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

Skip to comments.

Salt Lake Officials: We shalt not move tablet (Ten Commandments gets support)
Salt Lake Tribune ^ | 9/12/03 | Mark Eddington

Posted on 09/13/2003 2:59:18 PM PDT by Liz

The Ten Commandments stone is across the street from City Hall. (Joshua Brown/Special to The Tribune) By Mark Eddington The Salt Lake Tribune

PLEASANT GROVE -- While their resolve is not set in stone, Pleasant Grove leaders are firm about their intent to keep a Ten Commandments monument on city property.

Even if Salt Lake City attorney Brian Barnard sues the Utah County city, community leaders say they would rather fight than switch locations -- provided they have legal grounds and financial backing.

"At this point, we are looking to fight," said Pleasant Grove Mayor Jim Danklef. "I think it's good to stand up and say you are not going to move [the monument] off just because someone says you have to."

Barnard, legal counsel for the Society of Separationists, has threatened legal action against Pleasant Grove unless the monument is removed from a city park at 100 North and 100 East, where it has stood ever since the Fraternal Order of Eagles gave it to the city in 1971.

City Attorney Christine Petersen says several "public-interest" law firms have offered to do pro bono work on behalf of Pleasant Grove. One of the firms, the Thomas More Law Center in Michigan, has faxed an offer to represent the city in court free of charge.

The Ann Arbor company's offer, however, would not cover any monetary damages a judge might assess if the city lost a court fight.

Petersen says Salt Lake City attorney Frank Myler, affiliated with the American Center for Law and Justice, has also offered legal assistance. The City Council has authorized legal staff to contact both organizations.

"We haven't had time to get in touch with both of them" to learn the details about the offers, Petersen said Thursday.

Neither Myler nor the Thomas More Center could be reached for comment.

Barnard, who has worked with the American Civil Liberties Union to get Decalogue -- 10 Commandments -- monuments moved from public property in seven locations, scoffs at the offers Pleasant Grove is fielding.

He noted his legal bills in Ten Commandment cases against Salt Lake City and Ogden totalled $80,000, and wonders if Pleasant Grove is willing to risk a similar amount if the proffered aid is less substantial than promised.

"If the city loses, and gets stuck with the attorney's bill . . . are those organizations going to pony up the money to pay it?" Barnard asked.

Danklef concedes that might be a problem. Still, the mayor and city administrators are heartened by the offers and by the "overwhelming support" they are receiving from Utahns and residents of other states.

The city recently received a $25 money order from the senior Sunday school of a small Baptist church in Alabama, the mayor said.

Moreover, city administrators believe their monument may fare better than the one a federal court ordered removed from a state judicial building in Alabama. Petersen said the Eagles donated Pleasant Grove's monument for secular instead of sacred reasons. Its purpose is to honor the Vietnam veterans, she said.

Barnard, however, insists the monument is a clear violation of church and state outlined in the Constitution and upheld by the courts. He asks why Decalogues need to be on public property in the first place.

"Is the meaning of the Ten Commandments enhanced because it is on government property? Does the public take it more seriously?" he asked. "God does not need the support of the Pleasant Grove government. The Ten Commandments doesn't need that support."

Pleasant Grove's monument is in an obscure location, nestled behind an antique shop and between a blue-spruce tree and a shed that served as the city's first fire station in 1906. Barnard argues Pleasant Grove should follow the example set by Provo, which voluntarily moved its Decalogue last year from city-owned Memorial Park to a much more visible spot at LDS Church-owned Tabernacle Park on the corner of Center Street and University Avenue.

Provo spokesman Michael Mower said the move, done with the consent of the Eagles and LDS Church, has worked out well.

"We were able to facilitate putting the Ten Commandments on the most prominent corner in Provo while avoiding the contention that would have surrounded an almost certain lawsuit." "America was founded on Christian ideals," she said. "If we won't stand up for God, how can we expect him to stand by us when we need him most?"

meddington@sltrib.com

© Copyright 2003, The Salt Lake Tribune. All material found on Utah OnLine is copyrighted The Salt Lake Tribune and associated news services. No material may be reproduced or reused without explicit permission from The Salt Lake Tribune.


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Extended News; Government
KEYWORDS:
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-23 next last

1 posted on 09/13/2003 2:59:19 PM PDT by Liz
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Liz
Good tactics in Provo.
2 posted on 09/13/2003 3:04:45 PM PDT by PokeyJoe (Don't talk about my armchair unless you know how to pull the recliner lever.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Liz
It's sad how some states are chicken chits, while other states have a big set! I'd love to live in a state with a big set, wouldn't you?
3 posted on 09/13/2003 3:07:31 PM PDT by SheLion
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: PokeyJoe
Second comment, can't the City proclaim the site of historical importance, and any change in status needs to be approved by the Historical committee? And then donate the land to an unaffiliated "historical society" that preserves Utah's unique heritage.

The LDS Church built the state - so almost everything in Utah is historical.

4 posted on 09/13/2003 3:08:04 PM PDT by PokeyJoe (Don't talk about my armchair unless you know how to pull the recliner lever.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: SheLion; PokeyJoe
People are finally waking up to the fraud that the ACLU is pepertrating on Christians. The ACLU which has been pushing its hate-filled agenda onto the rest of us far too long. Others will catch on and fight the ACLU, too.

The ACLU should be threatened with (1) discrimination, (2) hate crimes, and, (3) inflcting emotional distress for impeding Christians' ability to practice their beliefs as they wish within First Amendment guarantees.

One FR suggestion is that if a judge considers the Ten Commandments are the basis of our law in Western Culture, then he/she can cite the applicable provision in a written decision AND get it into the system. Laws like (1) Murder, (2) Theft, (3) Adultery, (4) Coveting (in sex harrassment or stalking case).

If that happened, the hate-filled ACLU would be forced to disavow a huge body of law that is analogous to the Ten Commandments.

However, I fear the Christian-hating ACLU and its partners in crime --- People for the American Way, Americans United for Separation of Church and State, American Atheists, Humanist Association, Planned Parenthood, etc --- would not hesitate to do this b/c at the heart of this Fifth Column's activities is a cynical scheme to undermine and weaken the US.

The Fifth Column haters haven't yet been emboldened enough to actually say that they despise religion and loathe the people who practice religion (but that could change). They usually offer some high-falluting, elliptical legal argument to snatch the Ten Commandments, prayers, religious symbols, and creches from so-called "public" places. Their arguments are always offered in unemotional voices, which unfortunately makes the hate-filled devils believable.

We are witnessing the last vestiges of liberal-imposed "moral-neutrality".......the non-judgemental culture devoid of oppobrium against wrongdoing. Sicko libs get off on moral relativity that obliterates the clear line between right and wrong. How else could the conniving Clintons and their acolytes have gotten away with all their crimes?

The hidden agenda of the religio-phobic ACLU, and its partners despite their high-sounding legal arguments, is to decimate all references to morality b/c in their small, inferior, insular minds morality equates to dreaded sectarian religious beliefs.

How very successful they have been. Everyday we see the moral relativity agenda's outcome as we experience the unimaginable crimes and the collapse of a once-thriving culture's moral underpinnings.

5 posted on 09/13/2003 3:28:06 PM PDT by Liz
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

Comment #6 Removed by Moderator

Comment #7 Removed by Moderator

To: seamole
Why don't they just establish Mormonism as the state religion?

Went out of style in the 1840s'. After we won the Mormon rebellion, State supported Churhes went out of style, thank Dan Webster.

8 posted on 09/13/2003 4:06:18 PM PDT by Little Bill (No Rats, A.N.S.W.E.R (WWP) is a commie front!!!!,)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Liz
Is this going to be Alabama all over again minus judge Moore's oratory?
9 posted on 09/13/2003 4:12:24 PM PDT by Noachian (Liberalism belongs to the Fool, the Fraud, and the Vacuous.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: seamole; BOBTHENAILER
The 14th Amendment to the Constitution prohibits state officials from any action that infringes upon the rights of citizens. Section 1 specifically states: "All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they reside. No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws."

The key phrase in the 14th Amendemnt is equal protection. At issue here is that the gov't (the courts) cannot establish different standards of Constitutional law.....one for believers and another for non-believers.

Moreover, the crucial Bill of Rights (the first ten amendments) guarantees, by the first and tenth amendments, "the right of the people in and through their states and state governments to reverence God according to their constitutionally determined choice, that is by the vote of the majority in their state."

10 posted on 09/13/2003 4:30:44 PM PDT by Liz
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Noachian
We shall see. The Mormon church is very powerful in SLC. If anybody can ward off the evil ones, they can.
11 posted on 09/13/2003 4:33:09 PM PDT by Liz
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Liz
"Barnard, legal counsel for the Society of Separationists, has threatened legal action against Pleasant Grove unless the monument is removed from a city park at 100 North and 100 East, where it has stood ever since the Fraternal Order of Eagles gave it to the city in 1971"

This is the stuff I hate so much. The monument stood there for over thirty years and no one cared. NOW, due to the ACLU-backed anti-God campaign, EVERY ONE is a target. GRRRRRR.

They may be able to keep it on historical grounds, and if it's stood there uncontested for thirty years, WHY NOW? is a valid legal argument.

12 posted on 09/13/2003 4:41:21 PM PDT by cake_crumb (UN Resolutions = Very Expensive, Very SCRATCHY Toilet Paper)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Liz
"Moreover, city administrators believe their monument may fare better than the one a federal court ordered removed from a state judicial building in Alabama. Petersen said the Eagles donated Pleasant Grove's monument for secular instead of sacred reasons. Its purpose is to honor the Vietnam veterans, she said"

Oh yes, considerably better legal argument then Moore's: donated by a third party (unlike Moore's) AND a veterans' memorial.

13 posted on 09/13/2003 4:43:19 PM PDT by cake_crumb (UN Resolutions = Very Expensive, Very SCRATCHY Toilet Paper)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: cake_crumb
....if it's stood there uncontested for thirty years, WHY NOW?....

It's as if they're vampires who just got out of their coffins, roamed the land looking to destroy all that's good, and pounced on the tablet.

14 posted on 09/13/2003 4:59:37 PM PDT by Liz
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Liz
hehehe.... you said "ward" hehehe
15 posted on 09/13/2003 5:15:45 PM PDT by PokeyJoe (Don't talk about my armchair unless you know how to pull the recliner lever.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

Comment #16 Removed by Moderator

To: All
I want you all to here this from me.....an agnostic.

This is a crude attempt to remove our country's heritage.

Just because I may not profess to an organized religion...does not mean that our Founding Fathers' object of freedom, should be shunted aside for a complete expletion of religious faith.

I grew up with the Commandments as a good rule of thumb.

I want to say "God Help Us"!!!!..but then again...I'm an agnostic.

17 posted on 09/13/2003 5:22:50 PM PDT by Focault's Pendulum
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Focault's Pendulum
what about the golden rule?
18 posted on 09/13/2003 6:29:30 PM PDT by PokeyJoe (Don't talk about my armchair unless you know how to pull the recliner lever.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: Liz
We shall see. The Mormon church is very powerful in SLC. If anybody can ward off the evil ones, they can.

I hope they can, because if they, or some other church doesn't, I fear for the future of religion in this nation.

There is a curious thing about judicial rulings on the First Amendment. For the last decade or longer the First has been brought up repeatedly in cases involving religious matters, but that Amendment contains more clauses than the right to religion.

The freedoms of speech, assembly, press, and petition are also in the First Amendment, but none of those have been abridged as has the religious clause.

The constructions that have come from the High Court of a "wall of separation" that's no where in the Constitution, the "establishment" clause that conveniently ignores the second half (the "prohibition" clause), and the incorporation of the First Amendment into the Fourteenth are all aimed at religious matters before the High Court. None of the other four rights in the First have such obviously unconstitutional constructions thrust upon them.

One need only follow the rulings handed down by the High Court to see that there is a pattern here that clearly shows the High Court to be hostile to religion. With liberals controlling the Judiciary Committees of both the House and Senate there's now no restraint upon the High Court, and they may rule as they wish with impunity.
19 posted on 09/13/2003 8:14:45 PM PDT by Noachian (Liberalism belongs to the Fool, the Fraud, and the Vacuous.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Liz
The ACLU is freaking nuts to take on Utah -- the Mormons are richer than God! (Oops -- didn't meant that in a blasphemous way!) I predict the ACLU to land on its hiney on this one!
20 posted on 09/13/2003 8:58:16 PM PDT by StarCMC (God protect the 969th in Iraq and their Captain, my brother...God protect them all!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-23 next last

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.

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