Says People For the American Way
8/20/03 5:37:00 PM
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
To: National Desk, State Desk
Contact: Peter Montgomery of People For the American Way, 202-467-4999
WASHINGTON, Aug. 20 /U.S. Newswire/ -- The U.S. Supreme Court today denied a last-minute plea by Alabama Chief Justice Roy Moore to stay a federal court order requiring the removal of a massive Ten Commandments monument Moore installed in the rotunda of the state's judiciary building. The high court's decision not to intercede today does not necessarily indicate whether or not the justices will agree to review the case in the future.
"It is time for Roy Moore to end his constitutional game of chicken and agree to uphold the rule of law," said People For the American Way Foundation President Ralph G. Neas. "If he continues to deny the authority of the federal courts, other Alabama officials must take action. It is outrageous for the state's chief justice to declare himself above the law."
Are you trying to argue that the text of the Ten Commandments would be SUBSTANTIALLY different in a different translation? Would you expand that argument to include the INTENT of the Commandments?
Then he must defy it unlawfully.
Anarchists rule, except that's kind of an oxymoron....
The Hebrew translates as, "Thou shalt not murder", as opposed to "kill", which makes a subtantial difference.
Also, Dennis Prager points out that translating, "Thou shalt not carry the Lord's name in vain", suggests that sinning in the name of God is amongst the gravest of transgressions.
Two major Rabbinical organizations, representing over 1000 Orthodox Rabbis, today declared their support for Alabama Chief Judge Roy Moore in his battle to keep the Ten Commandments on display in the Supreme Court building in Montgomery, Alabama.
Lawyer groups, led by the ACLU, have demanded that Judge Moore remove the display, citing church-state concerns; and Federal Judge Myron Thompson has given Judge Moore a deadline of August 20 to remove the display. But Judge Moore is refusing to be intimidated.
Rabbi Hirsch Ginsberg of the Union of Orthodox Rabbis said: "The Ten Commandments are the basis of civilized society and the rule of law. It is no accident that legal testimony begins with swearing to tell the whole truth, while holding a Bible. Here, in New York City, many courtrooms have a plaque on the wall, right above the judge's head, proclaiming 'In G-D we trust'."
Rabbi Abraham Hecht of the Rabbinical Alliance added: "It's no surprise that the ACLU, a radical left-wing organization of ambulance-chasing rip-off artists, should object to the Ten Commandments. The Biblical injunctions against lying, stealing, and adultery must make them feel terribly uncomfortable."
Rabbi Yehuda Levin who is representing the two Rabbinical groups in Montgomery, Alabama this week, commented on a nasty New York Times editorial that referred to Judge Moore as a demagogue: "This is the worst kind of savage yellow journalism. The New York Times has lately been rocked by scandals, in which it has been revealed that senior reporters and editorial staff have knowingly fabricated stories and distorted the news. They have some nerve criticizing a moral, intelligent, and courageous man like Chief Judge Moore."
Rabbi Levin will hold a press conference on the steps of the Alabama Statehouse in Montgomery on
Friday, August 15, 2003, at 10:00 a.m.
After the press conference, Rabbi Levin is to meet with Chief Judge Moore to make a presentation to him on behalf of the Union of Orthodox Rabbis and the Rabbinical Alliance.
'Can't place that translation.
If taxpayer funds were not used to purchase and place the monument, I see no problem with it. If taxpayer funds were used, then the taxpayers need to be reimbursed from him personally.
He is not establishing religion, nor prohibiting it. A monument does not establish anything except a monument. It is not the law of the the land there.
The only logical explanation is that "Kill" is more properly interpreted as "Murder." And an injunction against murdering one's fellow man is not limited to Judeo-Christian morality, but transcends languages, cultures, and time itself.
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.