The Ten Commandments Debate (Federal Judiciary Tyranny Alert!)

Worldnetdaily.com ^ | 9/01/03 | Joseph Farah

[risk]

You should consult the first case that led to Thompson's orders for whose rights were violated.

[jwalsh07]

And yours would be with them as well then, as they specifically avoided the words Judaism or Christianity in the Constitution, and were distinctly worried about the kind of problems Moore has been causing.

You don't know what you're talking about.

Jefferson and Madison supported laws requiring the honoring of the sabbath under penalty of law.

Jefferson spent from the public treasury to build missions and supply them with the word of God.

52 of 55 founders of this country were unabashed Christians who were informed by their bibles and their God.

The Constitution regobnises and pays homage to the the fourth commandment in it's admonition to the executive not to do business on Sunday.

The men who signed affixed their signatures directly below the words "In the YEar of Our Lord".

The wall of separation was built by Justice Black, not Thomas Jefferson and the frogs in the slow boil pot go merrily on their way boiling while the Blacks of the world continue to usurp powers never granted to them in the COnstitution.

Have a nice swim.

[Scenic Sounds]

"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." Amendment 10 would cover that.

Well, I understand the argument. I guess you understand that that argument was rejected a long, long time ago in favor of the argument that the adoption of the Fourteenth Amendment (it came after Amendment 10) requires that states honor some of the freedoms described in the First Amendment.

I guess, if we wanted to, we could do a U-turn and allow states to ignore freedoms described in the First Amendment, but how many people really want to do that?

[risk]

You haven't changed my mind. Nor have similar pleas changed the minds of the superior courts.

[A2J]

People crying that God is being excluded from our nation's public halls purely on the basis of Moore's legal problems are distorting the facts and hurting the cause of Christian freedoms where they actually matter.

And where exactly is that?

[rottweiller_inc]

so what you're arguing is that the ratification of the 14th amendment repealed the 9th and 10th and yet they were left in the bill of rights?

[risk]

How about in church? Maybe in compassionate service to community? Perhaps in evangelical activities?

[A2J]

They would still be there today if I had been able to advise Moore.

And what, exactly, makes you so much more imminently qualified than a state supreme court justice?

Are you Johnny Cochran?

[risk]

See above. He probably would have ignored me, because I do believe he wanted all of this to happen just like it is.

[A2J]

Isn't reason and argument enough for the construction and enforcement of our laws?

Apparently, "reason and argument" isn't enough for the SCOTUS to strike down such "reasonable" state anti-abortion laws.

While I may not agree with Moore's confrontational style, this is a pure states' rights case, not a religious case.

[risk]

That's the nature of our adversarial legal system.

[Conservative Me]

If we as a society took responsibility for ourselves and took the time to instill values into our children, the removal of the Ten Commandments monument would be moot. We wouldn't be relying on schools and public services to be the source of moral value. Instead it would begin in the home and/or church where it belongs.

No one can take away the belief in God/god because that belief is in the heart, not in a stone monument.

[A2J]

As a matter of fact, a very nice Christian woman will be home-schooling my 4 year old.

And you'll probably end up thanking God for it.

[risk]

Agreed.

[A2J]

Why not just break the US up into separate countries by faith?

Then where would you live? In the Northeast? DC?

[Conservative Me]

Good greif! I decided long ago that my decision to be an Atheist was not one that I would force on my children. I plan to search for a Universal Unitarian church so that my children can be exposed to more than one faith. Their belief in God/god is up to them, not me.

BTW, I can't thank someone who does not exist.

[Scenic Sounds]

so what you're arguing is that the ratification of the 14th amendment repealed the 9th and 10th and yet they were left in the bill of rights?

No, the argument has been that the ratification of the Fourteenth Amendment has limited the power of states and that some of those limitations require states to observe limits described in the First Amendment.

[Conservative Me]

Why should I HAVE to decide where I live based on my faith, or lack thereof. That is my point. I should not be persecuted based on my faith. That includes being forced to live in a certain location.

I moved to NH not long ago from VT. It is quite a change for the better. It had nothing to do with religion. It had to do with location, things to do, education for my children, type of people, etc.

[A2J]

So any non-Christian should move out of the state of Alabama because the law follows only Judeo-Christian values.

That's not what he said at all.

He said that if an individual, such as Risk or yourself, can't stand the fact that should the PEOPLE of a state where you reside decide to embrace religion as the foundation of their laws, then YOU have the choice to either stay or leave.

[A2J]

I guess, if we wanted to, we could do a U-turn and allow states to ignore freedoms described in the First Amendment, but how many people really want to do that?

I don't believe people would want to touch the First Amendment but they would probably want their soveriegnty back, which the Fourteenth Amendment steals from them.