[colorado tanker]

Wheter or not we agree with a ruling, if we refuse to abide by it, aren't we advocating anarchy? I thought we had to abide by all the laws, not simply the ones that we agree with. There are legal challenges that may be undertaken to overturn a lae or decision if they are truly unjust, that's what makes this country so great. Just a thought

I agree with you.

I am in complete agreement with Judge Moore's position that the Constitution does not prohibit the State of Alabama from displaying the Commandments. But it is fundamental to the rule of law that a valid court order be obeyed even if its wrong. For the State's highest judicial officer to ignore a court order is a very bad thing - what kind of example is he setting for ordinary citizens who disagree with a judge's ruling? He should take his appeal to the SCOTUS.

[aristeides]

You're assuming that the case law that state courts have to obey lower federal courts is correct. It seems to me that the correctness of those decisions is as open to question as the federal case law on the First Amendment.

[B Knotts]

He should take his appeal to the SCOTUS.

He already tried. They rejected the appeal.

So, now what? Is there ever a line which simply must be crossed? Or must we just accept anything the judiciary decrees? I don't know the answer; it just seems to me that this is a dark day for our Republic.

[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.