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

Skip to comments.

Ten Commandments on Display Has No Legal Standing
sierratimes.com ^

Posted on 08/24/2003 10:14:36 AM PDT by Timothy Paul

Ten Commandments on Display Has No Legal Standing By J.J. Johnson Please excuse the shocking title of this article. I will try to get past much of the rhetoric from both sides of the standoff about the en Commandments on display at the State Courthouse in Montgomery, Alabama. As thousands descend to Alabama's state capitol for prayer and defense of a 5300 pound rock, and legal scholars try to sort out the mess, many pundits wonder 'just what point is Chief Justice Roy Moore trying to make?' Well, here's one man's take on the matter: Despite all the historical documents from this nation's beginning, and despite everything we were taught from a young age, we are a more 'enlightened' people. We elected more 'enlightened' politicians who in turn appointed more 'enlightened' judges. And these all knowing, all powerful people, having more information at their fingertips than at any time in world history, have ruled that the basic rules of mankind that have been in place for at least 50 centuries have no place ; no legal standing in today's government.

...and that is the exact point Roy Moore is making.

The order to remove the Ten Commandments from public display at the Alabama Court Building is not the cause of a failed government, failed courts, or a failed people - it is instead, the result of it.

I will do my best here not to preach a sermon or sound like a right-wing zealot, but no one can tell me what is 'offensive' about those ten rules that are, in reality, the foundation of what was American law. But that's ancient history. We are more 'enlightened' today.

Being the greatest and most powerful country on earth, we don't need silly rules such as those ten. No, we have government today - which has become the new god. And we have finally come to a point where there just isn't enough room on the Grand Stage for two gods. Thus, the courts have consistently ruled in recent days that the 'Other God' must go.

And so, what if God does leave? What if he actually said, "ok, you guys win - and you're on your own"? That would make us a better country, wouldn't it?

Of course. And when folks like Jerry Falwell makes a statement on September 11 implying the God has removed his protective hand from us, we won't have to chastise him - since it would have been true.

And after such tragedies, we won't have national days of prayer, and prayer sessions in Congress while grieving over the dead because there will be no God to pray to. We told Him to get lost, remember? No, let us bow our heads and pray (and pay homage) to the New god of government. They will protect us from now on, and provide for all of our needs.

Let's not sing God Bless America anymore, since we really don't want him to. That's George W. Bush's job now. And let's remove "In God We Trust" from our currency, since we really don't trust him anymore. We've placed our faith in our money supply to Alan Greenspan.

And when it comes to religious symbols, we do our best to protect those in the war zone of Iraq, while throwing our own in the trash.

Makes perfect sense to me.

Word has it that a guy named Moses had gotten these ten rules straight from God himself. Even though e-mail wasn't around back then, God somehow downloaded them on to a couple of stone tablets. When Moses came back down from that mountain and saw the folks that were led out of slavery acting like too many of us today, he threw the tablets down, and they were forced to wander in the desert for 40 years.

But today, in the more enlightened America, we don't have to wander in the desert. We have military personnel to do that for us. And little by little, more will go and wander as well. You see, we have a new god now, and the whole world has become a desert.

So if and when we are plagued with earthquakes, violent storms, endless droughts, brushfires, or just people going crazy and shooting their co-workers or schoolmates, we'll call them "Acts of God", then plead to our new god (government) for our protection from all of these things. Yes, this new god is more to our liking. We can pray, and if the new god doesn't deliver, we can just vote him out of office (federal judges not withstanding). That Old God wouldn't let us do that.

Isn't it ironic that if everyone simply followed those rules, it would make not only that 5300 pound rock, but that entire building itself - irrelevant?

With the polls showing upwards of 77% of Alabamians, and the vast majority of Americans supporting the Ten Commandments being displayed at the courthouse, people are scratching their heads wondering, "why can't they just do what the majority wants?"

Answer: Because we asked for this.

We have long since slipped away from those tenants - and it's reflected in the people in government that represent us, enforce the laws, and rule on the laws. Yes, America - we didn't get the kind of government we wanted, nor the kind we needed. We get the kind of government we deserve.

We have become so 'enlightened' that we don't even know how to respect or enforce our own sovereignty. Millions cross our national borders illegally, and our leaders don't even have the will to call it illegal. As a result, we will eventually lose at least 4 southwestern states. I have all but given up trying to make it an issue anymore. We deserve it.

We have become so 'enlightened' that the only criteria for any judge to sit on a bench, despite all the other important decisions they have to make, depends on his or her willingness to sanction the killing of the unborn. Fine. We didn't want them to take the phrase "Thou shall not kill" seriously, anyway.

We have become so 'enlightened' that we fight to protect retirement schemes that we know will go broke soon, but that's okay since we've decided to let our grandchildren pay the bill. Then again, if they have no respect for that "Honor thy Father and Mother" thing when they grow up, why should they bother taking care of us?

We are so 'enlightened' that we find it acceptable to act pre-emptive, killing anyone we see fit to keep us safe, if we think they are a threat. Make sense, since we don't want God's protection anymore. We have to live this way now. We have enemies all around us and even within us we are told - because they envy us. They don't have the new god that we have, and they're jealous.

Gay Bishops are in, Boy Scouts are out, and sodomy has become a civil right, protected by the Constitution somewhere. Okay, I get it. According to our new god, the oldest industry on earth (agriculture) has become the most dangerous to the environment. And we all know that with all the craziness in schools these days, the last thing we need is prayer inside those buildings. Good thing we threw God out of there a long time ago. Just look at how much schools have improved since then.

Yes, for government's sake - let's get those Ten Commandments out of public view before something good happens.

And while we're at it, let's get all those crosses out of Arlington Cemetery. It's public property, you know. And tell all of our troops fighting overseas that worship service is history, turn in those pocket Bibles and as a matter of fact, they must all be atheists in those foxholes.

Let's do it right: Let us all come to an agreement that when the Bill of Rights was passed, they had no respect for any god, despite the fact that the Constitutional Convention was opened and closed with a Prayer to Almighty God. To Congress: Fire that priest we pay with our tax dollars to open and close each session of Congress with Prayer. We have a new god now, remember?

And one more thing: Let's not support Israel anymore, since their presence in the holy land is based on scripture, and our government's support would represent an 'establishment of religion'.

Hey ACLU and SPLC: Wanna take THAT one on?

Now, as for those people who have dedicated themselves to prevent the monument's removal, and those who have rallied to the cause - take a good look at them. That's what's left of the American ideal that was founded over two centuries ago - like it or not.

Make no mistake about it. If it weren't for too many trips already taken this year, I'd be there myself from 2000 miles away. Who knows - if the standoff in Alabama lasts, I may still be there. If I lived anywhere in Dixie, I would be writing this article from Montgomery.

Would I suggest others go? Let's put it this way: You don't even have to be a Christian, Jew or even a Muslim. God knows none of us have lived up the standards of all those rules, but it you believe the Ten Commandments should REMAIN the foundation on which this country is based, then take a drive down to Montgomery. Your fellow Americans are waiting for you.

And what about you, Mr. Bush? The silence from the White House is deafening. Is this only a "state issue" where the federal government should not get involved? If that were the case, we wouldn't be in this mess. I would not only pray for protection of the Ten Commandments, but that the President, during his fund raising travels, make a stop in Montgomery to visit with the Chief Justice, or maybe the people standing vigilant outside.

Odds are, they all voted for George W. Bush.

You see America: There is no sense looking for a legal loophole to save the Ten Commandments anymore, as God has no legal standing left in today's courts, government, or much of society. But the way things look from my piece of the world, perhaps it's time we invited Him back.

Just my opinion,

J.J. Johnson


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Culture/Society; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS:
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 61-8081-100101-120 ... 181-194 next last
To: evangmlw
Beautiful expression of religious prophecy, but I am a bit of a realist. I believe that we can and should draw lines in the dirt and fight for what we believe in.

The prophesy may be true in the end, but the bible also says that no man knows when that end will come.

I cannot just accept things. It is not in my nature to do so. I am not personally affronted by this attack of Moore, I am concerned for the roots of this nation. The very principles of it's existence.

While nations come and go, I want this one to test the notion that 2000 year reigns are over and this 200+ year old nation broke the mold.

Just my nature to be that way I suppose.

81 posted on 08/24/2003 2:47:35 PM PDT by Cold Heat (Nothing in my home is French!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 65 | View Replies]

To: evangmlw
This God has been under an all out assault in this nation for the past thirty years.

It is impossible to assault god.

As those who make up this society continue to assault the Creator, the more pronounced judgments will be.

It is impossible to assault god.

Denying God His rightful place in society will force Him to lift His hand of protection.

It is impossible to deny god a place in society.

911 was a Sunday School picnic, compared to what will follow, as this nation continues it's assault upon Him.

Who is this supposedly omnipotent being you are referring who mere mortals can assault? It sounds rather more like a petulant child.

82 posted on 08/24/2003 2:47:48 PM PDT by Pahuanui (When a foolish man hears of the Tao, he laughs out loud)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 65 | View Replies]

To: Pahuanui
It sounds rather more like a petulant child.

That perfectly describes the Biblical God. The things some people believe in!

83 posted on 08/24/2003 2:49:41 PM PDT by jlogajan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 82 | View Replies]

To: sinkspur
So, how do you explain Texas? Already litigated, and it was found to have a secular context.

Quite simply, one court has taken a more expansive reading of Lynch than the other. But don't worry the other will catch up.

To me, these cases are clear: no religious preference in public displays.

That would be Karl Marx' view as well. Karl Marx and current US law are coincident. Religion is banned from the public square. You might see that as desirable, I certainly don't.

Would you be OK with a Koran in a Supreme Court building foyer?

Of course. Nothing in the Constitution prevents the display of books in the foyer of the SCOTUS. Cripes.

Now if the SCOTUS began using it as precedent for opinions, I would urger them be impeached.

Just what is it that you are afraid of?

84 posted on 08/24/2003 2:50:17 PM PDT by jwalsh07
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 79 | View Replies]

To: jlogajan
Ha. I'm a lifelong Libertarian. I believe in minimalist government -- and certainly one that isn't out hawking a particular religious mythology.

No, you're a frog who whistles the Bridge Over the River Kwai merrily on as one after the other Federal Courts makes law and ignores the Constitution because thier usurptations are coincident with your ideology.

You're a big central government kind of guy. Maybe you need the three step plan.

85 posted on 08/24/2003 2:54:55 PM PDT by jwalsh07
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 80 | View Replies]

To: jlogajan
To the raving fanatic, atheism and religious neutrality look the same. They are not.

Yes, I suppose that is true. I have seen and experienced some of that. We do agree on that point.

Probably the reason that I do not belong to a church or any other group of like minded people. They tend to become single minded and vain.(plus a dozen other adjectives):-)

86 posted on 08/24/2003 2:55:43 PM PDT by Cold Heat (Nothing in my home is French!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 73 | View Replies]

To: jwalsh07
Just what is it that you are afraid of?

I should ask you that. Does your religious life suffer because some judge is not able to place the 10 Commandments in a prominent place in a courthouse, but can display them in his courtroom, or his office, in the same courthouse?

I haven't experienced one whit of persecution because the 10 Commandments aren't in the Tarrant County Criminal Courts building, or because I can't say a public prayer at a high school football game.

87 posted on 08/24/2003 2:57:05 PM PDT by sinkspur (God's law is written on men's hearts, not a stone monument.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 84 | View Replies]

Comment #88 Removed by Moderator

To: jwalsh07
You're a big central government kind of guy.

It seems to me that those who want government involved in religious expression are the big government guys.

89 posted on 08/24/2003 3:01:13 PM PDT by sinkspur (God's law is written on men's hearts, not a stone monument.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 85 | View Replies]

To: jwalsh07
:-) LOL!

I sense you have had some of the same frustrations recently as I have. Seems like a Libertarian Renaissance on FR.

90 posted on 08/24/2003 3:01:16 PM PDT by Cold Heat (Nothing in my home is French!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 85 | View Replies]

To: sinkspur
Check out what he thinks about Muslims, Hindus,
and Buddhists, and that they have no rights
in this country except those rights given to them
by the Judeo-Christian religion.

I'd have thought by Now....
that Everyone would have gotten You straightened out
on this Issue !!

.....THUNDER......

91 posted on 08/24/2003 3:05:59 PM PDT by THUNDER ROAD
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: sinkspur
I should ask you that.

You should and you may as soon as you answer the question I posed without a question.

92 posted on 08/24/2003 3:06:05 PM PDT by jwalsh07
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 87 | View Replies]

To: sinkspur
It seems to me that those who want government involved in religious expression are the big government guys.

Central government is the Feds. Another example would be the Soviet Duma.

Should the tenth amendment being excised from the Constitution?

Is government better the closer it is to the people or the further away?

93 posted on 08/24/2003 3:08:42 PM PDT by jwalsh07
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 89 | View Replies]

To: wirestripper
I sense you have had some of the same frustrations recently as I have. Seems like a Libertarian Renaissance on FR

A wire stripper with uncommonly good sense. :-}

94 posted on 08/24/2003 3:09:45 PM PDT by jwalsh07
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 90 | View Replies]

To: jwalsh07
Just what is it that you are afraid of?

That purpsefully and conspicuously placing a tribute to a religious artifact in a public place with the expressed intention of favoring its relgion over all others under color of gov't power, purposefully using this action to create a media-storm of publicity, expressing dubious, self-righteous outrage about this manufactured, contrived little dust-up and directly disobeying the law is being construed by charlatans and suckers as religious 'persecuion'.

Somebody get them a hanky for this ocean of crocodile tears.

95 posted on 08/24/2003 3:11:58 PM PDT by Pahuanui (When a foolish man hears of the Tao, he laughs out loud)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 84 | View Replies]

To: jwalsh07
Is government better the closer it is to the people or the further away?

Closer. But a mayor who advocates a particular form of religious expression is no more desireable than a President who does.

96 posted on 08/24/2003 3:12:55 PM PDT by sinkspur (God's law is written on men's hearts, not a stone monument.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 93 | View Replies]

To: THUNDER ROAD
I'd have thought by Now.... that Everyone would have gotten You straightened out on this Issue !!

So, Hindus, and Buddhists, and Muslims are second-class citizens? That's what you're saying, isn't it?

97 posted on 08/24/2003 3:14:51 PM PDT by sinkspur (God's law is written on men's hearts, not a stone monument.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 91 | View Replies]

To: jwalsh07
You should and you may as soon as you answer the question I posed without a question.

The only thing I fear is a theocracy, Walsh. Of any kind, under any religious banner.

98 posted on 08/24/2003 3:16:57 PM PDT by sinkspur (God's law is written on men's hearts, not a stone monument.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 92 | View Replies]

To: Pahuanui
That purpsefully and conspicuously placing a tribute to a religious artifact in a public place with the expressed intention of favoring its relgion over all others under color of gov't power, purposefully using this action to create a media-storm of publicity, expressing dubious, self-righteous outrage about this manufactured, contrived little dust-up and directly disobeying the law is being construed by charlatans and suckers as religious 'persecuion'.

Whoops, now you stepped in it. All those things are nice and believe me my heart goes out to you.

However, I have several questions for you.

Where does the Constitution protect your right not to be offended?

Where does the Constitution proscribe "media-storms ...blah,blah,blah?

And now for the big one, where does the Constitution create a Wall of Separation and who built it?

My senses tell me you are also a frog in the water pot enjoying the slow boil because you like the smell of frog stew. But I could be wrong.

99 posted on 08/24/2003 3:19:00 PM PDT by jwalsh07
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 95 | View Replies]

To: Nightshift
ping
100 posted on 08/24/2003 3:20:40 PM PDT by tutstar
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 61-8081-100101-120 ... 181-194 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