[AnalogReigns]

Our system is based on, in the words of various founders, "self government." By this, they didn't mean as we usually define the term today, "democracy," they meant persons who were able to govern themselves without being coerced into it by the state; their term, "self-government" today would be called "self control." THE basis of self-government in this sense is the moral law of God--summarized in the 10 Commandments.

Not ONE of the founders, even the most secular or deist, felt our system was based on some sort of abstraction of "pure reason." Reason itself is founded on the idea of a stable consistant universe--which arose from the idea of a stable consistant God. The whole concept of "rights" in the constitutional sense, is anchored in the idea they are irrevocably given by God, not given (revocably) by government.

Acknowledgement of God--yet while not establishing an official religion--is at the heart of being American--as its the heart of our historic idea of liberty.

[risk]

Acknowledgement of God--yet while not establishing an official religion--is at the heart of being American--as its the heart of our historic idea of liberty.

But Moore said that all 10 of the commandments (without qualification) were the basis of our laws. By doing so, he:

1. Established Judeo-Christian beliefs as the primary basis for American law (the obvious meaning).
2. Imposed the belief in Jehova as a legal requirement for all Americans, as he had failed to limit the scope of the set of commandments to either inspiration, or to the last six, and he further failed to set forth any qualifications as to state residence.
3. Dismissed reason and logic as the primary source for our laws.
4. Confirmed that a particular brand of morality was required in the enforcement of our laws.

Reasonable Christians need to at least try to understand the implications of Moore's civil disobedience. If that is what you want, then you are asking for a constitutional change. If that is not what you want, then try to understand why Moore's inability to articulate a qualification or limit to the scope of his pronouncements has the entire secular community of this country worried.

I personally am not usually concerned with religious expressions in schools, courts, or anywhere else in this country. But when Moore failed to limit the breadth of his announcement that a Judeo-Christian icon was the basis for our entire legal system, I noticed.

Please try to understand that this is not a negative, anti-Christian sentiment on my part. is what you