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

Skip to comments.

VANITY/ACTIVSM: Any Freepers organizing capital onsalught to protest removal of Ten Commandments?
Me ^ | 8/21/2003 | Me

Posted on 08/21/2003 12:58:35 PM PDT by YoungKentuckyConservative

I'm in rage over the recent decision to again "erase" our history in Alabama. I'm worried for Judge Moore. I'm worried for the protesters that were carried off to jail.

Hand cuff yourself to an "old growth" stump and you'll be "safe guarded" by the police. Tie yourself to the Ten Commandments and you go to jail. More logic from the left.

Are any Freepers (or can any) in the generally locale going to organize a national response? Perhaps something could be coordinated with a concerned talk show host (Glenn Beck seems willing to take media risks)?

I'm pi$$ed as hell and need a channel for my rage. Unfortunately, I'm a solid ten hours from the area and I'd only be useful in organizing a "push" down to an organized rally. Not being familar with the territory I'm also not sure where the best location would be. Perhaps flooding the State Capital would be appropriate?

And please, for the love of God, don't ban my posting privs for trying to do some good and get a "lit fire" organized. I don't need any unnecessary stress at this point. =) Hehe.

God Speed, Freepers.


TOPICS: Activism/Chapters; Constitution/Conservatism; Culture/Society; Free Republic; Government; News/Current Events; US: Alabama; US: Florida; US: Georgia; US: Mississippi; Your Opinion/Questions
KEYWORDS: alabama; commandments; freep; freeper; judgemoore; michaeldobbs; moore; protest; rally; ten
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-54 next last

1 posted on 08/21/2003 12:58:36 PM PDT by YoungKentuckyConservative
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: All
LINKS OF INTEREST:

FOX NEWS.com: "ALABAMA JUSTICES OVERRULE MOORE, ORDER REMOVAL OF COMMANDMENTS" (August 21, 2003) (Read More...)

AGAPE PRESS: "A PHOTO TRIBUTE TO THE 'TEN COMMANDMENTS MONUMENT'" (August 21, 2003) (Read More...)

ETHERZONE.com: "COURTS THAT HATE GOD" -Commentary by Dave Franklin (August 21, 2003)

FOX NEWS.com: "JUDGE RULES AGAINST PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE" (August 19, 2003)

GULF1.com: "BOTTOM FEEDERS" -Column by Robert L. Pappas, Col USMC (Ret) (August 18, 2003)

CHANNEL OKLAHOMA.com: "'IN GOD WE TRUST' POSTERS FINDING WAY INTO SCHOOLS ACLU: Posters Violate Separation of Church and State" (August 19, 2003)

BUSH COUNTRY .org: "PLEDGE ALLEGIANCE TO THE ACLU" -Commentary by Hans Zeiger (August 14, 2003)

TRADITIONAL VALUES.org: "PACIFIC JUSTICE INSTITUTE LOSES BATTLE OVER CROSS DISPLAY" (ARTICLE SNIPPET: "San Francisco attorney Vince Chhabria arrived in Ventura three months ago and began representing a small group of atheists known as the Freethinkers of Ventura. Chhabria threatened to sue the city if it did not remove the cross immediately. Brad Dacus offered to defend the city for free against this attack on religious freedom and an historic site, but the city decided to sell the cross to the highest bidder. Chhabria is still dissatisfied with the result of the city's decision. He demanded that the winner of the bid be banned from lighting the cross in the future and asked that the new owner be forbidden from rebuilding the cross should it need to be replaced.") (August 14, 2003)

TOWNHALL.com: "JOLTED!" -Column by Rebecca Hagelin (August 13, 2003)

2 posted on 08/21/2003 1:00:48 PM PDT by Cindy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: YoungKentuckyConservative
gee sounds like you are ready to go " 'merc ". lots of people feel the same way........
3 posted on 08/21/2003 1:01:12 PM PDT by AmericanInTokyo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Cindy
I appreciate the links, Cindy, but we don't have time to keep talking in America. We stand up now or we might as well sit down for good. We need action. We need it now. If you know of anyone or anything organizing a response, please let me know. I've been searching the web and I can't find anything.

We need a massive march. We need a massive rising. This is America that's on the line.

4 posted on 08/21/2003 1:24:36 PM PDT by YoungKentuckyConservative
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: AmericanInTokyo
gee sounds like you are ready to go " 'merc ". lots of people feel the same way........

But apparently not enough. I'm trying to avoid going "merc" while there is still a chance for reason and "power in numbers". It doesn't have to get that way if we don't let it.

5 posted on 08/21/2003 1:25:57 PM PDT by YoungKentuckyConservative
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: YoungKentuckyConservative
The black-robed thugs won't even let the public inside teh courthouse building now.

How about that. OUR building is off limits to us.
6 posted on 08/21/2003 1:27:27 PM PDT by rwfromkansas ("Men stumble over the truth, but most pick themselves up as if nothing had happened." Churchill)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: YoungKentuckyConservative
I'm pi$$ed as hell and need a channel for my rage. Unfortunately, I'm a solid ten hours from the area and I'd only be useful in organizing a "push" down to an organized rally

Yeah. That's courage.

"Hey, why don't the rest of you guys go get yourselves arrested while I sit here on my butt and cheer you on!"

7 posted on 08/21/2003 1:30:07 PM PDT by sinkspur (Get two dogs and be part of a pack!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: YoungKentuckyConservative
Forget Glenn Beck. I heard him on the radio this week ranting against what Judge Moore is doing in Alabama.
8 posted on 08/21/2003 1:34:40 PM PDT by Bizzy Bugz
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: rwfromkansas
How about that. OUR building is off limits to us.

So let's take it to the capital. Bypass the court house. Someone loally needs to get the details organized and the rest of us "concerned" parties need to organize local movements at churches, in our neighborhoods, on the radio, in the newspaper, etc. Get the word out.....

9 posted on 08/21/2003 1:36:57 PM PDT by YoungKentuckyConservative
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: sinkspur
"Hey, why don't the rest of you guys go get yourselves arrested while I sit here on my butt and cheer you on!" It will be awfully lonely when you're the last man they come calling for. Keep your tail between your legs, tough guy. =)
10 posted on 08/21/2003 1:37:29 PM PDT by YoungKentuckyConservative
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Bizzy Bugz
Forget Glenn Beck. I heard him on the radio this week ranting against what Judge Moore is doing in Alabama.

Hmmm. I heard him discussing the argument that Judge Moore should obey the law, but I wouldn't say he was ranting against him. Fine. Envoke the powers of Michael Savage and let's see how stirred up we can get this event. =)

11 posted on 08/21/2003 1:38:28 PM PDT by YoungKentuckyConservative
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: YoungKentuckyConservative
In less time than is required to watch a football or baseball game (with commercials) the following can be read:
  1. Congress, the Court, and the Constitution
  2.  Ten Commandments Defense Act of 2003
  3. Religious Freedom Restoration Act

If you agree with the above, request that your representatives do likewise.

12 posted on 08/21/2003 1:38:52 PM PDT by Vindiciae Contra TyrannoSCOTUS
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: YoungKentuckyConservative
SUMMARY: Chief Justice Roy Moore's Case Defending The Display Of ...

The U. S. Constitution's guarantee against an "Establishment of Religion" is not violated by the placement in the Alabama State Judicial Building's rotunda of a 2 ½ ton monument inscribed with the Ten Commandments and a variety of other quotes. To the contrary, interpretations of the Constitution by a U. S. District Court in Alabama and a three-judge panel of the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals do violate the Constitution. The monument was designed and commissioned by Alabama Chief Justice Roy Moore in recognition of the moral foundation of the law.

  1. This suit should never have gone to court. The plaintiffs complained that they found the monument "offensive," that it made them feel like an "outsider," that Moore was "using religion to further his political career," that Moore was guilty of a "shameless political use of religion," etc. None of these highly personal, subjective feelings qualifies as a "case or controversy"--the only type of action that Article III of the Constitution allows federal courts to hear.
  2. There is no "law" involved in this case. A "law," by definition, commands, prohibits, or permits a specific action. Chief Justice Moore's installation of the monument does not command, prohibit, or permit any action by any party.
  3. There is no unconstitutional "establishment of a religion" involved in the monument's creation and placement.
    1. The Ten Commandments as displayed in the Judicial Building are memorialized as a fundamental source of American and English law and Western civilization. A "law" and its "source" are not the same thing. The Ten Commandments as the moral foundation of our law are supported by a variety of large, influential religious groups--evangelical Protestants, conservative Catholics, orthodox Jews, and Mormons (for example). If the Ten Commandments per se constitute a "religion," which of these "religions" is "established"?
    2. Interrelationships between law and non-legal values, reflected in the Ten Commandments, are inevitable. "Without religion, there can be no morality: and without morality there can be no law" (top-ranking British judge Alfred Lord Denning, 1977). Reflecting this truth, the U. S. Supreme Court has correctly ruled that "This is a Christian nation" (1892, 1931).
    3. A "pluralism" of fundamental religious and legal values can extend only so far. Both federal courts ruling against Chief Justice Moore argue for religious "pluralism"--asserting a "history of religious diversity" in America (the Court of Appeals) and branding any effort by law to recognize a single definition of "religion" as "unwise, and even dangerous" and as "tending towards a 'theocracy'" (the District Court). But the courts call for the impossible. "Values are necessary for the functioning of any society, and if they are not consciously adopted and publicly acknowledged, they will be smuggled in surreptitiously and often unconsciously. Values are always in real or potential conflict. And the state inevitably favors some values over others" (American historian James Hitchcock, 1981). Thus, American law can be based on the Ten Commandments or on a non-theistic value foundation. There is no alternative. And if public acknowledgement of the former constitutes "establishment of religion," so does the latter.
    4. All of the Ten Commandments have a secular significance to the law. Even the first four Commandments, most directly involving Deity, reveal that there are a Higher Authority and Higher Law to which human law must be submissive--the only sure safeguard against tyranny by human government.
  4. There is an unconstitutional establishment of religion created by the two federal court decisions.
    1. The District Court's assertion that the state "draws its powersfrom the people, and not God" is a religious position (an anti-theistic one). This assertion throws the power of the court behind a religious view in violation of the Establishment Clause.
    2. Both federal courts base their conclusions on the mythical "wall of separation" doctrine. This concept is not in the Constitution's text, is not supported by American history and tradition, and calls for the impossible (see #3b. and #3c. above). Because the mythical "separation" doctrine was created by the Supreme Court in 1947--156 years after the Establishment Clause was written, and therefore has no fixed content--federal courts have had to constantly re-define and create "tests" of "establishment." The most notably is the Lemon three-pronged test (Lemon v. Kurtzman, 1971). Since 1971, various Supreme Court Justices have exposed the true nature of this myth and the "tests" it has spawned, describing them as "all but useless," "mercurial in application," "unhistorical," "non-textual," and productive of a body of Establishment Clause law that is plagued with "insoluble paradoxes" and "unprincipled, conflicting litigation." Despite these fatal flaws in the "separation" myth and Lemon test, both federal courts utilize them as the basic standards for finding against the Chief Justice and the monument.

In a 1798 letter to American military officers, President John Adams declared that "The Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the governance of any other." Chief Justice Roy Moore's installation of the Ten Commandments monument in the Alabama Judicial Building recognizes this truth. Chief Justice Moore does not violate the U. S. Constitution. The two federal courts who have ruled against him do.

HOSTETTLER STATEMENT ON COURT ENFORCEMENT
FUNDING PROHIBITION

By U.S. Rep. John Hostettler, July 2003

U.S. Rep. John Hostettler delivered the following statement regarding his amendment to prohibit federal funds for the enforcement of a federal court ruling that ordered the Alabama Supreme Court to remove a monument depicting the Ten Commandments:

"Mr. Chairman, in Glassroth v. Moore, the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that the Alabama Supreme Court Chief Justice Roy Moore violated the establishment clause of the first amendment to the Constitution by placing a granite monument of the Ten Commandments in the rotunda of the Alabama State judicial building in Montgomery, Alabama.

"In the court's words, 'The rule of law does require that every person obey judicial orders when all available means of appealing them have been exhausted.' In this statement, Mr. Chairman, the court plainly shows that it believes itself to be the chief lawmaker whose orders become law.

"But, in fact, Mr. Chairman, this is inconsistent with both the Constitution in Article I, Section 7, and, in fact, Federal statute, which says that the United States Marshal Service shall execute 'all lawful writs, process, and orders' of the U.S. district courts, U.S. Courts of Appeal and the Court of International Trade.

"In reality, Mr. Chairman, the founders of this great nation foresaw this problem and wrote about it. And when they developed our form of government, they said this, according to Alexander Hamilton in Federalist No. 78:

"'Whoever attentively considers the different departments of power must perceive that in a government in which they are separated from each other, the judiciary, from the nature of its functions, will always be the least dangerous to the political rights of the Constitution; because it will be least in capacity to annoy or injure them. The executive not only dispenses the honors, but holds the sword of the community. The legislature not only commands the purse, but prescribes the rules by which the duties and rights of every citizen are to be regulated. The judiciary, on the contrary, has no influence over either the sword or the purse; no direction either of the strength or of the wealth of the society, and can take no active resolution whatever. It may truly be said to have neither force nor will, but merely judgment, and must ultimately depend upon the aid of the executive arm even for the efficacy of its judgments.'

"Mr. Chairman, given the fact that the judiciary has neither force nor will, it is left to the executive and the legislative branches to exert that force and will. We have heard tonight that the executive branch wants to argue the Newdow case that was spoken of earlier and may hear that the executive branch wants to argue in favor of the display of the 10 Commandments in that case.

"We will allow, therefore, the executive branch to leave these decisions in the hands of the judiciary who, a few years ago, concluded that sodomy can be regulated by the States, but most recently said that sodomy was just short of a fundamental right that is enshrined in our United States Constitution.

"But the framers of the Constitution never intended for the fickle sentiments of as few as five people in black robes, unelected and unaccountable to the people, to have the power to make such fundamental decisions for society.

"That power was crafted and reserved for the legislature, and one of the mechanisms that was entrusted to us was the power of the purse. Mr. Chairman, time and again I am sure that our colleagues are asked about ridiculous decisions made by the Federal courts, and many of us say that there is nothing we can do.

"Mr. Chairman, today, we can do something. We do not have to put our faith in the faint possibility that some day five people in black robes will wake up and see that they have usurped the authority to legislate and will constrain themselves from straying from their constitutional boundaries.

"Mr. Chairman, it might be suggested that we do not want this legislation to disrupt the judicial process in the interim between the Circuit Court of Appeals process and the Supreme Court.

"It is not my intention to do that tonight. In fact, I welcome the highest Court's review of this decision; and I say tonight that if they get it wrong, I will exercise the power of the purse again and defund the enforcement of that inane decision. Mr. Chairman, today is a great opportunity for us to learn the powers of the legislature vis-a-vis the judiciary.

"After this vote, Mr. Chairman, and the vote to de-fund the Ninth Circuit's decision to effectively remove the phrase 'under God' from the Pledge of Allegiance, our constituents will ask us, 'Congressman, do we, your constituents, have a voice in these most fundamental decisions, and we do not need to wait on a new Supreme Court Justice who may or may not, today or tomorrow, inject common sense into the decisions of the Supreme Court?'

"Mr. Chairman, we will be able to tell them, 'Yes, you do have a fundamental say.' And it is for that reason, Mr. Chairman, that I have offered this amendment to the Commerce, Justice, State, and the Judiciary Appropriations Act.

"This legislation is where we find any funding in any executive agency that would enforce the 11th Circuit's judgment in this case. My amendment would prevent any funds within that act from being used to enforce that erroneous decision in Glassroth v. Moore. I ask my colleagues to support the amendment

The U.S. House of Representatives has voted to withhold funds from any enforcement action related to a federal appeals court's decision that the Ten Commandments monument in the Alabama judicial building is unconstitutional."


By a vote of 260-161, lawmakers last week OK'd an amendment by Rep. John N. Hostettler, R-Ind., to prohibit any money in the bill funding the Justice Department from going to enforcement of the controversial decision. House rebuffs court on 10 Commandments

PaulRevereSociety (Michael Savage)

He has set up funds for this 10 Commandment case and other causes and all $$ goes to the causes:

Click for online conribution site: http://www.paulreveresociety.com/10CommandmentsOnline.html

22 posted on 08/20/2003 7:24 PM CDT by rface

13 posted on 08/21/2003 1:43:01 PM PDT by Vindiciae Contra TyrannoSCOTUS
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: sinkspur
"Hey, why don't the rest of you guys go get yourselves arrested

Nothing new about that sentiment.
Recall in Horatius at the Bridge how the Etruscans were real keen to go forward, except for those who would themselves be going forward to take on Horatius:

"Was none who would be foremost
To lead such dire attack;
But those behind cried, ``Forward!''
And those before cried, ``Back!''
14 posted on 08/21/2003 1:46:03 PM PDT by John Beresford Tipton
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Vindiciae Contra TyrannoSCOTUS
If you agree with the above, request that your representatives do likewise.

I think it is abundantly clear that our representatives don't get the job done. I do feel lucky with the representatives I have in Kentucky, but there comes a time and place when the people have to make their voices heard, over that of the politicians. It's time to take a page from Martin Luther King and "overcome", peacefully.

Who you going to vote for in the next election, anyway? The socialist (Democrat or a RINO), or socialist-lite (the Republican)?

15 posted on 08/21/2003 1:48:56 PM PDT by YoungKentuckyConservative
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: YoungKentuckyConservative
figure of speech, of course ( i.e., 'merc)
16 posted on 08/21/2003 1:49:07 PM PDT by AmericanInTokyo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Vindiciae Contra TyrannoSCOTUS
PaulRevereSociety (Michael Savage) He has set up funds for this 10 Commandment case and other causes and all $$ goes to the causes: Click for online conribution site: http://www.paulreveresociety.com/10CommandmentsOnline.html

And I have donated what I can spare. However, money isn't going to do everything. We need money and action. That's the only way to change things. I'm a bit dissapointed by the responses I'm getting on here. If Freepers aren't willing to stand up and do anything, surely the majority of America is likewise going to sit their fat butt down on the couch and eat a few more Pringles.

17 posted on 08/21/2003 1:50:23 PM PDT by YoungKentuckyConservative
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: YoungKentuckyConservative
It will be awfully lonely when you're the last man they come calling for. Keep your tail between your legs, tough guy. =)

Who's "they"?

As for "tail between legs," I'm not the one attempting to encourage other people to go get themselves arrested.

18 posted on 08/21/2003 1:59:26 PM PDT by sinkspur (Get two dogs and be part of a pack!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: YoungKentuckyConservative

Who you going to vote for in the next election, anyway? The socialist (Democrat or a RINO), or socialist-lite (the Republican)?

National Federation of Republican Assemblies does a good job of tracking/estimating the effectiveness of canidates most likely to attempt to achieve the goals stated @ www.freerepublic.com/about.htm

It's time to take a page from Martin Luther King and "overcome", peacefully.

Use every lawfull means at your disposal.

And resist tyranny of any in governemt with the "authority of lower officers of the state." A Footnote to the Political Theory of John Adams Vindiciae contra ...

19 posted on 08/21/2003 2:01:20 PM PDT by Vindiciae Contra TyrannoSCOTUS
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: YoungKentuckyConservative
Erase our history? You mean we didn't have any history until two years ago when this monument went up? That entire Alabama history course I took must've been a pure waste of time.
20 posted on 08/21/2003 2:03:08 PM PDT by lugsoul
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-54 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