FOX NEWS: ALABAMA TEN COMMANDMENTS JUDGE SUSPENDED...

Drudge Report ^ | 08/22/03 | Matt Drudge

[Pokey78]

Orlando Salinas broke in a few minutes ago and announced this on Fox News.

[Sangamon Kid]

This monument is fast becoming an idol.

U. S. troops pulled down the statues of Saddam just months ago. Very powerful and symbolic. I'm not sure I'll have as much fun watching this happen on American soil.

[VRWC_minion]

You mean the Ten Commandments aren't even posted in Churches, yet fanatics want them posted in government buildings?

Because its not entirely central to faith,

Paul's discussion of faith and works in Romans 3 is one such passage. In verse 28 we read, “Therefore we conclude that a man is justified by faith apart from the deeds of the law.” Paul is talking about justification: Christ's death covering our previous transgressions. He is showing that we could never earn forgiveness.

[Frapster]

You and anyone else have the freedom and the right to defy any court ruling you see fit - none of us should be surprised at the consequences when we do. That does not make our defiance wrong nor does it make the consequences right - but at some point people have to make a stand even if it defies the rule of law... thankfully our forefathers felt that way and I'm glad Judge Moore does as well.

[f.Christian]

pinky lee ... you ?

[WOSG]

Come now, refusing to abide by an order you think it unjust is not 'anarchy' it is civil disobedience.

He did nothing different from what ML King did back in the 1960s.

[XHogPilot]

TomGuy, I believe you are far closer to identifying this skirmish than anyone else.

"It is no coincidence that this is happening in Alabama. The statue/10 commandments have been there for well over a year.
Alabama Atty General = Bill Pryor,
US Senate Judicial Committee fillibuster = Bill Pryor's appointment

[HostileTerritory]

The Appeals Court ruling addressed this issue directly. Judge Moore's own testimony provided the basis for differentiating his acts from that of other courts that post the TC along with other historical and religious images. This has been rehashed on FR literally dozens of times.

[strela]

What would be the difference between you and PeeWee Hermann?

A movie theater and a bottle of hand lotion?

(snicker)

[wardaddy]

no. you hit it and I was relieved.

This whole controversy is pretty contentious by nature.

Has JR done a poll?

[Donna Lee Nardo]

This damn Senate is as panty-waisted as the Senate that lacked the balls to remove clintoon. No change there... Pussies all except Senator LINDSEY Graham (don't want anyone thinking about that looser with the same last name) and a bunch of others.

[VRWC_minion]

Don't waffle, either it is the symbol of ALL HUMAN MORALITY and LAW or its just a rock. Can't be both to fit the argument.

How do you know this ? How do you know its not simply a display to show how superior Moses was to all the rest ? You don't without knowing the intentions of the artists.

Its the same thing with the confederate flag. By itself its simple color and design.

[Robert_Paulson2]

For what it's worth.
last time I talked to a kosher uncle...
six on friday till six on saturday was sabaath.

For those "moore addicted" east coast freepers who have been frantically posting in his defence since six o'clock in violation of the sabaath command for NO work whatsoever, including typing... it's time to submit to that well known and final penalty for sabaath breaking... so much for the supposed love of God's commandments!

If we don't keep the commands, what difference does the statue make? NONE. Whitewashed sepulchers.

This is why we no longer honor statues to commands we don't agree with. They are NOT our laws. God never established them in this Nation's Constitution. They are religious laws, and not secular.

They are not even Christian law, per se. Jesus never advocated the death penalty for working on the sabaath, or adultery, or failure to do this or that. Jesus honored the law by keeping it, not making stone statues of it.

[colorado tanker]

If that result was so obvious under the Supremacy Clause, what do you think Martin v. Hunter's Lessee, 14 U.S. 304 (1816) and Cohens v. Virginia, 19 U.S. 264 (1821) were about? They came out the way you want, because centralizing federalists like Marshall and Story dominated the Supreme Court. But a Jeffersonian Supreme Court would probably have ruled very differently.

Justice Story was a Jeffersonian and a Democrat, appointed to the Court by President Madison.

The result was obvious until the Virginia Court of Appeals decided to defy the Supreme Court in a property case.

You would not find lower federal courts ruling on constitutional questions like this in the 18th and 19th centuries because Congress did not give the lower federal courts federal question jurisdiction until this century.

Justice Story grounded his views in the Martin case in the views of the Founders, whom he personally knew, having been appointed by Madison, the father of the Constitution.

Story said in Martin: "It is an historical fact, that at the time when the judiciary act was submitted to the deliberations of the first congress, composed, as it was not only of men of great learning and ability, but of men who acted a principal part in framing, supporting or opposing that constitution, the same exposition was explicitly declared and admitted by the friends and by the opponents of that sytem. It is an historical fact, that the supreme court of the United States have, from time to time, sustained this appellate jurisdiction, in a great variety of cases, brought from the tribunals of many of the most important states in the Union, and that no state tribunal has ever breathed a judicial doubt on the subject or declined to obey the mandate of the supreme court until the present occasion."

[f.Christian]

Pride goeth before the fall ...

fools rush in where wise men fear to tread !

[wardaddy]

The Poll?

I'll answer that...no...not yet. I see we're still on McKlintock and Arnold.

They ought to do one.....this topic has been heavy traffic for the past week or so.

[WOSG]

So the ACLU gets Leftists to filibuster decent judges so the Leftist Judges can run riot ...

and THEN we wonder why "our side" keeps getting tripped up by the Judiciary. I dont mean this issue per se, look at things like prop 187 in Cali, or how the eco-extremists can get a friendly Judge to 'force' their views into policy etc.

harrumph. These Leftists have a scam going and they will NOT LET UP ON POWER without a fight. Let's not disappoint them!

[wardaddy]

I think the Senate is sort of like the Department of State. It reduces fine men and women to mediocrity and elevates milquetoast to celebrity.

[WOSG]

"It is interesting, isn't it, that the "rule of law" is so vigorously and rapidly enforced in this case, while illegal aliens roam the country, collecting government benefits and getting drivers licenses, with little to fear from the same judges."

BINGO!

[colorado tanker]

If so, that takes time and they may refuse to hear it.

That is correct. SCOTUS could dodge this if they want.

That is why the fight over judicial appointments in the Senate matters and why electing Republicans to the Senate matters.