"abhorrent, immoral, detestable, a crime against nature, and a violation of the laws of nature."Hmmm.. bet they're talkin bout them queers and faggots.
Posted on 02/18/2002 2:50:21 PM PST by ex-Texan
Alabama Chief Justice Calls Homosexuality 'Evil' In High Court Decision
By Phillip Rawls
Associated Press
MONTGOMERY, Ala. - In awarding custody of three teenagers to their father instead of their gay mother, Alabama's chief justice on Friday wrote that homosexuality is "an inherent evil" that should not be tolerated.
The nine-judge Alabama Supreme Court ruled unanimously in favor of a Birmingham man and against his ex-wife, who now lives with her gay partner in southern California.
The parents weren't named in court documents to protect the identity of the children, ages 15, 17 and 18.
Chief Justice Roy Moore wrote that the mother's relationship made her an unfit parent and that homosexuality is "abhorrent, immoral, detestable, a crime against nature, and a violation of the laws of nature."
Moore also quoted scripture, historical documents and previous state court rulings that he said backed his view.
Moore is known for his decision to place washing machine-sized monuments of the Ten Commandments in the state judicial building after he became chief justice last year. He earlier became known nationally as the "Ten Commandments judge" when he fought to keep a plaque of the Biblical commandments in his courtroom as a district judge.
David White, state coordinator for the Gay and Lesbian Alliance of Alabama, said Moore's opinion reflected outdated thinking.
"It's unfortunate Alabama is going to be embarrassed once again by a religious fanatic in a position of power in Alabama," White said. "It's obvious he cannot judge a gay person fairly and he should be removed from office."
John Giles, state president of the Christian Coalition, said Moore's decision protected the institution of marriage and strengthened the traditional family.
The father had held custody since 1996, but the mother petitioned for custody in June 2000, contending the father had been abusive.
John Durward, the father's attorney, said his client "is very relieved." The mother's attorney, Wendy Crew, did not return a telephone call seeking comment.
Here is the first paragraph and the first part of the second paragraph of the "Declaration of Independence". That's where I got it.
When in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.
We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness...
"abhorrent, immoral, detestable, a crime against nature, and a violation of the laws of nature."Hmmm.. bet they're talkin bout them queers and faggots.
The father held custody since 1996,... what abusive? He wouldn't let the kids sleep over with the mother and her "butch" lover?
She can put her petition here
The best judges insert personal political and religious opinions-- otherwise, how is the "judged" to understand the decision? It is within the personal political and religious opinion that mercy is shown-- else mercy would rob justice.
Any behavior that is destructive to society can also be found to be un biblical and therefore evil. I also find it kind of telling that in any religion older than about 50 years the same moral laws apply. Even the Muslims consider homosexuality to be a sin. Name one old religion that contradicted that mind set. When you cry that this judge is wrong for stating the obvious then you are undoing the good that this judge is trying to do for mankind. He is trying to make society less deviant, and destructive. When you attack him for that then you are in effect making the world more deviant and destructive. That seems like a heavy burden that you are going to have carry. It could even be considered evil in of itself.
Who cares how the judged understands the decisison against him? Is that a new legal concept I am unaware of? Do we really care if a murderer understands why he is being executed under the law?
Here is the whacky thing I do. I pretend the judge is somebody else. If this judge ruled and stated something was evil, and quoted from L. Ron Hubbard's book Dianetics because he was a Scientologist judge, I would not like it one bit.
Jesus had a saying you know... When in Rome, do as the Romans do. Since we live in a pluralistic society, I would rather my judges follow the law, then let their interpretation of God's will decide cases. If a judge converts to Scientology, Hare Krishna, or Voodoo on the bench and hears your case, you will appreciate my point of view.
Btw, I am the son of a minister, and am extremely pro-christian. I can't believe you folks who find it shocking that some of us believe that sermons should be given from the pulpit, and law should be interpreted through the constitution. What a radical idea.
I'm with you. This guy had no business legislating from the bench. I want congressmen quoting the Bible when they write the laws, and judges to make sure the congressmen stick to the constitution.
A judge is not a technician, looking up the appropriate law and filling in the blank. We elect judges to decide cases that are difficult, to apply wise, godly principles in a way that is right.
You people that are so upset when someone says something that is politically incorrect--get over it. Judge Roy Moore is one of the best judges in this country. He doesn't pander to political correctness.
The reason we pass laws is to punish evil, so what is wrong with a judge calling someone evil? It is time we all started speaking the plain truth and saying what we mean instead of spouting politically correct bullduty.
I take it then that you are apoplectic generally about legal positivism and the breaks with precedent that were the stock in trade of the Warren and Burger Courts.
What do you think of the quiet activism of gay civil servants (e.g. here in Texas), who have campaigned to influence children's protective services and welfare agencies to allow gay couples to adopt -- and to get state employees fired promptly who disagree with the policy, and complain that it happens to be not merely non-statutory, but illegal?
First, that implies moral equivalence of moslemism to the Bible, which, of course, compares a pagan cult to God's truth and His word.
Second, this is a Christian nation, so ergo Alabama is not going to BE heathen. Even if Alabama COULD become moslem, the pagan rules or beliefs of moslemism would not or could not be part of law.
In summary: God and the Bible are truth. WE---the USA---are RIGHT. THEY---the pagan cults like mohammedanism---are wrong, are false. OUR way---Western, Judeo-Christian, freedom based upon natural rights in a Republic---DESERVE to prevail. When we start equating others with us, as the relativistic, post-modernist left does, then we have lost claim to our birthright. The proof is in our SUCCESS. The proof is in the abject moral and material failure of third-world feral and uncivlizied races. To deny that is to hate self---which is the way of the American left.
Our moral superiority and our foundation in total truth precludes any serious consideration of comparing OUR way to the ways of other multi-culti, diversity, whacko third-world sickos like the moon-worshipping, boy-buggering islams.
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.