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Moore also quoted scripture, historical documents and previous state court rulings that he said backed his view.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David White, state coordinator for the Gay and Lesbian Alliance of Alabama, said Moore's opinion reflected outdated thinking.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.
As I said in another post, I don't find any Scriptural evidence that homosexuals are uniquely immoral in comparison to adulterers and fornicators. I plan on doing a study on this in the near future, and I'll pass it along when I'm done. If someone has something they can share with me, I'd appreciate it.
To infer that, because all are sinners, none should be parents goes against God's own teaching. God knew every word we would utter before we were born. Yet he told us to "be fruitful and multiply." To have kids. To become parents. Despite the fact that He knew we'd be sinners.
Queers can't do that, because it requires a male and a female to procreate. That morally sound (though sinful) people might thus believe that it is wrong for queers to raise children is in keeping with the social/sexual/parental order established by God.
That's all.
I would agree with you, but not necessarily in the case where the homosexual is the natural parent. It is entirely conceivable to me where, if the father was a serial fornicator, with a revolving door of sleep-over girlfriends, it might be better for the child to be with his lesbian mother, provided she showed more stability and discretion. This is based on my understanding of Scripture, which does not, in my reading, uniquely condemn homosexuality vis-a-vis fornication and adultery.
My goal is not to soften our stance against homosexuality, but to stiffen it against *all* forms of sexual immorality, which are arguably equally destructive.
Probably. Then again, kezeke may just be queer...?
Stability and discretion. A lesbian. You're serious, aren't you? God help us all.
Second, Judge Moore's comments have no precedential value. The opinion of the Alabama Supreme Court, which Judge Moore did not author, merely holds that a state appellate court was wrong to overturn the state trial court's factual (as opposed to legal) determination that the mother did not bear her burden to prove that the father was abusive and that a transfer of custody to the mother would materially improve the lives of the children. Her homosexuality entered into the Supreme Court's opinion only minimally, if at all. The Supreme Court did not hold that homosexuality was grounds for denying custody.
Judge Moore wrote a concurring opinion in which he offers his opinion that (among other things) traditional legal and extra-legal abhorrence of homosexuality should be grounds for denying custody. Judge Moore's concurrence, which no one else signed on to and which in my view is rambling and nearly incoherent, does not bind any court.
The opinion is here: http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?court=al&vol=1002045&invol=2 (Sorry, I don't know how to link)
Stability and discretion. A lesbian. You're serious, aren't you? God help us all.
I would say you're having trouble seeing past your hatred of homosexuality. I tried providing Scripture to support my arguments, but instead you respond as you have. That I "may just be queer?" Please.
Rather than allow Scripture to teach you, you have been informed by your prejudices and hatreds. Homosexuality is SO repugnant to you, that you ignore that I condemn it as sexual immorality because I don't condemn it as severely as you do. You, who claim to be sons of God, treat a brother with a complete lack of charity, and don't bother to crack your Bibles to enlighten me.
Think a second time, friends.
I do not hate homosexuals. I hate what they do but not them. I would have them punished for what they choose to do. How can we punish for what is choosen not to be done? Now a person who does not participate in homosexual/sodomite behaviours should not be punished. have I advocated that they should?
Hey - it's a FR thread with Homosexuality in the title. What do you expect. Hang on and enjoy the ride.
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.