Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Alabama SC justices cave, order Ten Commandments removed
AP on Fox News ^ | 8-21-03 | AP on Fox News website

Posted on 08/21/2003 8:33:17 AM PDT by rwfromkansas

Edited on 04/22/2004 12:37:00 AM PDT by Jim Robinson. [history]

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 181-200201-220221-240 ... 1,201-1,220 next last
To: jethropalerobber
You come off as a anti-Christian's caricature of a Christian. If that's you goal, consider yourself outed.
201 posted on 08/21/2003 10:09:29 AM PDT by stands2reason
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: smith288
I think the argument has been debated a thousand times.

Which doesn't anwser the question. I personally don't understand why it's a pity. But hey, I'm might just be a Christian who looks at it unemotionally. It seems to be an emotional issue for most.

202 posted on 08/21/2003 10:09:29 AM PDT by Protagoras (Putting government in charge of morality is like putting pedophiles in charge of children.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 187 | View Replies]

To: Zack Nguyen
But you failed to mention the enormous number of cases where the ACLU threatens small towns with bankruptcy unless they take down the Cross from their town shield, or the Ten Commandments from the town square, or a Nativity Scene.

That is exactly what they do .. they are also in a hunt to find the last remaining 10 commandment monument in Utah

Hunting down a monumnet is ridiculous .. why in the heck are they so damn afraid of the religion?

203 posted on 08/21/2003 10:11:07 AM PDT by Mo1 (I still hate Liberal Democrats)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 185 | View Replies]

Comment #204 Removed by Moderator

To: OXENinFLA
Is the ACLU now going to tell the Gov't it can no longer Pray before the start of Congress, and all references to religion on any Gov't building must be removed post haste?

That's a toughie...the argument that is being circulated is that based on the First Amendment:

(excerpted) Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof

Using this, the attacking view is that having the 10 Commandments (G-d's Law) in the on a government building (paid for by the taxpayers) is de facto endorsement of Judeo/Christian beliefs -- not quite the 'law respecting an establishment of religion' but close enough because the money that was used to construct the buildings and decorate them, money seized from taxpayers at gunpoint, includes athiests, Buddhists, and whatever other non-Christian belief you can conjure and that these peoples' monies should not go to paying for such things.

I'd just like to see this also applied to works of art that are used to decorate government buildings. I don't care if the place where I go to renew my driver's license has a sculpture in front of it. Instead of blowing money on art, hire more employees so that I may renew my driver's license in 15 minutes instead of an hour and 15 minutes.

205 posted on 08/21/2003 10:12:46 AM PDT by xrp
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

Comment #206 Removed by Moderator

To: Sloth
When were the Boy Scouts set on fire?
207 posted on 08/21/2003 10:13:42 AM PDT by xrp
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 162 | View Replies]

To: missyme
How can anybody in there right mind find the Ten Commandments offensive? That is what I am saying

If I was say, Hindu, and I was told that the Christian God is the only True God, and I would have to accept that to be on equal standing with those who believe in that True God, I think I just migh be a little offended.

So, in their plain text, I don't see why one should be offended. But that is not the issue here. Some want to Ignore Judge Moore's words and intent and act like this is an attack on Christianity. It isn't.

208 posted on 08/21/2003 10:14:01 AM PDT by HurkinMcGurkin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 200 | View Replies]

To: missyme
Not everyone subscribes to the same religious beliefs that you do, missyme.
209 posted on 08/21/2003 10:14:30 AM PDT by xrp
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 200 | View Replies]

To: Catspaw
Moore's spokesman, Tom Parker, said Moore was out of town for a family funeral but decided to return to Montgomery when he learned the monument had been walled from public view.

"This is an example of what is happening in this country: the acknowledgment of God as the moral foundation of law in this nation is being hidden from us," Moore said in a statement issued by Parker.

I bet his fellow justices just love him. Guess they bit the bullet, and finally decided that the support of slackjawed mouth breathers was too fickle to court anymore - and decided to do the right thing.

"This is a great hypocrisy," [Pastor] Hopkins said. "This is an assault on God. They're saying we're going to cover up God."

Pastor, you might think about looking at those Commandments about that idolatry thing. Methinks you aren't as up on that concept as you should be.

210 posted on 08/21/2003 10:14:40 AM PDT by Chancellor Palpatine ("what if the hokey pokey is really what its all about?" - Jean Paul Sartre)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 145 | View Replies]

To: beachn4fun
If you don't like one law, change it to something you do like.

I cannot just willy nilly make up law. I lack the robe.

211 posted on 08/21/2003 10:16:05 AM PDT by Skooz (Tagline removed by moderator)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 156 | View Replies]

To: Mo1
Hunting down a monumnet is ridiculous .. why in the heck are they so damn afraid of the religion?

Because religion is the highest authority in a clear majority of humanity as far as who people truly answer to. Destroy religion and what is the highest authority? That's right...government.

212 posted on 08/21/2003 10:16:05 AM PDT by xrp
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 203 | View Replies]

To: lugsoul
It goes like this. A state actor cannot take action in the absence of legislation if legislation authorizing such action would be unconstitutional.

Of course, whether or not something passes constitutional muster (such as the pledge of allegiance) depends upon the whim of judges who make it up as they go along.

While we're on hypothetical legislation, how's this one for you?

"There being no greater threat to life or liberty than exposure to Judeo-Christian concepts or artifacts, all public representations of anything associated with said beliefs or history (except for "works of art" which trash Christian beliefs or symbols) is strictly prohibited."

213 posted on 08/21/2003 10:16:29 AM PDT by talleyman (ACLU = Spawn of Satan)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 137 | View Replies]

To: lugsoul
These are not inconvenient statements from Judge Moore. I like them and agree with them. A careful study of our founding documents and actions of this country's founding fathers will reveal that this nation was indeed founded as a Christian nation with the Judeo-Christian God as its head. One small example: Thomas Jefferson was in charge of the newly formed public school system while he was president. He mandated that the Bible and a Christian hymnal be included in every classroom. Also back then just about every major public building in Washington D.C. doubled as a church building on Sunday, including the House of Representatives and the Supreme Court.
214 posted on 08/21/2003 10:16:44 AM PDT by Drawsing
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 181 | View Replies]

To: rwfromkansas
You know that little Supreme Court decision to uphold gay rights?

Next it will be to uphold gay mairrage rights.

Then it will be to punish any religion that counters that decision as "unlawful."

Then . . . .

215 posted on 08/21/2003 10:17:17 AM PDT by Happy2BMe (LIBERTY has arrived in Iraq - Now we can concentrate on HOLLYWEED!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: rwfromkansas
I'm sorry, but in all the reporting of the judges who "overruled" Judge Moore, no one has explained who the hell asked them!!?

On what point of law were they making a decision? What case? What court? What jurisdiction did they have on the particular case? Who submited the specific case upon which these judges just ruled? Upon what grounds did they make their judgement?

216 posted on 08/21/2003 10:17:52 AM PDT by Spiff (Have you committed one random act of thoughtcrime today?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: missyme
I have no problem with the last 6 (prod numbering) or last 7 (Catholic numbering).
217 posted on 08/21/2003 10:18:03 AM PDT by Right Wing Professor
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 200 | View Replies]

To: laffercurve
I think your terribly wrong, maybe no one religion does not have authority over the land, but the one and only creator does from the Old and New Testament.

We have never been a country that worships Cows, Idols, People, we worship the G-D of the Universe.

That is why we would never be a country that would Embrace Hinduism, Buddhism, or Islam. We are a Judeo-Christian Society
218 posted on 08/21/2003 10:18:03 AM PDT by missyme
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 204 | View Replies]

To: ConsistentLibertarian
I simply haven't time to get into this with you. I think that historically, the ACLU has done some important things for civil liberties. However, in recent years it has become far more hostile to religion per se as opposed to the establishment of religion, which is prohibited by the Constitution, and has rather consistently followed an agenda that can best be characterized as socialist and hostile to the original intent of the Founders. While was once a member, and contributed to the ACLU, now, if the lot of them were transported to Greenland (where they would be deliriously happy - I won't wish ill on anyone), I would not shed a tear.
219 posted on 08/21/2003 10:18:09 AM PDT by CatoRenasci (Ceterum Censeo [Gallia][Germania][Arabia] Esse Delendam --- Select One or More as needed)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 163 | View Replies]

To: inquest
I'm not a Christian (actually was once nonsensically an anti-Christian), and I rely on the facts to make my decisions, not other's opinions. I have come to the conclusion that ACLU is heavily biased against Christians. There's no other reasonable conclusion stemming from their actions.
220 posted on 08/21/2003 10:18:36 AM PDT by stands2reason
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 181-200201-220221-240 ... 1,201-1,220 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson