|
|
|
|
Randy
SFN Regular
USA
1990 Posts |
 Posted - 07/01/2003 : 15:29:19
|
Fundie Judge Roy Moore doesn't know his law from his @$$!.....
http://www.cnn.com/2003/LAW/07/01/tencommandments.appeal.ap/index.html
ATLANTA, Georgia (AP) -- A federal appeals court ruled Tuesday that a Ten Commandments monument the size of a washing machine must be removed from the Alabama Supreme Court building.
The 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals unanimously affirmed a ruling by a federal judge who said that the 2 1/2-ton granite monument, placed there by Alabama Chief Justice Roy Moore, violates the constitutional separation of church and state.
"If we adopted his position, the chief justice would be free to adorn the walls of the Alabama Supreme Court's courtroom with sectarian religious murals and have decidedly religious quotations painted above the bench," the three-judge panel said.
"Every government building could be topped with a cross, or a menorah, or a statue of Buddha, depending upon the views of the officials with authority over the premises."
Moore put the monument in the rotunda of the courthouse in the middle of the night two summers ago. The monument features tablets bearing the Ten Commandments and historical quotations about the place of God in law.
He was sued by several attorneys who said the monument infringed on their religious freedom. In November, a federal judge ordered the monument removed but then decided it could stay pending appeal.
|
"We are all connected; to each other biologically, to the earth chemically, to the rest of the universe atomically."
"So you're made of detritus [from exploded stars]. Get over it. Or better yet, celebrate it. After all, what nobler thought can one cherish than that the universe lives within us all?"
-Neil DeGrasse Tyson |
|
|
filthy
SFN Die Hard
USA
14408 Posts |
Posted - 07/01/2003 : 17:22:16 [Permalink]
|
So now let's see if he carts it out of the courthouse. I'll volenteer To run the fork-lift, pro bono -- I'm feeling generous.
This whole thing has been giving a chuckle for quite a while.
 |
"What luck for rulers that men do not think." -- Adolf Hitler (1889 - 1945)
"If only we could impeach on the basis of criminal stupidity, 90% of the Rethuglicans and half of the Democrats would be thrown out of office." ~~ P.Z. Myres
"The default position of human nature is to punch the other guy in the face and take his stuff." ~~ Dude
Brother Boot Knife of Warm Humanitarianism,
and Crypto-Communist! 
|
 |
|
|
Dave W.
Info Junkie
USA
26022 Posts |
Posted - 07/02/2003 : 06:58:27 [Permalink]
|
I'm firmly of the opinion that Moore should be removed from the bench, for both abusing his position in order to install a personal monument on public property and, if I remember correctly, saying in an interview months ago that he would never remove it, no matter what the courts ruled (thus thumbing his nose at his own job).
But, there's something to be said for the defense. In this case, it's clear that no laws were enacted regarding the establishment of religion, and that's what the 1st Amendment prohibits. I don't buy the "free speech" defense, since it is, as I said, a personal 2.5 ton block of granite, installed on public lands, and were I to try to install even a blank stone block in a State Government building, I'm sure I wouldn't be able to do so.
But the prosecution is framing this as entirely a separation-of-church-and-state case. Perhaps it does send a message that only "good Christians" will receive justice at that court, but then, in a "free speech" response, all sorts of other monuments should be installed by other people.
I'm sure that the argument is that without Moore's power, nobody else can put big monuments in there, but that's my original point: the installation of the monument was a tremendous abuse of his office. Give Moore the boot, and then you're free to give the monument the boot, as well, protected free speech or not, establishment of religion or not.
Aren't the precedents for this case all those "creche on the courthouse lawn" cases that went through the courts years ago? What were the rulings there? |
- Dave W. (Private Msg, EMail)
Evidently, I rock!
Why not question something for a change?
Visit Dave's Psoriasis Info, too. |
|
|
|
Tim
SFN Regular
USA
775 Posts |
Posted - 07/03/2003 : 04:43:13 [Permalink]
|
I like this article from when the case was being argued to the Appeals Court;
http://www.reclaimamerica.org/PAGES/NEWS/newspage.asp?story=1242
Actually, two things struck me about this particular article. First, it seems honest and balanced--considering the source. Second, the arguments made by Moore's attorney are crazy. Haven't these people ever actually read the US Constitution, or studied American History, at least objectively?
My favorite quote; quote:
Should he lose, "What's going to happen is that every mention of God will eventually be stricken from your public life. 'In God We Trust' will be taken off our money, 'Under God' will be taken off our pledge. When we cannot acknowledge who this God is, it will be taken from us. It's that simple."
If people can't continue practicing their religion without the support and endorsement of government, doesn't that say something about the value of that religion? |
"We got an issue in America. Too many good docs are gettin' out of business. Too many OB/GYNs aren't able to practice their -- their love with women all across this country." Dubya in Poplar Bluff, Missouri, 9/6/2004
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
Topic Locked
