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 Well, here's one man's take on the matter: Despite all the historical documents from this nation's beginning, and despite everything we were taught from a young age, we are a more 'enlightened' people.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 ... 121-140141-160161-180181-194 last
To: Robert_Paulson2
You note how things exist today while ignoring their foundations.

You DIDN'T go back.

You DIDN'T go all the way back.

...and only 1 of those 10 Commandments is necessary to prove the point that they were part of the founding framework of Law in the US.

The justification from that standpoint *is* there...the justification for their removal *does not* exist.
181 posted on 08/25/2003 2:16:23 PM PDT by Maelstrom (To prevent misinterpretation or abuse of the Constitution:The Bill of Rights limits government power)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 176 | View Replies]

To: djf
True on both counts.

Congress can't make a law, and the courts can't decide what doesn't exist.

The government has no standing from the aspect of religion.

Strengthen your argument...
...the first Amendment protects that monument in 2 different ways, even as it bars the government from the actions it's taking.
182 posted on 08/25/2003 2:19:31 PM PDT by Maelstrom (To prevent misinterpretation or abuse of the Constitution:The Bill of Rights limits government power)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 180 | View Replies]

To: Pahuanui
Please, you're embarassing yourself in exposing your ignorance regarding legal matters.

LOL.

The subject of an individual Alabama citizen's right being infringed is irrelevant here.

Right, it's not about individual rights. It's all about collectivism.

If you can't see that, that's not my problem.

I have 20/20 vision. In fact it is so good that I can see that you have failed to answer one question regarding the state of Alabama's Constitution being violated.

There are some knowledgeable folks on your side of this debate but you ain't one of'em Pahuanui.

183 posted on 08/25/2003 2:23:27 PM PDT by jwalsh07
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 173 | View Replies]

To: Maelstrom
our laws (plural) are not based on the ten (plural specific) so if you can not show a multitude of our laws that clearly REFLECT all ten... sorry, you lose.

Our laws are NOT based on the TEN... and they clearly don't correspond... and you knew that.

Such dishonesty is apppaling.
184 posted on 08/25/2003 2:30:21 PM PDT by Robert_Paulson2 (roll the stone away... the tomb is empty... and there is no statue of the ten commandments inside.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 181 | View Replies]

To: Robert_Paulson2
ROFL!

You're argument is pathetic.
US Law is based on English Common Law which followed from the 10 Commandments.

You DIDN'T go all the way back.
You CAN'T

Laws change every day...more now than ever...their roots remain the same.

It's history, bud, it's over and done with, stop trying to change it.
185 posted on 08/25/2003 2:40:12 PM PDT by Maelstrom (To prevent misinterpretation or abuse of the Constitution:The Bill of Rights limits government power)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 184 | View Replies]

To: Maelstrom
You're argument is pathetic.
US Law is based on English Common Law which followed from the 10 Commandments.

you sure about that?
186 posted on 08/25/2003 2:45:26 PM PDT by Robert_Paulson2 (roll the stone away... the tomb is empty... and there is no statue of the ten commandments inside.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 185 | View Replies]

To: Maelstrom
dear roflmao... maelstrom...
go back you say? okay since you insist...

"Authorities for what is common law may therefore be as well cited, as for any part of the Lex Scripta, and there is no better instance of the necessity of holding the judges and writers to a declaration of their authorities than the present; where we detect them endeavoring to make law where they found none, and to submit us at one stroke to a whole system, no particle of which has its foundation in the common law.

" For we know that the common law is that system of law which was introduced by the Saxons on their settlement in England, and altered from time to time by proper legislative authority from that time to the date of Magna Charta, which terminates the period of the common law, or lex non scripta, and commences that of the statute law, or Lex Scripta.

"This settlement took place about the middle of the fifth century. But Christianity was not introduced till the seventh century; the conversion of the first christian king of the Heptarchy having taken place about the year 598, and that of the last about 686.

"Here, then, was a space of two hundred years, during which the common law was in existence, and Christianity no part of it.

"If it ever was adopted, therefore, into the common law, it must have been between the introduction of Christianity and the date of the Magna Charta. But of the laws of this period we have a tolerable collection by Lambard and Wilkins, probably not perfect, but neither very defective; and if any one chooses to build a doctrine on any law of that period, supposed to have been lost, it is incumbent on him to prove it to have existed, and what were its contents.

"These were so far alterations of the common law, and became themselves a part of it. But none of these adopt Christianity as a part of the common law. If, therefore, from the settlement of the Saxons to the introduction of Christianity among them, that system of religion could not be a part of the common law, because they were not yet Christians, and if, having their laws from that period to the close of the common law, we are all able to find among them no such act of adoption, we may safely affirm (though contradicted by all the judges and writers on earth) that "Christianity neither is, nor ever was a part of the common law."

... Thomas Jefferson
Jefferson's letter to Dr. Thomas Cooper, from Monticello, February 10, 1814.

Yours is a failed argument to the inclusion of Christianity into the Common Law... I did go back which is WHY I know, and now you know, WHY such a false position is NOT mine.

Unless of course you probably also believe jefferson was not a "true american or founder or president." whatever. you side with 'grandstander' roy... and I will have to side with Jefferson.

187 posted on 08/25/2003 3:01:26 PM PDT by Robert_Paulson2 (roll the stone away... the tomb is empty... and there is no statue of the ten commandments inside.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 185 | View Replies]

To: Maelstrom
Take your history changing accusations to Jefferson.
188 posted on 08/25/2003 3:02:10 PM PDT by Robert_Paulson2 (roll the stone away... the tomb is empty... and there is no statue of the ten commandments inside.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 185 | View Replies]

To: Maelstrom
Suggested reading:"The American Leadership Tradition" by Marvin Olasky.

To fully understand the founding documents of this country, and how we got here from there,one needs to know a little about the leaders who brought us here.

Please understand, I'm not finding fault with you or any of your comments here, I found this book a good read and informative.

189 posted on 08/25/2003 3:05:11 PM PDT by exnavy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 185 | View Replies]

To: jwalsh07
The subject of an individual Alabama citizen's right being infringed is irrelevant here.

Right, it's not about individual rights. It's all about collectivism.

Ah, suffering from the inability to think, I see. Not all legal decisions based on constitutions revolve around individual right, Einstein. They also have to do with limitations of certain gov't powers.

Why am I not suprised you didn't know that?

If you can't see that, that's not my problem.

I have 20/20 vision. In fact it is so good that I can see that you have failed to answer one question regarding the state of Alabama's Constitution being violated.

Strange how you 20/20 vision led you to utterly miss the point.

There are some knowledgeable folks on your side of this debate but you ain't one of'em Pahuanui.

Coming from you, I don't see that as particularly important.

190 posted on 08/25/2003 3:11:45 PM PDT by Pahuanui (When a foolish man hears of the Tao, he laughs out loud)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 183 | View Replies]

To: Robert_Paulson2
I have to ask (after reading some of your earlier posts), do you believe that displaying the ten commandments, in a courthouse, is a forcing of religious beliefs on people by government?
191 posted on 08/25/2003 3:13:37 PM PDT by exnavy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 188 | View Replies]

To: Robert_Paulson2
No...
...Mine is the use of the 10 Commandments as the foundation of law.

YOURS is the allegation that this constitutes the adoption of Christianity as common law.

It's not even Jefferson's claim. His traces back the establishment of the Anglican Church as the State Religion.

Yours for better scholarship.
192 posted on 08/26/2003 5:22:01 AM PDT by Maelstrom (To prevent misinterpretation or abuse of the Constitution:The Bill of Rights limits government power)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 187 | View Replies]

To: Maelstrom
no, yours WAS that the common law was based on the 10 commandments and/or the bible. it's not, never was.

a known falsehood.

193 posted on 08/26/2003 11:21:04 AM PDT by Robert_Paulson2 (We need a new war... the *--WAR on GLUTTONY--* to save America...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 192 | View Replies]

To: Robert_Paulson2
That's right.

Common law is based on the 10 Commandments.

Jefferson told you how the establishment of religion was a later development.

I'm surprised you didn't read what he wrote in context. He told you that following the 10 Commandments doesn't establish a religion.
194 posted on 08/27/2003 8:07:57 AM PDT by Maelstrom (To prevent misinterpretation or abuse of the Constitution:The Bill of Rights limits government power)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 193 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 121-140141-160161-180181-194 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