Chief Justice Roy Moore - PeachParts Mercedes-Benz Forum

Darrell Woods · #1 08-18-2003, 11:01 PM

Anyone care to voice their opinion on the Alabama Chief Justice's stance on posting the Ten Commandments?

Piotr · #2 08-18-2003, 11:11 PM

I have a tough time about this. On one hand, being a catholic (and being from Poland with 94% of population being catholic, and Pope being Polish, that's CATHOLIC) I'm proud of his stand. On the other, it seems like a clear violation of separation of state and religion. This is not simply saying "God" in the Pledge. This is clearly promoting a religion by the State. So, I try not to have a strong opinion, or I'm going to start arguing with myself...

Darrell Woods · #3 08-18-2003, 11:17 PM

This is interesting to me, having sworn to support and defend the constitution against all enemies, foreign and domestic, as a commissioned officer (Air Force, Retired). I would argue that to not allow the posting violates the constitution, since it states not only that congress shall not establish a religion, but also that it shall not prohibit the free exercise thereof. What sayye?

sfloriII · #4 08-19-2003, 12:34 AM

I think he should be allowed to post them. Having them in public certainly does not try to establish a religion.

If you care enough to sign a petition to support the Justice's posting of the Commandments,

Click Here

#5 08-19-2003, 01:07 AM

doesnt bother me personally, but... i believe the intent was to keep religion out of the machinery.

i think it would be far easier to regulate the seperation than to try to accomodate all the potential differing factions later.

i started a thread here earlier about sep of ch&st with regard to the oath used in the courts. you know, i swear to tell the truth, TWT, and NBTT, SHMG. again, it doesnt bother me, but seems out of place, considering how simple this is to adopt language that excludes relig. apparently this old "oath" has been replaced in many systems, and thats fine by me.

i can not see how any religion can be included without the exclusion of others. but then again, maybe thats the bigger picture.

the only higher power i can attest to is the almighty turbo !!!

anthonyb · #6 08-19-2003, 01:39 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Darrell Woods
I would argue that to not allow the posting violates the constitution, since it states not only that congress shall not establish a religion, but also that it shall not prohibit the free exercise thereof. What sayye?

The problem with this argument is that the right of freedom of religious expression applies to individuals, not the government. By saying "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion," the Constitution actually restricts the free exercise of religion on the part of the government. The court system, as being one of the three branches of government, falls under this restriction.

When the Chief Justice of the Alabama Supreme Court posts the Ten Commandments in an Alabama courthouse, on Alabama state property, 1. he is not intending his act to be that of a private citizen, and 2. it will not be interpreted (nor should it be) as the act of a private citizen.

Quote:

i can not see how any religion can be included without the exclusion of others. but then again, maybe thats the bigger picture.

Actually, it's easy. All you have to do is say that this is a Christian country, and the right to religious expression only applies to Christians.

Quote:

the only higher power i can attest to is the almighty turbo !!!

Amen to that.

-anthony

MTI · #7 08-19-2003, 02:44 AM

. . . let's see, does the Judge's multi-ton monument have the "Thou shalt have no other gods before me"? I presume so, since that would be the big "numero uno." I must assume that state funds were used to commission the art work. The next four are basically religous tennents as well. I think the judge would have been okay had he stuck to the last five, which all pertain to codified law.

jjl · #8 08-19-2003, 09:43 AM

Really none of my business since I'm in UK

, but the less we hear of religion anywhere the better in my not so humble opinion..relgious folk think the rest of us are baby-eating barbarians without any ethical or moral whatsits..look at Islamic states to see where it all ends up..ps started off as a catholic, good training for being an agnostic

davidmash · #9 08-19-2003, 10:28 AM

I think too many people are viewing this from the perspective of being in the majority. I was brought up as a Jew. When I went to school as a child, there were never any plays put on during the holidays about Jewish historical events. Everything pertained to Christianity. I felt like an outsider. I did not belong.

I think the same thing applies here. This is not a Christian nation. Most of the “god” stuff was brought into our society during 50’s. The term “under god” was added to the Pledge in the 1950’s.

There are those in our society who do not believe in “god”. They are atheist or agnostic. There are those who believe in different “gods” such as Hindu, Buddhist and so forth. You either have to acknowledge all religious beliefs (including those you hate like Wicken (sp?), Satanic worship and the like) or none. Then there are those in our society who were persecuted in the name of religion who are probably very offended by this display. Two groups come to mind off hand. The first would be the poor souls who were burned at the stake in Salem, MA. The second group might be a bit more familiar to us. They were the ones who welcomed us to their home back in the 1400’s when we “discovered” this land (odd how you can discover something which someone else already knows about). We moved in, stole their land, killed them, banned them from practicing their beliefs, banned them from speaking in their native language, placed them in camps and for the most part, just wiped them out.

A professor of law once told me that the Constitution is there to protect the minorities from the majority, not the other way around. The judge, as far as I am concerned, has no right to put anything any where with the exception of his A$$ in the chair behind the desk. It is not his building. It’s the peoples building … then again … it is in Alabama

The Warden · #10 08-19-2003, 11:55 AM

jjl and davidmash, IMHO you two said it better than I ever could have. I could not agree more. Thank you.

sfloriII · #11 08-19-2003, 12:25 PM

Although the Ten Commandments are followed primarily by Christians, weren't they written well before the birth of Christ?

For that matter, last time I looked at them, the name Christ wasn't even in them. I think they really just pertain to a lot of the common practices and beliefs of most people.

MTI · #12 08-19-2003, 02:43 PM

sfloriII, the 10 C's are "old testament" so JC wouldn't have made his appearance yet. Just for clarification's sake here they are, in order:

1. Thou shalt have no other gods before thee.

2. Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image, or any likeness of any thing that is in the heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth: Thou shalt not bow down thyself to them, nor serve them: for I the Lord thy God am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children unto the third and fourth generation of them that hate me; And shewing mercy unto thousands of them that love me, and keep my commandments.

3. Thou shalt not take the name of the Lord thy God in vain; for the Lord will not hold him guiltless that taketh his name in vain.

4. Remember the sabbath day, to keep it holy.

5. Honor thy father and thy mother.

6. Thou shalt not kill.

7. Thou shalt not commit adultery.

8. Thou shalt not steal.

9. Thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbour.

10. Thou shalt not covet any thing that is thy neighbour's, thou shalt not covet thy neighbour's wife, nor his manservant, nor his maidservant, nor his ox, nor his ass, nor anything that is thy neighbor's.

As stated before, the first five, viewed in our context are clearly religious, while the next five are primarily secular/legal. Had Mel Brooks not slipped the third tablet, we might have the final five!

sfloriII · #13 08-19-2003, 05:33 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by MTI
sfloriII, the 10 C's are "old testament" so JC wouldn't have made his appearance yet.

Had Mel Brooks not slipped the third tablet, we might have the final five!

I was really stating that the Commandments were written before the birth of Christ, but doing it in a question form because it's so obvious.

Mel Brooks? Thank God he dropped the last five!! I've got a hard enough time keeping with the first ten!!

MTI · #14 08-19-2003, 06:23 PM

10. Thou shalt not covet any thing that is thy neighbour's, thou shalt not covet thy neighbour's wife, nor his manservant, nor his maidservant, nor his ox, nor his ass, nor anything that is thy neighbor's.

So, that's where the anti-gay thing is from!

sfloriII · #15 08-19-2003, 06:26 PM

HAHAHAHAHA!!