[BearCub]

The pro-freedom view is to let people have the freedom to express their views. Denying Judge Moore this freedom is anti-freedom.

Stop miscasting the issue. People are free to express their religious views - government is not. Judge Mooore's views aren't at issue here. Judge Moore is not acting as a private citizen when he is at work - he is 'the government'.

Once again I'll say: Those of you who support Judge Moore are doing so only because his views reflect your own. If he were a Muslim wanting to put up a tribute to the Koran then you'd be screaming bloody murder.

But why? He'd only be expressing his views...

The dishonesty of your opinion is obvious.

[WOSG]

"Those of you who support Judge Moore are doing so only because his views reflect your own."

NO. NOT SO. Judge Moore's particluar religious views do *not* reflect my own, I am a non-fundamentalist Catholic for one,
and simply because he has an official capacity does not mean he throws away his rights of expression.

"If he were a Muslim wanting to put up a tribute to the Koran then you'd be screaming bloody murder. "
NO, WRONG, ANOTHER STRAWMAN. I wouldnt and nor should you disallow public officials from expressions that are consistent with Muslim religion, or favorable to it, so long as it doesnt constitute an "establishment of religion".
Posting a plaque with a quote from the Koran in a Govt building for example is in that permissible category, as is a plaque with the Ten Commandments ... as is, for example, President Bush saying "Islam is a religion of peace".
(Now if Bush was saying that about Christianity, the ACLU would be having fits!)