Alabama Justice Suspended Over Monument (10 Commandments Being Violated, Big Time!)

Associated Press ^ | August 22, 2003 | BOB JOHNSON

[Bluntpoint]

I know I am going to get flamed here, but, could it be that we have the classic case of the right message but the most absurd and wrong messenger?

[P.O.E.]

I've been called many things in my day, but never a "wrong messenger".

"Bad example", yes, often. "Wrong messenger", no.

Kidding aside, I assume you meant the Justice More? In which case, I guess I'd have to say somebody had to do it.

[rebel]

You wrote, "The devil's crowd always overplays their hand. Persecution is always a pretext for revival."

I agree! All those "christians" who will "enforce the law" no matter what the law is form the "luke warm" church that needs purifing.

This has been a pivotal event for me. Never before has the co-opting of the statist christians been more clear. Never before has our government been more clearly anti-God. They deem themselves supreme and will tolerate no higher authority.

And President Bush is SILENT! He too believes in supreme government!

[Bluntpoint]

Judge Moore could have uses his position to "re-educate" the public on the connection between civil law and God's law.

His in your face, middle of the night ambush, just fed his own self-aggrandizement and hurt his cause.

He can no longer sit on the highest court expecting others to submit to "Ceasar's law" and be an impediment to that same law.

It would have been an appellate nightmare.

For the record, I have no problems with the Commandments. I have practiced in courts for years with similar artifacts.

However, the judges and adminstrators associated with those courts, did not turn the availability of such devices into a tool for their own glory and moral vanity.

[rebel]

The most misunderstood and misused political quote from scripture. What is the "governing authorities" in our political system?

It is not judges and elected officals. All these swear an oath to up hold the ...CONSTITUTION?

THE CONSTITUTION IS THE GOVERNING AUTHORITY OF ROMANS 13.

If they rule unconstitutionally they need not be obeyed. They have over stepped their authority.

When they govern unconstitutionally, as in Judge Moores case, they are governing by brute force. Remember, power flows form the barrel of a gun.

But then what else can God haters act on but force?

[rebel]

You wrote, "I don't understand why people feel their faith is threatened if the State doesn't endorse it. As someone who wants to see the State have less rather than more power, I can't understand why anyone on FR would have a principled reason for wanting the state throw it's weight in one direction or the other."

What is supposed to be the constitutional check on government power? The states. The 10th amendment. Then the people.

You resist states rights, you are endorsing an all powerful central government. If the Mormans in Utah want a monument of some sort that is their right. Pretend some small town of Buddists in Kalifornia want somme sort of monument that is their right.

Want to prevent all powerful government? Support states rights.

[Non-Sequitur]

If they rule unconstitutionally they need not be obeyed. They have over stepped their authority.

So their actions are unconstitutional because you say that they are? What if I say that their actions are constitutional? Does that overrule you?

[Princeliberty]

The federal courts are violating the Rule
of Law by raping the Constitution.
Defying a ruling and illegal order that violate
the Constitution does not violate the Rule of Law
in fact Judge Moore is upholding the Rule of Law
by fighting a lawless federal judge.

[rebel]

So you say that whatever the SC says is LAW and we must sumbit. Like the Dred Scott decision?

If you are serious, you endorse the judical tyranny that has developed.

At some point common sense must rule.

The founders believed that good men would sit on the courts.

Any supposedly educated judge who says that the founders intended to forbid displays of the like this and forbid any reference to the God of the bible in the public arena is LIAR and wants to usurp POWER! It's that simple.

Never in their wildest dreams did the founders intend to prevent what Judge Moore did. This is a federal power grab pure and simple. Bibilical christianity has always opposed tyrannts. The next generation must be de-christianized, or at least statist christians to further their tyrannical desires.

Sadly, too many christians are already statists.

[P.O.E.]

Judge Moore could have uses his position to "re-educate" the public on the connection between civil law and God's law.

I think he's doing exactly that. Although, to your point, perhaps not in the "best" way.

[Bluntpoint]

Judge Moore decided on his own to be part of the system. Now he has to follow the rules of that system (Following higher courts, etc).

Judge Moore is free to fight this ruling, as a private citizen.

He would not permit litigants in front of his bench to pick and choose which court opinions are binding and which court opinions are not binding on them.

It is time that Moore remove his robes and take his fight to the ballot box.

[UncleDudley]

What is the first thing a witness is asked to do in court? Put your hand on the what? and swear to whom?

Ginsburg and the ACLU would like to change that to the Washington Post. And swear to the memory of Madelyn (sp?) O'Hare.

[Bluntpoint]

Is your first name E.D.G.A.R.?

[Bluntpoint]

Actually, all courts give you a choice not to swear on the bible.

[Bluntpoint]

As an example of how the oath is treated today:

The Ohio Revised Code merely says "a person may be sworn in any form he deems binding on his conscience." No Columbus court — from municipal to federal — uses a Bible, though most still end the oath with "so help me God."

[P.O.E.]

It's a "Dr Strangelove" reference. I can't tell you more without giving the movie away (if you haven't seen it yet).

[Bluntpoint]

But I learned to love the bomb!

[rebel]

That may well be right! It may be that christians SHOULD NOT work for government.

But think of what you are creating. A monlitihic system with absolute power an no defiance allowed or justified. You accecpt the Nuremberg Defence.

When the court acts in a clearly unconstitutional way it ought to be defied by someone in power. It's called interposition. It was right to defy Dred Scott and it is right to defy this.

[FReepaholic]

>>...What is the first thing a witness is asked to do in court? Put your hand on the what? and swear to whom?...<<

I've never been in court here in Florida, but I have given sworn depostition several times. Each time I was asked only to raise my right hand and swear to tell the truth, whole truth, and nothing but the truth.

No bible and no swearing to God.

[Bluntpoint]

Again, not just christians. Anyone in the court system, who relys on the power of precedent and higher court or adimistrative authority, cannot pick and choose when and where to follow such higher authority and then expect his or her authority to be binding on those who find themselve standing in front of his or her bench or panel.