The Ten Commandments Debate (Federal Judiciary Tyranny Alert!)

"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."

What does the First Amendment really mean – particularly in the context of the current, raging debate over the Ten Commandments monument in the Alabama state judiciary building?

Federal Judge Myron Thompson, who ordered the Ten Commandments monument removed from the Alabama courthouse, believes it means no one can reference God in a government building.

Is he right? Not if you read and comprehend the clear and concise words of the First Amendment.

the federal government has no business interfering in the individual free exercise of religion;

and that the federal government cannot declare an official, state religion. But it means more than that. The First Amendment clearly says the federal government has no business passing any law even addressing the issue of establishing a religion – not for it or against it.

Couple the First Amendment with the 10th Amendment, which says: "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." Now you clearly have to see the federal government has no power to interfere in Alabama's affairs on this matter raised by the actions of Alabama Chief Justice Roy Moore, who brought the Ten Commandments monument into the judiciary building.

If Judge Thompson's ruling is permitted to stand, it will be the beginning of the end of any mention of God in the public square. Period. End of story.

It's amazing to me that so many otherwise sensible people cannot understand what is at stake in this conflict. It is profound. It is as monumental as any great debate this country has ever had. This is much bigger than the washing-machine-size granite monument in the Alabama courthouse.

Simply, we will not recognize America a decade from now if Thompson's ruling stands. It will open the floodgates of litigation that will strip the country of its national spiritual heritage. It will distort and destroy the meaning of the First Amendment. It will turn us from a nation established on the rule of law and self-governance to a nation ruled by men, ruled by elites.

This is a national crisis. You may not think so because no one is losing life and limb in this conflict. But we are losing our freedom – and we have always sacrificed life and limb in this country's history for the preservation of freedom.

As Justice Moore himself puts it: "The battle over the Ten Commandments monument I brought into Alabama's Supreme Court is not about a monument and not about politics. (The battle is not even about religion, a term defined by our Founders as 'the duty we owe to our creator and the manner for discharging it.') Federal Judge Myron Thompson, who ordered the monument's removal, and I are in perfect agreement on the fact that the issue in this case is: 'Can the state acknowledge God?'

"Those were the precise words used by Judge Thompson in his closing remarks in open court. Today, I argue for the rule of law, and against any unilateral declaration of a judge to ban the acknowledgment of God in the public sector. We must acknowledge God in the public sector because the state constitution explicitly requires us to do so. The Alabama Constitution specifically invokes 'the favor and guidance of Almighty God' as the basis for our laws and justice system. As the chief justice of the state's Supreme Court, I am entrusted with the sacred duty to uphold the state's constitution. I have taken an oath before God and man to do such, and I will not waver from that commitment."

He continues: "By telling the state of Alabama that it may not acknowledge God, Judge Thompson effectively dismantled the justice system of the state. Judge Thompson never declared the Alabama Constitution unconstitutional, but the essence of his ruling was to prohibit judicial officers from obeying the very constitution they are sworn to uphold. In so doing, Judge Thompson and all who supported his order violated the rule of law."

The other Ten Commandments judge

Devoted boyfriend that he was, Thomas Hinds frequently accompanied his girlfriend on her baby-sitting jobs, including those at the home of a young federal judge, Myron Thompson.

That was 18 years ago, but the conductor and music director of the Montgomery Symphony Orchestra still prizes those baby-sitting dates for the friendship he developed with "one of the really fine people I know."

"A conversation with Myron Thompson at times feels like an athletic event," said Hinds. "He is curious; he wants to know the details. 'What do you mean? How do you do that?' He wants to know how things work.

"Myron is a very analytical person, and I'm very intuitive. We approach things in a different manner, and I think I frustrate him very much," Hinds said, laughing. "Myron takes things logically, and I will go from point A to point L."

Though he hasn't spoken at length with Thompson about his central role in the Ten Commandments fight -- it was Thompson who ruled that Alabama Chief Justice Roy Moore's public placement of a Ten Commandments monument was unconstitutional and ordered it removed from the state Judicial Building -- Hinds doubts his friend is troubled by the harsh criticism from Moore and some supporters of the chief justice.

"Myron has great respect for people who disagree with him," Hinds said. "He is not rattled by people disliking his decisions. He says this sort of thing comes with the territory, that if you do what's right, sometimes it will be controversial."

Some have done more than just disagree. When Moore's eight associate justices on Aug. 21 overruled their chief justice's decision to defy Thompson's order, Moore denounced Thompson as having "put himself above the law (and) above God as well."

Hinds, like others interviewed for this story, described Thompson as a private man, rarely seen at Montgomery social events.

"Not only is that appropriate to his profession, I think that's his temperament," Hinds said.

An attempt to speak to Thompson for this story was unsuccessful. A clerk in his office stated that the judge wasn't giving any interviews.

In 1980, then-President Jimmy Carter nominated the Yale graduate and Tuskegee native to the federal bench. That year, Thompson became the second black person to serve as a federal judge in Alabama.

In the more than two decades since, he has presided over more than his share of controversial cases.

Though ideological labels are almost always overly broad, to the extent that some judges are branded conservative and others liberal Thompson belongs in the latter category, according to those familiar with his time on the bench.

In redistricting cases, for example, he consistently has issued rulings sought by black litigants seeking to increase representation by blacks on school boards, city councils and, as with a case in Baldwin County, on county commissions.

And in some important discrimination cases -- most notably, the long-running lawsuit by black employees against the Alabama Department of Transportation -- Thompson has ruled for minority plaintiffs.

In 1996, Thompson ruled in favor of a gay rights organization at the University of South Alabama that had been denied state funding that other student groups received.

Eight years earlier, Thompson participated in a celebration in Atlanta, marking the third anniversary of the national holiday in honor of the Rev. Martin Luther King Jr.

"He taught us physical characteristics, racial or sexual, simply do not determine a person's worth or value," Thompson told a reporter covering the event.

"Many of our laws dealing with the handicapped, sexual discrimination and so forth are all legacies of King," Thompson said.

"I think that in some quarters, Judge Thompson has a relatively liberal reputation," said Richard Cohen, chief counsel for the Southern Poverty Law Center and one of the lawyers opposing Moore in the Ten Commandments case.

"I think that other people would see him differently. For example, is it liberal to rule against the state when it was tying prisoners to a hitching post, which is a torture device?"

Thompson has found himself in the spotlight in part by virtue of his judicial district, which includes the state capital.

He's presided over a multitude of cases with statewide impact, issuing rulings on prison overcrowding and the state's treatment of the mentally ill. Thompson also was one of three judges who made the historic ruling that overturned Charlie Graddick's apparent victory in the 1986 Democratic gubernatorial primary.

Bill Baxley was declared the winner, and out of that mess rose Republican Guy Hunt, who defeated Baxley in the general election.

"He has had more opportunities to intervene in state matters precisely because he's been asked to do it more than the average judge," Cohen said.

Cohen said Thompson has a pretty good record as far as appeals, despite the conservative reputation of the Atlanta-based 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals.

The appeals court, for example, issued a powerfully worded order affirming Thompson's ruling in the Ten Commandments case. The same court -- in fact, the same appellate judge -- also criticized Thompson's handling of the Transportation Department discrimination case.

Some attorneys and parties with cases before him have cited a tendency for Thompson to take considerable time, such as a year or more, before issuing rulings.

In March, for example, Alabama Gov. Bob Riley blasted Thompson for delays that Riley said have cost the state substantial sums in legal fees and other costs during the now 18-year-old Transportation Department case.

"I have been advised that, for whatever reason, motions often pend before the Federal Court for years awaiting a ruling," Riley wrote in a letter to the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals, in complaining about Thompson's oversight of the case.

But the 56-year-old jurist receives plaudits for his intelligence, his polite, professional courtroom demeanor and for the effort he makes to hear both sides out.

Montgomery lawyer David Boyd, who primarily represents corporate clients, said he's lost more than his share of cases before Thompson. Always, though, he's felt like his client received a fair hearing.

"I practiced against him when we were both lawyers, before he was a judge, and I've been in his courtroom many, many times, and I've had a lot of contact with him on court-related matters," Boyd said. "I hold him in very high regard.

"He's an active judge in the sense that he really wants to understand what's before him, and if he thinks lawyers are not doing a good job of getting the facts or the information that he needs or that a jury needs, he can be pretty active."

Boyd, too, commented on Thompson's private nature.

"But he is also a very warm individual," said the Montgomery lawyer.

Thompson and his wife, Ann, have three children, two of whom are adopted, said Hinds. The conductor has known the judge's oldest son almost since birth, 18 years ago, and was also close to the boy's twin sister, Lilly.

The Thompsons' daughter died at age 10 of sickle cell anemia, Hinds said.

"That's something that was very personal. She was just a lovely child," he said.

Hinds rarely sees his friend at the symphony, since Thompson prefers jazz to symphonic music, he said. He also likes to read.

"He's always reading something," said Hinds. "It's his personality -- he's interested in things all over the place."

"I enjoy being around an intellect greater than mine -- it's fun, it's an adventure. That's not that I'm willing to concede that to him; I'm a conductor, and we have egos," Hinds said, laughing.

As the movement of the Ten Commandments and the protests of that action developed into a national spectacle, Hinds said he couldn't help but wonder what was going on in the private, serious head of his friend.

"I said, 'Gee Myron, people are getting excited.' But he just went to the law, found out what the law said, and made a decision," Hinds said.

this book was use in America schools until 1903 New England Primer { The Real Education Book that America needs to get Back too}
http://www.freerepublic.com/forum/a3b0c849d088d.htm

http://my.voyager.net/~jayjo/primer.htm

excerpt from the New England Primer...

Q. 40. What did God at first reveal to man for the rule of his obedience ?
A. The rule which God at first revealed to man for his obedience was the moral law.

Q. 41. Where is the moral law summarily comprehended ?
A. The moral law is summarily comprehended in the ten commandments.

Q. 42. What is the sum of the ten commandments ?
A. The sum of the ten commandments is, to love the Lord our God with all our heart, with all our soul, with all our strength, and with all our mind, and our neighbour as ourselves.

Q. 43. What is the preface to the ten commandments ?
A. The preface to the ten commandments is in these words, I am the Lord thy God which have brought thee out of the land of Egypt, and out of the house of bondage.

Q. 44. What doth the preface to the ten commandments teach us ?
A. The preface to the ten commandments teacheth us, that because God is the Lord, and our God and Redeemer, therefore we are bound to keep all his commandments.

Q. 45. Which is the first commandment ?
A. The first commandment is, Thou shalt have no other Gods before me.

Q. 46. What is required in the first commandment ?
A. The first commandment requireth us to know and acknowledge God, to be the only true God, and our God, and to worship and glorify him accordingly.

Q. 47. What is forbidden in the first commandment ?
A. The first commandment forbiddeth the denying or not worshipping and glorifying the true God, as God, and our God, and the giving that worship and glory to any other which is due to him alone.

Q. 48. What are we especially taught by these words (before me) in the first commandment ?
A. These words (before me) in the first commandment, teach us, that God who seeth all things, taketh notice of and is much displeased with the sin of having any other God.

Q. 49. Which is the second commandment ?
A. The second commandment is, Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image, or the likeness of any thing that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth; thou shalt not bow down thyself to them nor serve them, for I the Lord thy God am a jealous God, visiting the iniquities of the fathers upon the children, unto the third and fourth generation of them that hate me and shewing mercy unto thousands of them that love me & keep my commandments.

Q. 50. What is required in the second commandment ?
A. The second commandment requireth the receiving, observing, & keeping pure and entire all such religious worship and ordinances, as God hath appointed in his word.

Q. 51. What is forbidden in the second commandment ?
A. The second commandment forbiddeth the worshipping of God by images or any other way not appointed in his word.

Q. 52. What are the reasons annexed to the second commandment ?
A. The reasons annexed to the second commandment, are God's sovereignty over us, his propriety in us, and the zeal he hath to his own worship.

Q. 53. Which is the third commandment ?
A. The third commandment is, Thou shalt not take the name of the Lord thy God in vain, for the Lord wilt not hold him guiltless, that taketh his name in vain.

Q. 54. What is required in the third commandment ?
A. The third commandment requireth the holy and reverent use of God's names, titles, attributes, ordinances, word and works.

Q. 55. What is forbidden in the third commandment ?
A. The third commandment forbiddeth all profaning or abusing of any thing whereby God maketh himself known.

Q. 56. What is the reason annexed to the third commandment ?
A. The reason annexed to the third commandment is, That however the breakers of this commandment may escape judgment from men, yet the Lord our God will not suffer them to escape his righteous judgment.

Q. 57. Which is the Fourth commandment ?
A. The fourth commandment is, Remember the Sabbath day to keep it holy, six days shalt thou labor and do all thy work, but the seventh day is the sabbath of the Lord thy God, in it thou shalt not do any work, thou nor thy son, nor thy daughter, thy man-servant, nor thy maid servant, nor thy cattle, nor the stranger that is within thy gates, for in six days the Lord made heaven and earth, the sea and all that in them is, and rested the seventh day, wherefore the Lord blessed the sabbath day and hallowed it.

Q. 58. What is required in the fourth commandment ?
A. The fourth commandment requireth, the keeping holy to God such set times as he hath appointed in his word, expressly one whole day in seven to be an holy Sabbath to himself.

Q. 59. Which day of the seven hath God appointed to be the weekly sabbath ?
A. From the beginning of the world, to the resurrection of Christ, God appointed the seventh day of the week to be the weekly sabbath, and the first day of the week ever since to continue to the end of the world which is the Christian Sabbath.

Q. 60. How is the sabbath to be sanctified ?
A. The sabbath is to be sanctified by an holy resting all that day, even from such worldly employments and recreations as are lawful on other days, and spending the whole time in public and private exercises of God's worship, except so much as is to be taken up in the works of necessity and mercy.

Q. 61. What is forbidden in the fourth commandment ?
A. The fourth commandment forbiddeth, the omission or careless performance of the duties required, and the profaning the day by idleness or doing that which is in itself sinful, or any unnecessary thoughts, words or works, about worldly employments or recreations.

Q. 62. What are the reasons annexed to the fourth commandment ?
A . The reasons annexed to the fourth commandment, are God s allowing us six days of the week for our own employment, his challenging a special propriety in the seventh, his own example, & his blessing the sabbath day.

Q. 63. Which is the fifth commandment ?
A . The fifth commandment is, Honor thy father and thy mother, that thy days may be long upon the land which the Lord thy God giveth thee.

Q. 64. What is required in the fifth commandment ?
A. The fifth commandment requireth the preserving the honor, and performing the duties belonging to every one in their several places and relations, as superiors, inferiors, or equals.

Q. 65. What is forbidden in the fifth commandment ?
A. The fifth commandment forbiddeth the neglecting of, or doing any thing against the honour and duty which belongeth to every one in their several places and relations.

Q. 66. What is the reason annexed to the fifth commandment ?
A. The reason annexed to the fifth commandment is a promise of long life and prosperity, (as far as it shall serve for God's glory and their own good) to all such as keep this commandment.

Q. 67. Which is the sixth commandment ?
A. The sixth commandment is, Thou shalt not kill.

Q. 68. What is required in the sixth commadment?
A. The fixth commandment requireth all lawful endeavors to preserve our own life, and the life of others.

Q. 69. What is forbidden in the sixth commandment ?
A. The fixth commandment forbiddeth the taking away of our own life, or the life of our neighbour unjustly, and whatsoever tendeth thereunto.

Q. 70. Which is the seventh commandment ?
A. The seventh commandment is, Thou shalt not commit adultery.

Q. 71. What is required in the seventh commandment ?
A. The seventh commandment requireth the preservation of our own and our neighbor's chastity, in heart, speech & behaviour.

Q. 72. What is forbidden in the seventh commandment ?
A. The seventh commandment forbiddeth all unchaste thoughts, words and actions.

Q. 73. Which is the eighth commandment ?
A. The eighth commandment is, Thou shalt not steal.

Q. 74. What is required in the eighth commandment ?
A. The eighth commandment requireth the lawful procuring & furthering the wealth and outward estate of ourselves and others.

Q. 75. What is forbidden in the eighth commandment ?
A. The eighth commandlnent forbiddeth whatsoever doth, or may unjustly hinder our own or our neighbours wealth or outward estate.

Q. 76. Which is the ninth commandment?
A. The ninth commandment is, Thou Shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbour.

Q. 77. What is required in the ninth commandment ?
A. The ninth commandment requireth the maintaining and promoting of truth between man & man, & of our own & our neighbor's good name, especially in witness bearing.

Q 78. What is forbidden in the ninth commandment ?
A. The ninth commandment forbiddeth whatsoever is prejudicial to truth, or injurious to our own or our neighbor's good name.

Q 79. Which is the tenth commandment ?
A. The tenth commandmelat is, Thou shalt not covet thy neighbour's house, thou shalt not covet thy neighbour's wife, nor his man-servant, nor his maid-servant, nor his ox, nor his ass, nor any thing that is thy neighbour's.

Q . 80. What is required in the tenth commandment ?
A. The tenth commandment requireth full contentment with our own condition, with a right and charitable frame of spirit towards our neighbour, and all that is his.

Q. 81. What is forbidden in the tenth commandment ?
A. The tenth commandment forbiddeth all discontentment with our own estaxe, envying or grieving at the good of our neigbbour, and all inordinate motions and affections to any thing that is his.

Q. 82. Is any man able perfectly to keep the commandments of God ?
A. No mere man since the fall is able in this Iife perfectly to keep the commandments of God, but daily doth break them in thought, word and deed

>>>> For one, you have not been persecuted for your non-belief. The same cannot be said of believers in lands where belief is banned.

It's no accident that I haven't been persecuted. In early Pilgrim settlements, I would have.

>>>> Why would you fix what was not broken?

Americans are jealous about their freedoms. The rocks didn't bother me, but someone decided to debate them in court with Moore. This is that adversarial system again. In court, Moore couldn't hide the real reason for putting up the stones (or didn't want to hide it). It was revealed that he believed his execution of justice was based, not inspired on those rocks. He broke a bond of trust in impartiality then, and has repeatedly since he lost that first case.

>>>> Third, if you would not have God, you will suffer having gods imposed upon you. Gaia, for instance, as the envirowacko symbol and excuse for sacrificing your lands to her priests.

I don't agree to this assumption. And this is the very essence of our debate. To pin the perceived wrongs of our contemporary society on the loss of the Judeo-Christian God is to abandon duty to rationality. We must argue our preferred political directions with our fellow citizens, we must elect leaders of whom we can approve, and we must debate what we believe. We can not, and simply must not abandon rational exposition to a particular metaphysics because we believe that is enough. This is not what our founding fathers intended for us to do with our intellectual abilities and our public life.

It's only when the law doesn't protect me from irrationality that I am at risk of being forced to obey irrational laws that are imposed out of the worship of foreign gods, as you suggest.

>>>> Explain why did you felt the need to add "here" at the end of ["I also reject your notion that the state is taking on the role of God here."]

I mean this in two ways. First, Thompson is not assuming the role of God (and neither is the Ethics Commission or the Supreme Court). Second, America isn't assuming the role of God. This logic doesn't work for me -- restricting the application of Judeo-Christian ethics to what is rational and logical is perhaps a worship of human intellect in certain devout perceptions, but this is the essence of the Enlightenment: we ARE able to explain ourselves and our reasons for doing things. To doubt this is to doubt the whole Age of Reason. Therefore, practicing Christians should feel comforted by the knowledge that neither their own personal dogmas nor anyone else's (be it Christian or otherwise) can be imposed on them. That is the take of my patriot parents, who are the most devout Christians I know.

>>>> The Statist element is growing hugely even as, and likely in response to, the Left marginalizes itself.

OK, we have had several posts to this thread with my fears, now we get to see yours. I respect this point of view greatly, and I would just warn you: how great could the power be of a state that both seized political AND religious power together be? You fear the lack of religion (which has merely been applied to prevent oppression except in some unusual cases) yet the specific requirement of one religion or another could be just as dangerous. Before the Gunpowder Plot and after, Catholics were forced to attend Anglican services and even severely fined for refusing. Only the rich could avoid services. Furthermore, the Pilgrims and Quakers were ridiculed and continually fined, imprisoned, and reduced to paupers by the Anglican church. The America we know, where freedom from religion is just as important as freedom to practice religion, comes out of these horrific experiences. Each one of them is central to the Religious Reformation of the middle ages. Our increasingly agnostic government has emerged out of this very tradition. Specific religions represented by governments have always equalled oppression in our longer history. We know this, and so does our judicary.

>>>> Equal treatment before the law is not the same as seeing to it that everybody has an equal result in life. The former is American, the latter is Marxist.

You misinterpreted my use of the word 'egalitarian' with that concept, but I was also referring to equality before the law. I apologize for not making that utterly clear. I agree with you and other Capitalists who argue that it is a combination of a consistent legal environment (that includes equality before the law) and the opportunity to excel that makes our nation so great.

>>>> And security is the promise that Statists use to make gains. Statism is a term I've been working hard to make better understood so that it may be used properly. It is incipient Statists who are the risk implied in my tagline. I have a short link if you're game.

This opens up a lot of issues for discussion, and it's laden with a VERY interesting perspective, since you've said that the state is on the march. First, I don't believe it is on the march in this particular case. In fact, it is on the retreat in my view. Moore wanted a statist religion, but he succeeded in linking his icon to freedom of religious expression among certain devout Christians (certainly not all). Second, there has been a good deal of discussion about this that fails to take into consideration the feelings of nonbelievers in the state of Alabama and the rest of the country. Some Christians are quick to point out that the school prayer issue has been an abridgement to their freedoms, but they never concede that prayer is still allowed under conditions that wouldn't oppress nonbelievers. Furthermore, every Christian may attend private school, and our "activist" supreme court has ruled that vouchers are legal. This is a country that is determined to be fair with respect to religious association, practice, and expression. Finally, if statism is on the march, we need to discuss specific issues and address them together. Not everyone agrees on this subject, some of it is theoretical, and we do have a democratic republic in which we are free to elect people who will serve our ends as we wish. If we believe this country cannot maintain our freedoms with the Constitution as it is, then we must rewrite it. If we believe that this country will NEVER be able to maintain our freedoms because of a frailty of human nature, or because we have already gone off the deepend, then that is much more dangerous and pessimistic. I don't think the blood of patriots shed in the past was done so in that spirit. It would be defeatist, and completely unamerican to say that our system of government is DOOMED to failure.

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.