Posted on 08/21/2003 6:10:47 PM PDT by VeryUnprogressive
After three pages of sound and fury, you seem to have been the first to post the full position of Keyes in your Post #255. I recommend others go back and read it.
Keyes is dead-on. This is an issue of Federal judges making law from the bench on a subject which Congress has been specifically prohibited from making law by the First Amendment. Therefore, no decree by a Federal judge on this subject has force of legitimate law behind it, only their own judicial precedent and interpretation via their own constuct.
This is a genuine States Rights matter under the 10th Amendment. Congress has no say in the matter. Unless it is Congress trying to set up a specific Sect as a State Religion neither do Federal judges. This is just a huge power grab by unelected Federal judges. Calling this situation "obeying the law" is no different than having a Federal judge ordering you without trial to a concentration camp and then having everyone in the enforcement chain obey the order because they are "obeying the law". There is no applicable law. It is Judicial Tyranny, pure and simple. They are trying to cloak it in the words of the First Amendment, which says precisely the opposite!
There is no Federal law saying Alabama can't post whatever they wish in their own Courthouse - only Federal Judicial fiat which goes against the very words and meaning of the Constitution. Judge Moore stands on solid Constitutional grounds. The Feds are being exposed, not just in this but in their entire long, miserable train of usurptions in this matter. This entire thing started in 1962 when they threw prayer out of public schools and they have been making law out of the same phony whole cloth ever since.
That gravitas line didn't work for the Dims in 2000, and it doesn't work now.
The deposits of tin in the ancient world were usually small and not very plentiful. The Phoenicians discovered the tin deposits of the British Isles through their own exploring and seeking out of new products and markets for them. They kept the knowledge of the Cornish tin mines a closely guarded secret so they could control trade in the metal and charge a high price for it. After the Punic wars, Carthage, the one remaining city of the Phoenicians, became less and less an important economic power. With their well - known efficiency and thoroughness, the Romans counted access to the British tin mines as one of the advantages of conquering the island. Julius Caesar knew of the importance of British tin when he invaded the island in 55 to 54 B.C. After the conquest of Britain during the reign of Claudius, the Romans were in control of most of the world's supply of the metal. Hence, the closely guarded treasure secret of Britain's tin passed hands from the Phoenicians to the Romans.The fact that tin trade existed is too well attested to need proof. Herodotus as early as 445 BC speaks of the British Isles as the Tin Islands or Cassiterides. Pytheas (352-323 BC) mentions the tin trade, as does also Polybius (circa 160). Diodorus Siculus gives a detailed description of the trade. He tells us that the tin was mined, beaten into squares, and carried to an island called Ictis, joined to the mainland at low tide, which is generally held to be Mount St. Michael in Cornwall, although some have identified it with Falmouth. Thence it was shipped to Morlais, and transported across France on pack horses to Marseilles. From Marseilles it was again shipped to Phoenicia. Innumerable ancient workings in Cornwall still attest the trade, and tin is still mined there today. Lord Avebury and Sir John Evans held the opinion that the trade existed as early as 1500 BC, and Sir Edward Creasy in his History of England writes: "The British mines mainly suppled the glorious adornment of Solomon's Temple". This matter ties in very well with the involvement of Phoenician builders with construction of Solomon's Temple.
Get a grip. When you have lost all sense of humor, you might as well cash it in.
I noticed that the instigator of this thread got the axe. Hmmmmmm.....what does that say about who and what Alan Keyes is all about and who his greatest fans are?
I feel sorry for all of you that pant over the thought of touching the hem of his garment. It's pathetic.
Petty remarks come from what kind of people?
Then you also know that in order for a debate to take place there has to be discussion on both sides of the issue.
You also must be aware that Henry was comfortable with ending the church's taxing power in the new government. He did express concern that the people might not meet their obligations to the church.
I wonder what he might think of todays temporal landscape where it is the churches that are not meeting their obligations to the people.
That is, you, yourself, according to me, may have issues you are not dealing with straight up, the way a man should, and that comes out in your recourse to online "multiple personas". I speak from afar, only knowing you from observation over a few years as a regular poster. I am not even saying that there is no good in dealing with issues in this way on your part. Look at James Thurber! Look at many a professional comedian, actor, author -- many times they too deal with such very perosnal issues through means of story-telling and role-playing. There's some creative juice in it.
I'm just putting a proposition before you. Are you all you can be?
Perhaps your ability to discern is lacking or you like to pretend. Either way, it isn't flattering.
I love the whine about the ad hominem crap. Don't you get it? Keyes does and has turned people off enough to make most of what he says lost on his pompous, know-it-all manner.
If that is what one leads with, the "attitude" tends to take center stage. Thus, criticism of him is justifiably focused on the very thing that he pushes most; that no-one-knows-better-than-I routine. He's too puffed up and for many observers, it's distracting enough to drown out his words.
I realize that you Keyes worshipers cannot understand this because you have this idol fixation. Funny.....he depends on suckers like you to make a living for himself.
Exactly. Hatred and anger only hurt you, not the person at whom they are directed. That is why we must forgive, forgive, and forgive. If nothing else, do it because it is in your own self-interest.
Exactly the word that their kind would use, too.
Which he has never said, claimed, or implied, as you know VERY WELL. But go on saying ti anyway. If you repeat something enough, it will become true, right?
Oh yes, because it couldn't possibly be that anyone would have trouble with Alan Keyes' public remarks and divisive nature. It must be personal. < /sarcasm >
I realize how impossible it is for you guys to believe that Keyes could make a mistake, but the truth is, he had most of "us" (BOO!) in his camp at one time or another. I used to like him quite a lot...but, as with John McCain, my opinion of him evolved.
I don't have a "personal vendetta" against McCain, either.
Come to think of it, that's someone's M.O. (think "bait and switch"), and that someone used to work for Keyes.
Free Republic's rules prevent me from posting my guess.
Well, I know that this may come as a shock to some of you, but I myself was once a Keyes booster of sorts.
However, I really just don't understand what he's talking about in this current matter concerning the Ten Commandments monument. I had thought that he was saying that he recognized the law to be the law, but that he felt that, in the finest American tradition of civil disobedience, he was prepared as a matter of conscience to interfere with the operation of the law and cheerfully accept whatever penalty might result as a consequence. Last night, however, he seemed to be arguing that each of us have a right determine for ourselves what the law is on any particular matter. I'm not sure what that philosophy is, but it doesn't sound very conservative to me.
It's all very frightening, actually. ;-)
--------------------------------
I've thought about it. That's what wimps tell themselves to justify passivity, fear, confusion, and excessive inhibition when they are being abused, deceived, ridiculed, or otherwise wronged. Blandness is not spoken at my house. People get what they earn. A good kick in the behind is necessary corrective action.
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.