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

To: FBD
He did show a short clip of Mark Prior, asking Judge Moore if he would continue to acknowlege God, if he were to continue as Chief Justice.

Mr. Moore confirmed that he would. For that terrible crime, he was removed from the bench.

Actually Moore was removed for refusing to obey a federal court order, not for acknowledging God.

12 posted on 02/29/2004 1:28:33 PM PST by COEXERJ145
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies ]


To: COEXERJ145; King Black Robe; stand watie
"Actually Moore was removed for refusing to obey a federal court order,...

Yes. A Federal Court telling a state court it doesn't have the right to display the Ten Commandments. Where is that, in the Constitution?

17 posted on 02/29/2004 1:45:43 PM PST by FBD (...Please press 2 for English...for Espanol, please stay on the line...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies ]

To: COEXERJ145
"Actually Moore was removed for refusing to obey a federal court order, not for acknowledging God."

And if you happen to be conservative, refusing to obey a federal court order will get you shot at sunrise, unlike liberals (SF Mayor, for example) who are CELEBRATED for ignoring such orders.

23 posted on 02/29/2004 2:06:56 PM PST by daler
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies ]

To: COEXERJ145; joanie-f; Mudboy Slim; sultan88; Landru; King Black Robe; All
Here's what Alan Keyes said about the Federal order to remove the Ten Commandments.

By the way, COEXERJ145, you are aware that the Ten Commandments is on the walls of the Supreme Court, yes?

Alan Keyes speech defending Chief Justice Roy Moore


"....Because I've learned something from America's history and heritage, from the long struggle of my own folks in America for equal rights and citizenship. Here's what you learn: you don't keep a right unless you're willing to stand up for that right!

And there will be those who will come against these brave folks, and they'll point the finger and they'll say, "We went to the federal judge, and the federal judge said to take it down," and they'll stand and look them in the eye and say, "We're going to keep it up."

And they'll say, "You lawbreakers! You violators!" But tell me. Which do you think is higher? A federal judge's ruling that has no foundation in law or constitution, or the Constitution of the United States, clear on the face of it?

When the federal judges follow the law, when the federal judges respect the Constitution, then they represent the majesty of law. When the federal judges disregard the Constitution, they speak for no law, they speak for no one but themselves.

And when they seek to impose their personal whims upon the states and the representatives of the people of the states, they are not imposing law, they are imposing dictatorship!

And on this day, above all, as we commemorate those who died at the beginning of our fight against the dictatorship of terror, let us remember that there are battlefields far flung across this globe, white crosses growing row on row of Americans who died in the fight against dictatorship on far-flung battlefields. If they died abroad, you can bet that we will stand firm here!

The federal judges, the federal courts have usurped the right and power of the people explicitly granted to them by the Constitution. But let us think a little further: how have they used this usurpation? To what end have they practiced this abuse?

To the end of driving prayer from our public schools! To the end of banishing the acknowledgment of God from festivals and our games and all our gatherings as a people! To the end of making sure that from one end of this land to another, there would be imposed a regime of atheism at every level of our public life!

But I'll tell you. Is it a coincidence that since this usurpation began, we have seen a rising tide of violence and crime and drug abuse in our schools? That since this usurpation began, we have watched the disintegration of our family life and the destruction of our sexual mores? That since this usurpation began, we have paid billions and billions on the crime problems and the health problems that result from the moral disintegration of our country?

For decades, we have paid the price!

And following the wisdom of our Founders--who said that we should not, for light or transient causes, call into question those in authority over us--we have borne it with patience, we have paid the bills, we have paid the billions in taxes. In spite of all the consequences that we could see, we have suffered while evils were sufferable.

But now they come against us to tear from the very walls of our courthouses those laws and commandments which we have so tried to instill into the hearts of our children! And before the very face of those children we have instructed in this law, they wish us to stand by while contempt is shown for the law of God, which is the basis of all moral discipline and true self-government!

I think it is clear: we must tell it to the courts, and we must tell it to our representatives, "Yes, we are a patient and long-suffering people. Yes, we will suffer while evils are sufferable. But this evil is intolerable, and we will suffer it no more!"

Now, I think that I would be a little worried about the consequences of all this, if I didn't have a pretty secure knowledge that our Founders were, contrary to the propaganda of a lot of the left-wingers and other people, our Founders we actually very prudent, very wise individuals--prudent and wise enough to have put together a Constitution that has not only stood the test of time, but includes elements within it that address contingencies that, at their time, they probably thought were unimaginable.

And I think one of the contingencies they thought was unimaginable was the idea of a federal judge getting everybody to tear the Ten Commandments off the walls of the courthouse. I mean, you could tell how it never occurred to the founding generation this would be a problem. If it had, I don't think that they would have etched the Ten Commandments in stone up there at the Supreme Court of the United States. You can't get 'em off without effacing the building. I doubt they would have put it together that way.

I also think that they couldn't imagine it--they wouldn't have put a wonderful quote from Leviticus 25:10, "Proclaim liberty throughout the land, and to all the inhabitants thereof." They wouldn't have etched it in the middle of the Liberty Bell, knowing that you could only get it out with a blowtorch!

It never occurred to them that this free people would ever suffer the indignity of an assault that denied our right to speak the name of God Almighty!

It never occurred to them--but nonetheless, they did provide us with a remedy.

And it's a wonder to me that, over the course of the last several decades, so many people who pretend to be lawyers and to know all about this and that, they stand before the American people acting as if the ultimate authority on everything constitutional is the Supreme Court. You realize, don't you, that just from a simple logical point of view, this couldn't possibly be true. First, because we all know (I think we still learn it in school) that we have three branches of government--the legislative, the executive, and the judicial--and under the Constitution of the United States, they are three equal branches.

Now, it doesn't take too much sense, does it, to realize, if I make a contract with you that says we're equal partners, and then there's a clause in there that says that you get to interpret it and I don't, who's the superior partner: me or you?

So, it doesn't make any sense. If the Supreme Court actually stood all by itself, interpreting the Constitution according to its whim, we wouldn't have three equal branches of government, we'd have a dictatorship of the judges!

And not only was this not intended, it was explicitly warned against by Jefferson, by Adams, by Madison. They held up the danger of such judicial tyranny in order to make sure that down through all the generations of this country's history, we would be warned against such abuses...."

26 posted on 02/29/2004 2:20:02 PM PST by FBD (...Please press 2 for English...for Espanol, please stay on the line...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies ]

To: COEXERJ145
Moore was removed for refusing to obey a federal court order to not acknowledge God in the foyer of the courtroom.

Moore is peacefully drawing attention to the harsh and arbitrary rulings of the federal courts on religion.

I dont understand why that bothers people.

27 posted on 02/29/2004 2:29:00 PM PST by mrsmith ("Oyez, oyez! All rise for the Honorable Chief Justice... Hillary Rodham Clinton ")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies ]

To: COEXERJ145; Servant of the Nine; sinkspur; Welsh Rabbit; joanie-f; Mudboy Slim; sultan88; Landru; ..
>"Actually Moore was removed for refusing to obey a federal court order..."<

I ask everyone:
What law did Judge Moore break?
Don't just say, "Well a Federal judge ordered him to remove the Ten Commandments. (which are on the Supreme Court)

Cite the law that was being violated.

Where is it? Who passed it? Name it!!!
You can't, because he didn't break any law!!!
.......................................


As Alan Keyes said,

http://www.renewamerica.us/archives/speeches/03_09_11rallyga.htm
.....................
"...When you get, as the county commissioners here have gotten, a letter from the ACLU that tells you that "well, we noticed that you are respecting God, we noticed that you are respecting His law, we noticed that you have placed an inscription of His will on the walls of your courthouse, and that's violation," I hope folks will do just one thing for me: that they'll turn around, whether it be to the ACLU or anybody else, and ask them to cite the law that is being violated.

Where is it? Who passed it? Who made it so?

We are fighting all over this country. I stood with Justice Roy Moore in Alabama, and as he came under assault from those who said that, somehow or another, he was violating the law, I raised the same question: what law?..."
36 posted on 02/29/2004 3:24:25 PM PST by FBD (...Please press 2 for English...for Espanol, please stay on the line...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies ]

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