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

To: CobaltBlue
I don't think Roy's Rock is offensive, personally, but I agree with Judge Thompson that the way it is displayed has the appearance of exalting religion, in particular the Judeo-Christian religion, and is not at all about man and law or history or art, as some have suggested.

The one in Colorado is like the one at the US Supreme Court. Moses and the Ten Commandments aren't given special prominence. Prefer[r]ing one religion over all other religions is fine in your church but not fine in a government building.

______________________________________________________________

The greatest monuments to American jurisprudence - indeed, to her founding principles - are found not only carved in stone, but enshrined in her documents - the very documents from which the quotations of Moore's stone memorial are taken. These parchment monuments to our heritage are in America's government buildings everywhere throughout this land, framed, preserved, cherished, and protected.

Will you remove the Declaration of Independence from every government building in which it is framed and honored because it gives testimony to "the Creator, Nature's God, the Supreme Judge of the world, and Divine Providence"?

Will you remove the Constitution because its Signers noted that they were affixing their names "in the Year of our Lord"?

Or will you hide in a closet the Treaty of Paris of 1783, that document which codified American independence in the eyes of the world, written and signed by John Jay, Benjamin Franklin, and John Adams, which opens with the extremely specific religious words, "In the name of the most holy and undivided Trinity," and also closes by citing the date, "in the year of our Lord"?

Memorialized in George Washington's First Inaugural Address are his words of acknowledgment and thanks to the One True God in whom he and (as he states) his fellow countrymen owed homage and allegiance. Would you remove these words from this document, or the document itself from our National Archives in Washington D.C. because the Father of this Nation did not also include thanks to Allah, the Mother-goddess, Molech? -

[I]t would be peculiarly improper to omit in this first official act my fervent supplications to that Almighty Being who rules over the universe, who presides in the councils of nations, and whose providential aids can supply every human defect, that His benediction may consecrate to the liberties and happiness of the people of the United States a Government instituted by themselves for these essential purposes, and may enable every instrument employed in its administration to execute with success the functions allotted to his charge. In tendering this homage to the Great Author of every public and private good, I assure myself that it expresses your sentiments not less than my own, nor those of my fellow- citizens at large less than either. No people can be bound to acknowledge and adore the Invisible Hand which conducts the affairs of men more than those of the United States. Every step by which they have advanced to the character of an independent nation seems to have been distinguished by some token of providential agency; and in the important revolution just accomplished in the system of their united government the tranquil deliberations and voluntary consent of so many distinct communities from which the event has resulted can not be compared with the means by which most governments have been established without some return of pious gratitude, along with an humble anticipation of the future blessings which the past seem to presage. These reflections, arising out of the present crisis, have forced themselves too strongly on my mind to be suppressed. You will join with me, I trust, in thinking that there are none under the influence of which the proceedings of a new and free government can more auspiciously commence.

Will you remove John Adam's Inaugural Address, itself a memorial to the Christian foundation and character of this nation? -

I feel it to be my duty to add, if a veneration for the religion of a people who profess and call themselves Christians, and a fixed resolution to consider a decent respect for Christianity among the best recommendations for the public service, can enable me in any degree to comply with your wishes, it shall be my strenuous endeavor that this sagacious injunction of the two Houses shall not be without effect.
...And may that Being who is supreme over all, the Patron of Order, the Fountain of Justice, and the Protector in all ages of the world of virtuous liberty, continue His blessing upon this nation and its Government and give it all possible success and duration consistent with the ends of His providence.

Those who are "offended" by the Ten Commandments monument which Chief Justice Roy Moore placed in the rotunda of his courthouse are also offended by every memorial - stone, wood, or paper - which enshrines our Christian founding and our God-given freedom. They are haters of all that America is, of all she has ever been, and it is their hate that spurs them on in their efforts to destroy our foundations. Why do you defend them?

53 posted on 08/31/2003 7:00:28 AM PDT by .30Carbine (and through the truth that comes from God mankind shall then be truly free)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies ]


To: .30Carbine
A good, informative summary, .30Carbine. Thanks.

"Those who are "offended" by the Ten Commandments monument . . ."

With the ACLU and the Dees money machine (SPLC) leading the pack. Where will this end if this cannibalistic effort to feed the abundance of lawyers in the U.S. continues?

Japan has 1,600 attorneys. That's one attorney for every 10,000 people.

The U.S. has 1,600,000 attorneys. That's one attorney for every 175 people.

We have become a nation besieged by lawyers who are replacing the rule of law with the tyannical agenda of a minority emanating from all three branches of government.

A conspiracy? Nope. Just an open declaration of war against the American people by the feral gummint, which continues, without abatement, to use the 'offenses against the laws of nations' clause (through treaty laws) as its instrument to seize total municipal power -- jurisdiction..

(Disclaimer: Yes, there are thousands of honest lawyers who are fighting for the preservation of what we have left.)

56 posted on 08/31/2003 10:47:57 AM PDT by Eastbound ( But, Hey! Lawyers gotta eat too, even if they have to eat their clients.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 53 | View Replies ]

To: .30Carbine
I don't agree with your statement of facts. The Supreme Court has never held that all expressions of faith in God should be purged from the public record.

The line that is crossed is the endorsement of one particular faith, which is typically Christianity. But there are cases involving endorsement of other religions, e.g., in the Kiryas Joel case the problem was endorsement of Orthodox Judaism.

I don't believe that government should be involved in endorsement of any particular religion. Expressing a belief in God is not endorsement of any particular religion.
58 posted on 08/31/2003 11:09:37 AM PDT by CobaltBlue (Never voted for a Democrat in my life.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 53 | View Replies ]

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