Lack of support stuns visitors [Pro-Moore demonstrators from out of town]

Montgomery Advertizer ^ | August 23, 2003

[LibKill]

There's nothing in the US Constitution about ordering the states to provide counsel, so I don't see how you think it's constitutional under the 10th. Maybe you can explain it to me.

Point and match. You're right, Gideon is unconstitutional.

So is the removal of 'the rock'.

[Pharmboy]

It all depends on what one interprets as the state "establishing" a religion. I would think the Founders did not want a state religion, and we all would agree, but would they agree to barring the Ten Commandments from the court's chambers just because it was also part of a religioun? And BTW, do you think the Ten Commandments should be removed from the Supreme Court building? Or the references to the Creator removed from the Declaration of Independence? Please try to be consistent when you answer.

I think the Founders would be stunned to see the eradication of any mention of Judeo-Christian principles or references from government institutions.

[Luis Gonzalez]

"Of the estimated 100 demonstrators who gathered outside the Judicial Building at 1 p.m., only a few were from Montgomery."

Well, there's your answer, the people of Alabama have spoken, and the silence is deafening.

[Arthur McGowan]

These idiots don't seem to understand the fact that the seperation of church and state was a concept proposed, not by atheists, but by men of some religious belief. They understood from the experience in Europe that a religiously neutral government was better than a government captured by one religion or another.

The problem with your comment is that it has nothing whatsoever to do with the issues that are being raised by Judge Moore. "Seperation [sic] of Church and State" is not in the U.S. Constitution. What is in the U.S. Constitution is "CONGRESS shall make no law respecting AN establishment of religion (i.e., a CHURCH established by Congress)..." Judge Moore is not CONGRESS. Neither is he attempting to establish a CHURCH, though there is nothing in the U.S. Constitution that prohibits Alabama from establishing a state church. The Supreme Court of Alabama is not CONGRESS. The government of the State of Alabama is not CONGRESS. Therefore, the words "Congress shall make no law" in the U.S. Constitution place no limit whatsoever on any action that may be taken by anyone in the government of the State of Alabama.

Roy Moore is challenging the phony "Incorporation Doctrine"--which is not in the U.S. Constitution, either, but was fabricated by the U.S. Supreme Court in 1869.

The "Incorporation Doctrine" was and is a tool for one massive power grab after another by the federal government, principally the U.S. Supreme Court. Using this bogus device, the Supreme Court has taken over control of schools, usurped countless powers of State governments, and commanded the States to permit the slaughter of 45 million babies.

The liberals know what's at issue. Countless "conservative" people don't, which is why the crowds are sparse in Montgomery.

[Viva Le Dissention]

Well, as I said in my last post, fortunately for us, the 14th Amendment rolled around, and we've got Gideon, and it's for the better, I think everyone would agree.

Original intent just plain doesn't work, because there are issues and concepts today that simply could not be fathomed in the 18th Century. Proliferation of commerical speech, the Internet, women's rights, civil rights, etc.

Like I said before, original intent is a nice reference and maybe a good starting point, but it's certainly not the Alpha Omega of constitutional interpretation.

[george wythe]

Judge posts Ten Commandments in courtroom; Hindus "not invited" to pray before his sessions

Judge Roy Moore displays a plaque of the Christian Ten Commandments in his courtroom and opens sessions with prayer. And the judge, a Baptist whose fight to keep religion in his courtroom has inspired a national rally, invites others to pray with him--as long as they're not Muslims, Hindus or Buddhists. "They do not acknowledge the God of the holy Bible on which this country was founded," Moore says.

Not all of Moore's supporters are aware that he draws a firm line against inviting anyone outside the Judeo-Christian tradition to conduct the prayers in his courtroom. "My duty under the Constitution is to acknowledge the Judeo-Christian God," not the gods of other faiths, Moore said. "We are not a nation founded upon the Hindu god or Buddha." Only Christians have been invited to lead the prayers, but the judge's clerk, Scott Barnett, said he did try to contact a local rabbi but couldn't reach him. While Moore would not invite representatives of other religions, he would not stop them. "That's their right," Moore said.

[Luis Gonzalez]

They LIKE the wall of separation, the problem being that a one-sided wall is an impossible feat of engineering.

[george wythe]

Interview with Judicial Watch

Moore: Well it’s not about the Ten Commandments at all. It’s about the source of the Ten Commandments that is the issue in controversy. Whether or not the state in general, the state of Alabama, or the US government can acknowledge the God of the Holy Scriptures, the Judeo-Christian God on which this nation was founded and with which our laws are based.

It’s not about the Ten Commandments because the Judge said that the Ten Commandments are a basic source of our moral foundation and our forefathers looked to them for guidance. But he said we crossed the line when we acknowledged the Judeo-Christian God.

[dsc]

"They LIKE the wall of separation, the problem being that a one-sided wall is an impossible feat of engineering."

Impossible in engineering, perhaps, but this isn't engineering.

America did a really good job of maintaining a one-way flow of influence until around the 60s.

[dsc]

"Proliferation of commerical speech, the Internet, women's rights, civil rights, etc."

With the exception of the Internet, all those issues existed well before the 18th century, and the Internet is really just another form of speech, which also predated the constitution.

The mechanism for amendng the constitution is spelled out therein. Unless and until it is amended, it means just what it says, no more and no less.

[dsc]

"Fortunately, however, the 14th Amendment trumps the 10th"

Just re-read the 14th, and it doesn't say anything about any right to counsel.

[Catspaw]

Moore's lawyers aren't from Alabama, either. 

From Alabama Attorney General David Pryor's response to Alabama House Minority Leader Jim Carns:

6. The state Attorney General has the duty to protect the state from wrongful interference by any party, including the federal government; what steps do you intend to take in this regard?

In accordance with my statutory authority to direct “ 11 litigation concerning the interest of the state” under section 36-15-21 of the Code of Alabama, J offered to assign attorneys from my Office to defend the Chief Justice when the lawsuits were filed against him. As you know, my Office has a fine record of success in the Supreme Court of the United States and the United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit. I also offered to appoint Jay Sekulow who has won several religious freedom cases in the Supreme Court, to represent the Chief Justice. From 1997 to 2001, 1 appointed Mr. Sekulow to represent Alabama officials in the Chandler school- prayer controversy. Together we won a ruling from the £leventh Circuit protecting student-led prayer. See Ghandler v. Siegelman, .230 F.3d at 1317.

The Chief Justice instead insisted that two private, out-of-state attorneys, Herb Titus and Steve Meichior, be appointed to represent him at no cost to the taxpayers. Out of respect for the Chief Justice and the separation of powers, I appointed those two private attorneys to represent him. Two assistant attorneys general in my Office represented Dr. Rich Hobson, the Administrative Director of Courts, who was named as a co-defendant in the Maddox case. Dr. Hobson was dismissed as a defendant several months before trial last year. Since then, my assistants have not been counsel in the cases. The day-to-day management of the litigation remains in the hands of the Chief Justice and his private attorneys. So far, they have been unsuccessful in their defense, and they have not requested my representation.

[Luis Gonzalez]

"...the establishment in question is not necessary for the support of Civil Government. If it be urged as necessary for the support of Civil Government only as it is a means of supporting Religion, and it be not necessary for the latter purpose, it cannot be necessary for the former. If Religion be not within the cognizance of Civil Government how can its legal establishment be necessary to Civil Government? What influence in fact have ecclesiastical establishments had on Civil Society? In some instances they have been seen to erect a spiritual tyranny on the ruins of the Civil authority; in many instances they have been seen upholding the thrones of political tyranny: in no instance have they been seen the guardians of the liberties of the people." -- James Madison, Memorial and Remonstrance

[george wythe]

Judge Moore says:

Judge Roy Moore displays a plaque of the Ten Commandments in his courtroom and opens his session with prayer. And the judge, according to the a report by the Associated Press, invites others to pray with him -- as long as they are not Muslims, Hindus or Buddhists.

"They do not acknowledge the God of the holy Bible on which the country was founded," Moore says. "My duty under the Constitution is to acknowledge the Judeo-Christian God."

The Catholic Church says [CCC 841]

The Church's relationship with the Muslims.

"The plan of salvation also includes those who acknowledge the Creator, in the first place amongst whom are the Muslims; these profess to hold the faith of Abraham, and together with us they adore the one, merciful God, mankind's judge on the last day."

[JavaTheHutt]

Of the thousands who rallied for Moore a week ago, the majority were from states such as Florida, Mississippi, Illinois, Chicago, Texas, Tennessee and others.

< sigh > public schools < /sigh >

[thoughtomator]

Bottom line is that the meaning of the Constitution is that religion may influence agents of the government, but agents of the government may not influence religion.

So, we've gotten it perfectly backwards now!

[george wythe]

Baptist Version	Catholic Version
1. Thou shalt have no other gods before me.	1. You shall have no other gods before me.
2. Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image.	2. You shall not take the name of the Lord your God in vain.
3. Thou shalt not take the name of the Lord thy God in vain.	3. Remember to keep holy the Lord’s Day.
4. Remember the sabbath day to keep it holy.	4. Honour your father and mother.
5. Honor thy father and thy mother.	5. You shall not kill.
6. Thou shalt not kill.	6. You shall not commit adultery.
7. Thou shalt not commit adultery.	7.  You shall not steal.
8. Thou shalt not steal.	8.  You shall not bear false witness against your neighbour.
9.  Thou shalt not bear false witness against.	9.  You shall not covet your neighbour’s wife.
10. Thou shalt not covet. . .	10.  You shall not covet your neighbour’s goods.

[george wythe]

Which version was posted by Judge Moore?

[yankeedame]

I see nothing in the Constitution to remove this display.

The 1st amendment provisions were written to prevent a "Church of America" in the style of "The Church of England".

I am going on the theory of 'original intent' here. The founders simply did not want a state religion. That does not mean that they were against religion in general.
----------------------------------
Amen!!

[Diddle E. Squat]

the majority were from states such as Florida, Mississippi, Illinois, Chicago, Texas, Tennessee and others.

I wonder if this brilliant newspaper writer would be kind enough to name the senators from and governor of the state of Chicago?