-
We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.
Good Birmingham Post-Herald Article on Moore
- Thread starter BDawg
- Start date
DealMonkey
Lifer
Like Bush, it's quite clear Moore is also using religion to further his political/judicial career.
DealMonkey
Lifer
I didn't see that. Where? Did you imagine it?
If the judge made a ruling not based on law but on his religious beliefs, or as the author implied, because someone didn't have the judge's same beliefs (no examples of this were given so I'm not sure how this could happen), then that would be a matter for appeal. I wonder how many of judge Moore's cases have been appealed because of that? I think this woman is being a bit hysterical.
edit: I see from a google search that during the 2000 election for Alabama Supreme Court Judge Moore was the target of a smear campaign. "Justice See claimed in a mailer that Judge Moore was "soft on crime" because he let 41 drug dealers off with reduced sentences or probation." Yeah, he's letting all of those druggies off because of his religious beliefs. Those druggies probably participated in the Judge's prayers in open court. Yeah, that's it.
The author wrote: There's nothing wrong with public displays of the Ten Commandments. as well as If any other judge had put a Ten Commandments plaque in an Alabama courtroom, most of us never would have heard about it. It's doubtful there would have been any lawsuits, and Roy Moore, now Alabama's chief justice, still would be in a circuit judge in Gadsden.
According to this website Moore has already been sued for posting a plaque of the ten commandments in his courtroom. This dingaling doesn't know what she's talking about because she's portraying a boogyman.
Moore first came under fire in 1992 after being elected judge of Alabama?s 16th Judicial Circuit Court when he displayed a plaque of the Ten Commandments and permitted prayers in the courtroom. The ACLU filed a lawsuit in 1995 alleging the display and the prayers violated the ?separation of church and state.? The case went all the way to the Alabama Supreme Court, with that court dismissing the lawsuit.
There's even more.
The most egregious element of the current case is an inflammatory letter Morris Dees, director of the Southern Poverty Law Center, wrote to fellow attorneys for the plaintiffs. Mysteriously, this letter found its way to Moore?s attorneys. In it, Dees calls Moore a ?bigot? and ?a lone religious nut in partnership with a fanatical church.?
Moreover, Dees vows to ?make this case so dirty that no appeals court will reverse [U.S. District Judge Myron] Thompson.?
On that last point, Melchior has filed a motion to recuse Thompson, arguing ?the language of the letter suggests judicial tampering going on.? Thompson will hear the case unless the motion is granted.
?The appearance of impropriety is that Dees spoke to Judge Thompson or has an idea how he is going to rule,? Melchior explained.
In turn, Dees has filed for a motion to strike his letter from the record.
Hmm, more smearing of a man who uses the ten commandments as guidance in his life. It's not like he's out pulling the wings off of butterflies.
His defiance of a federal judge has more to do with his obligation to his state rather than the whim of a federal court. The states expect to be able to govern themselves without federal interference.
It's an interesting twist, a judge (state judge) ignoring another judge (a federal judge), but it's not that simple.
edit: I see from a google search that during the 2000 election for Alabama Supreme Court Judge Moore was the target of a smear campaign. "Justice See claimed in a mailer that Judge Moore was "soft on crime" because he let 41 drug dealers off with reduced sentences or probation." Yeah, he's letting all of those druggies off because of his religious beliefs. Those druggies probably participated in the Judge's prayers in open court. Yeah, that's it.
The author wrote: There's nothing wrong with public displays of the Ten Commandments. as well as If any other judge had put a Ten Commandments plaque in an Alabama courtroom, most of us never would have heard about it. It's doubtful there would have been any lawsuits, and Roy Moore, now Alabama's chief justice, still would be in a circuit judge in Gadsden.
According to this website Moore has already been sued for posting a plaque of the ten commandments in his courtroom. This dingaling doesn't know what she's talking about because she's portraying a boogyman.
Moore first came under fire in 1992 after being elected judge of Alabama?s 16th Judicial Circuit Court when he displayed a plaque of the Ten Commandments and permitted prayers in the courtroom. The ACLU filed a lawsuit in 1995 alleging the display and the prayers violated the ?separation of church and state.? The case went all the way to the Alabama Supreme Court, with that court dismissing the lawsuit.
There's even more.
The most egregious element of the current case is an inflammatory letter Morris Dees, director of the Southern Poverty Law Center, wrote to fellow attorneys for the plaintiffs. Mysteriously, this letter found its way to Moore?s attorneys. In it, Dees calls Moore a ?bigot? and ?a lone religious nut in partnership with a fanatical church.?
Moreover, Dees vows to ?make this case so dirty that no appeals court will reverse [U.S. District Judge Myron] Thompson.?
On that last point, Melchior has filed a motion to recuse Thompson, arguing ?the language of the letter suggests judicial tampering going on.? Thompson will hear the case unless the motion is granted.
?The appearance of impropriety is that Dees spoke to Judge Thompson or has an idea how he is going to rule,? Melchior explained.
In turn, Dees has filed for a motion to strike his letter from the record.
Hmm, more smearing of a man who uses the ten commandments as guidance in his life. It's not like he's out pulling the wings off of butterflies.
His defiance of a federal judge has more to do with his obligation to his state rather than the whim of a federal court. The states expect to be able to govern themselves without federal interference.
It's an interesting twist, a judge (state judge) ignoring another judge (a federal judge), but it's not that simple.
DealMonkey
Lifer
The bottom line is that Moore's monument has been ruled unconstitutional. He's been ordered to remove it. He has refused to obey a federal court order. He's been suspended now. Yet him and his band of religious wackos are converging on the rotunda of the Alabama judicial building like Jesus Christ was freaking born there or something. Look people, everyone has the right to practice their religion pretty much any place they want. In fact, church is a good choice. But the government has a duty to remain neutral in religious affairs. Sticking a 2-1/2 ton stone monument of the ten commandments in the way of everyone entering an important state building IS NOT staying neutral.
Do a Google search for "First Amendment Establishment Clause" if you want to learn why. In closing, I'll leave you with a little quote by Jesus which fits Moore's little hypocritical political stunt quite neatly:
"When you pray, you are not to be like the hypocrites; for they love to stand and pray in the synagogues and on the street corners so that they may be seen by men. Truly I say to you, they have their reward in full. "
- Matthew 6:5
Do a Google search for "First Amendment Establishment Clause" if you want to learn why. In closing, I'll leave you with a little quote by Jesus which fits Moore's little hypocritical political stunt quite neatly:
"When you pray, you are not to be like the hypocrites; for they love to stand and pray in the synagogues and on the street corners so that they may be seen by men. Truly I say to you, they have their reward in full. "
- Matthew 6:5
DealMonkey
Lifer
DealMonkey
Lifer
The thing that worries me with any case like this is not necessarily the separation, but impartiality. I would react the same way if a judge had a monument with similar quotations from the Talmud or the Pentatuech (Yes, yes, 😛), or the Q'uran, or any sort of extreme display of religious faith. This is not having a poster of the 10 Commandments in your office, or wearing a cross around your neck, this is a something-odd ton monument bolted to the floor of the Judicial Building of Alabama.
I respect Moore's religious faith, like I do of any other person. Where I begin to get worried is when he makes quotes that his "duty under the Constitution is to acknowledge the Judeo-Christian God, not the gods of other faiths. We are not a nation founded upon the Hindu god or Buddha." This is not a man who regards equality of religion as a paramount ideal: he appears to be willing to place his religion above others in the course of his work. In his line of work, that can have dangerous implications.
This is not a man I want interpreting Constitutional law.
Tsk tsk, tcsenter, here we were talking about ad hominem attacks and flames, and here we see them rearing their ugly heads again. Shame on you. 😛
I don't necessarily think that this is entirely opinion. I would admit that if you looked at the ethnic and religious makeup of the American population from our conception to now, you would find that Judeo-Christian belief systems comprise a significant portion. The extent to which those belief systems were incorporated into daily life, however, is up for debate.
Not only that, one must also look at the founding fathers (in their entirety, not just Jefferson, not just Adams, not just Franklin, etc.) and understand what their intent was as a group. I am ashamed to admit that I do not know enough about them as a whole to be able to make a statement on this. I know quite a bit about Franklin and Jefferson, but that is the extent of my knowledge.
It doesn't matter whether or not your opinion is that the comments are legitimate. I stated that the article contained "comments supporting the legitimacy of the public display of the Ten Commandments." Apparently unable to read, you asked in response:
I then reprinted those comments for your edification, since you couldn't seem to find them without my assistance.
The article in fact contains "comments supporting the legitimacy of the public display of the Ten Commandments" just as I stated. Whether you agree with those comments is irrelevant to my original statement.
Please try to follow the discussion.
How can the actions of one man placing a statue in a public rotunda equate to the government? What laws were passed with this single person's actions that established an official, governmental religion? Do you not understand that the government is not involved? Just because a judge was the one who placed the statue there doesn't mean it's a function of the government.
It's a piece of art, it should be treated that way.
It's a witch hunt by the ACLU. They went after him back in 1995 (see my other message) for having a plaque of the ten commandments in his courtroom. The ACLU lost then. For this federal judge to interfere in state matters is more disconcerting than the statue itself.
And nowhere does "separation of church and state" exist in the constitution. That was taken from a letter Jefferson wrote to a baptist church in Conn that was concerned about another religion that was rumored to be lobbying for itself to become the national religion. Jefferson reassured them that would not happen.
The founding fathers did not want an official state religion, but they also wanted freedom of religion (of your own choosing) as well as freedom of expression.
lmao!
Wow. Had I wanted to read about the drafting of the First Amendment and its history, I would have thought to consult something eminently historical such as the Debates in the Convention, the Federalist Papers, or one of the pre-eminent treatises on the Federal Constitution such St. George Tucker's 'American Blackstone', William Rawle's "A View of the Constitution of the United States of America", or Joseph Story's "Commentaries on the Constitution of the United States".
Little did I know that a fringe leftwing E-mag like Slate.com would be an authoritative source of information on the meaning of the constitution and the First Amendment. Thanks for the tip!
Originally posted by: tcsenter
lmao!
Wow. Had I wanted to read about the drafting of the First Amendment and its history, I would have thought to consult something eminently historical such as the Debates in the Convention, the Federalist Papers, or one of the pre-eminent treatises on the Federal Constitution such St. George Tucker's 'American Blackstone', William Rawle's "A View of the Constitution of the United States of America", or Joseph Story's "Commentaries on the Constitution of the United States".
Little did I know that a fringe leftwing E-mag like Slate.com would be an authoritative source of information on the meaning of the constitution and the First Amendment. Thanks for the tip!
Well? Did you consult those books? They're now on my book list, at least. 😛
DealMonkey
Lifer
You can attack me all you want tcsenter, however it only proves how weak your argument is. The comments aren't legitimate, because they aren't true. Maybe that's why I couldn't find them 😉
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes + WCL Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 24K
-
-
