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

Skip to comments.

Alabama Chief Justice Calls Homosexuality 'Evil' in High Court Decision
Nando Times / AP ^ | 2/18/2002 | Phillip Rawls

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Moore also quoted scripture, historical documents and previous state court rulings that he said backed his view.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David White, state coordinator for the Gay and Lesbian Alliance of Alabama, said Moore's opinion reflected outdated thinking.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.


TOPICS: Breaking News; Culture/Society; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: homosexualagenda; sasu
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 321-325 next last
To: Texas Eagle
Well good- perhaps you missed my original post. I said I hoped he based his ruling on law and don't know the full story. But - regardless- his quoatation of scripture (unless quoted from prior legislative record or some duly elected body of the people) is utterly beyond the pale and should raise warning flags.
21 posted on 02/18/2002 3:12:08 PM PST by Burkeman1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: ex-Texan
There is plenty of hard statistical evidence of the destructive effects of gay and lesbian parenting for the judge to have cited instead of Biblical Law. The judge therefore made the right decision for the wrong reasons. Yes, God prohibited homosexual behavior as an abomination, and it is thus no accident that reality manifests Natural Law. That is not to say that all g/l parents are bad for children, but that to advocate it is a terrible policy for a society.
22 posted on 02/18/2002 3:13:19 PM PST by Carry_Okie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Burkeman1
We don't need "god Fearing" judges. We need a god fearing people.

Judges are people, ain't they?

23 posted on 02/18/2002 3:14:04 PM PST by Texas Eagle
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: Burkeman1
If it is a spade you call it a spade. That judge is a true American. Thomas Jefferson himself called homesexuality a black evil.
24 posted on 02/18/2002 3:14:39 PM PST by Vote 4 Nixon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: Texas Eagle
very good reply to the moron.
25 posted on 02/18/2002 3:14:47 PM PST by cactmh
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Burkeman1
Another interesting comment made by the judge is his statement about homosexuality being a "violation of natural law." The whole concept of Natural Law was hotly debated during the Clarence Thomas hearings. Additionally, our founders invoked this concept when they penned that we are "...endowed by our creator with certain unalienable rights." Basing a decision on natural law is not a new concept.
26 posted on 02/18/2002 3:15:24 PM PST by irishlass
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: ex-Texan
Alabama's chief justice on Friday wrote that homosexuality is "an inherent evil" that should not be tolerated.

We tolerate the person but not the behavior. That is what the Judge is saying. It is an evil act.

27 posted on 02/18/2002 3:15:52 PM PST by RAT Patrol
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: lexcorp
There is a considerable gulf between upholding the law and preaching.

Isn't every law pretty much preaching?

28 posted on 02/18/2002 3:16:26 PM PST by Texas Eagle
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: irishlass
No the wouldn't upset me. I don't have a problem with law being based on the bible- on morality - or anything. I do have a problem when a judge inserts his own religious belief in his decision making process. We can base our law on religion and have done so since the founding and before (indeed- what law is not based on some religion?) But when we rule on law- we don't want our judges to rule on cases based on what is in their hearts- but what the law says! The founders would agree with me- indeed- all conservatives who believe in non activist judges would agree with me- this is straight Bork thinking- right out of his books- I suggest you pick one up some day.
29 posted on 02/18/2002 3:16:48 PM PST by Burkeman1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: dogbyte12
It's very funny to me that things that would have been understood and actually expected from a judge are now construed as wrong. Have you seen the decision? I wouldn't be surprised if he wrote three sentences of bible scripture and his beliefs mixed in with 30 sentences of other material. Reporters always blow things out of proportion.
30 posted on 02/18/2002 3:17:24 PM PST by cactmh
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: ex-Texan
David White, state coordinator for the Gay and Lesbian Alliance of Alabama, said Moore's opinion reflected outdated thinking.

No Soddom became outdated, impersonation is a crime and it does not depend on your definition of sexual relations.

"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."

THe judge saw gays for who they are:

1. insane people who believe in their impersonation and impersonating relationships that impose on children, in this case, the equality of the gay relationship with an obviously crucial heterosexual marriage unit that hinges on chosing one another independently to further new generations as the central and sacred stake of their union .

2. Other people more facists who pretend to love for sake of love, but seem to let love hinge on a particular physical aspect of the body, i.e. a gender that seems to facisticaly pre-determine their trusts, central sacred issue of their union that puts in SECOND position the fate of future generations that those facist women wanted control over.

It is their thinking that is far outdated, and like the rise of political and customary fads to which sinful man may often be inclined to follow, it will die and be relegated to the dustbin of history, just as well as any facist or insane cult out there fell down because it supported itself at the cost of true love.

31 posted on 02/18/2002 3:17:38 PM PST by lavaroise
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: cactmh
Thank you. Next to shooting fish in a barrel, that is pretty much my favorite pasttime.
32 posted on 02/18/2002 3:18:13 PM PST by Texas Eagle
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: Burkeman1
What about prostitution. Is it an inherent evil? Is there any moral line you can draw? Are we debating IF there's a line or WHERE is the line?
33 posted on 02/18/2002 3:18:16 PM PST by RAT Patrol
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: Burkeman1
A judge should base his decisions on law and law only..

Would that be mans' law or God's Law? A lot of our legal system was derived from Leviticus, Exodus, Matthew, etc..

34 posted on 02/18/2002 3:19:17 PM PST by lideric
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Burkeman1
Who cares if you have a problem with it? This is for the State of Alabama to deal with. Why don't you mind your own business and leave the erosion of the 10th amendment to the federal bench and congress. They've done a good enough job as it is.

BTW, your state is so utterly Fu---- up that you should really worry about what's going on there rather than the good state of Alabama.

35 posted on 02/18/2002 3:20:49 PM PST by cactmh
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: Vote 4 Nixon
No one should fear God.
36 posted on 02/18/2002 3:22:07 PM PST by Crawdad
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: ex-Texan
I wish all Judges were like Alabama Chief Justice Roy Moore!!
37 posted on 02/18/2002 3:22:08 PM PST by willyboy22
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: cactmh
Good post
38 posted on 02/18/2002 3:22:23 PM PST by Vote 4 Nixon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: cactmh; Texas Eagle
What the good judge has done is leave the mother with a case big enough to drive truck through that she can use to get custody of the kids. This was a 9-0 decision. It should have ended there, at the Mississippi Supreme Court. But now thanks to Moore the mother has constitutional issues that she can raise and can take the whole matter to the federal level where it will wind up eventually at the U.S. Supreme Court. If at the end of it all the mother regains custody of the children from the father then the only person responsible for it is Judge Roy Moore. It will be his fault and his alone.
39 posted on 02/18/2002 3:22:23 PM PST by Non-Sequitur
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: Texas Eagle
We are proud of our fair minded Chief Justice here in Alabama, If we could get more like minded Judges on the US Supreme Court.
40 posted on 02/18/2002 3:22:39 PM PST by southland
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 321-325 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