Standing against Cowardly Elitists (A Battle Cry for the Republic)

fearless-flyers.com ^ | 8-29-03 | Matthew B. Rogers

[Fearless Flyers]

Good morning hope you all are enjoying the Holiday weekend.

[NoControllingLegalAuthority]

Well, Aunt Enna, I hope they do put Judge Moore in jail. You haven't seen trouble like that would create. It would unleash a firestorm not seen before in this country and maybe we can demonstrate to an out-of-control judiciary that we aren't going to take their tyranny anymore.

I don't want to hear about Judge Moore disobeying the law by declaring God's sovereign authority, while over 8 million illegal aliens run around America ripping off the taxpayers of this country in a massive, breathtaking violation of federal law and a lawless federal government does nothing about it.

[Happy2BMe]

Elitists? In the United States of America? No Way!!!

U.S. Supreme Court, 2003 - The Oligarchy*

Back Row (left to right): Ginsburg, Souter, Thomas, Breyer
Front Row (left to right): Scalia, Stevens, Rehnquist, O'Connor, Kennedy

ol·i·gar·chy
Pronunciation: 'ä-l&-"gär-kE, 'O-
Function: noun
Inflected Form(s): plural -chies
Date: 1542
1 : government by the few
2 : a government in which a small group exercises control especially for corrupt and selfish purposes; also : a group exercising such control
3 : an organization under oligarchic control

[Happy2BMe]

"No matter how much patriotism and righteousness you cloth Roy Moore in he is still a law breaker and he should be in jail."

A criminal is he?

Would you please be so kind as to inform all of us exactly which written law(s) Judge Roy Moore has broken?

[freep_toad]

Ahhh... If Judge Moore should be in jail for breaking a law, then Judge Myron Thompson, the federal judge who ordered the removal of the monument, should also be in jail. You see, Judge Thompson violated the Constitution, which supercedes any law written by Congress.
I don't know which law Judge Moore violated (please point this law out to us), but Judge Thompson has gone way, way beyond anything that you accuse Moore of doing.

[farmfriend]

The prohibition against an establishment of religion only applies to Congress. The states can establish religion all they want. Many states had a state religion when the Constitution was ratified. There is nothing in the Constitution that says they can't. The judge who orfered the monuments removal is the one who violated the law.

[Ben Bolt]

You banged another 1 out of the park Matt . Good job & thanks for the ping . Keep me on your list .

[Ben Bolt]

I gather from your reply that it is your contention you are ripe on the vine and you dont have any desire for a greater depth of knowledge .

I've out grown that phase thank goodness . Good luck Ms. Enna .

[philetus]

No matter how much patriotism and righteousness you cloth Aunt Enna in, she still doesn't know what she is talking about.

[I got the rope]

The system of law in this country is perverted NOT because it denies or embraces God but because it does not treat people equal.

The system of law is perverted because trolls like you believe that our laws are based on elitist statist statute law.

[GrandEagle]

No matter how much patriotism and righteousness you cloth Roy Moore in he is still a law breaker and he should be in jail.

Interesting that you would bring up the rule of law here. Lets look into that:
Amendment 1
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

Congress: That would be the U.S. Congress.
Shall: -- used in laws, regulations, or directives to express what is mandatory
Respecting: to have reference to

Amendment 10 The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.

The first amendment explicitly forbids the Federal Government from making any law having to do with the establishment of religion. It has the effect of not allowing them to establish a national religion, but it also prevents them from un-establishing a religion either. A quick check of history will reveal that several states had an official state religion well into the 1800’s. And I might add that many of these states were governed by men who helped WRITE our Constitution therefore having impeccable credentials to know what it says. The Congress had no authority; was in fact forbidden, the legislate on these matters at all.
The power to deal with established religion is reserved specifically to the states, or to the people as the 10th amendment states.
If Congress is forbidden to make any law with reference to an establishment of religion, then U.S. District Judge Myron Thompson's order to remove the monument is an illegal order. He is a FEDERAL judge, representing FEDERAL law and is in fact acting as legislator on matters that the Constitution says he is forbidden to even reference. When an order is an illegal order we as a nation have already established (as evidenced by the WWII war crimes trials) that we are under no obligation to follow it. Even military members when commanded to do things that are illegal have a DUTY to refuse the order. (For example killing POW’s, Non-combatants, etc.) We have a Governor and an attorney General who have removed an elected official (Judge Moore) from office for not following an illegal order.
Judge Myron Thompson should be disbarred, impeached, and removed from office for violating his oath to support and defend the Constitution AND for abuse of power.

[I got the rope]

Who's the last average non-lawyer middle class person you voted for, for any statewide or national office?

LOL. Do you have a dollar figure so that I'll know what you consider middle-class? Here are some of my non-lawyer votes: Bush, Paul, Lee

So...I'm interested in what you are going to try next...race baiting?

[Vindiciae Contra TyrannoSCOTUS]

Who's the last average non-lawyer middle class person you voted for, for any statewide or national office?

260 IN CONGRESS VOTED FOR Federalism

CONGRESS - John N. Hostettler , 8th District of Indiana

John Hostettler is serving in his fifth term as the Congressman representing the 8th District of Indiana, comprised of 18 counties in southwest and west central Indiana.

John Hostettler was born on July 19, 1961, the eighth of ten children. He grew up in rural Posey County near the Ohio and Wabash rivers. After graduating from North Posey High School in 1979, he enrolled in Rose-Hulman Institute of Technology. He graduated with a B.S. in Mechanical Engineering in 1983.

Later that year, Hostettler married his high school sweetheart, Elizabeth Ann Hamman. Prior to his service in Congress he was employed as a Power Plant Performance Engineer with Southern Indiana Gas & Electric Company.

Political activism was not a priority for the Hostettlers. In fact, prior to 1994 the Registered Professional Engineer was not involved in politics except to vote. He devoted his time to his growing family, his job and his church. He served as a Deacon at Twelfth Avenue General Baptist Church in Evansville and, along with his wife, ran the church's food pantry for the underprivileged.

[risk]

The system of law in this country is perverted NOT because it denies or embraces God but because it does not treat people equal.

Not quite agreeing with the first one, I skipped ahead to this sentence and I heard the voice of my 79 year-old father, a WWII veteran with a purple heart and the most fiery patriot I've ever met. He tells me he would have marched with Dr. King if he hadn't worried about leaving the support of me and the rest of his family to my mother, should he have been hurt or killed.

I'm so proud to see other people standing up for this sentiment. I'm not in favor of all of our entitlements programs, but I think we have to keep trying to eliminate racial inequality in our society once and for all. I think we're close, maybe much closer than justice O'Connor said in her recent commentary on the Michigan university ruling.

About the first sentence: it is impossible to tell true civil disobedience from a charade. It is the ones who are calling for violent uprising in support of Moore who are close to violating the law in a major way; and for right now, even they are still protected by the first amendment -- as far as I can tell. We need to be careful about not giving them a fulfilled prophecy.

[sauropod]

Please include me on your ping list.