Moore refuses to move monument!

[Syrinx]

[underpants]

1. Very informative. Thanks for all the info

:shrug:

[Syrinx]

3. posted it as soon as he said it on local tv

get it here first. :)

[MiltonLeBerle]

21. Ooooooohhhh C-o-o-l. Is there a prize for that?

You don't have time to say who "Moore" is, or what monument it is, or why anyone should care about it one way or the other?

[Syrinx]

35. "c-o-o-l"

If anyone has been following the political discussions here
at all, they would know the story about Roy Moore and the 10
commandments monument. His decision has been anticipated this
week. And I posted it the second it came out of his mouth.
And I followed it up with a link to the ap story the second
there was one.

[Trek234]

36. This has been in national news

several times for months now. If you don't know about the monument or Moore then you don't pay attention.

[Cush]

2. On CNN & FOX

says he's going to appeal to the SCOTUS

[madmax]

6. This cost the tax payers of Alabama

125 Million dollars in legal fees. Good use of taxpayers money - I'm sure God is sooooooooo proud.

[gratuitous]

18. $125 million in legal fees?

Whoa, I'd like to see the accounting on that figure! Hell, our firm is kicking the tobacco companies' collective ass from here to St. Swithins Day, and we haven't spent 1/1000 that much on the appeals! I can't imagine how $125 million in fees were generated on such a minor matter: No expensive witnesses or exhibits, just legal briefing.

[0007]

27. So who is gonna argue this case?

James A. Baker III? LOL!

[drdigi420]

4. THIS is a prime reason

why the seperation of church and state was put in.

This ignorant asshole actually complained that the fed govt was trying to take away the right of the STATE to acknowledge "god".

THEY HAVE NO SUCH RIGHT.

Religion is evil. And this is a good example of why I feel this way.

[Warpy]

13. Religion can be

...a source of great comfort for believers having stressful times.

This isn't about the validity or usefulness about religion.

It's about the state sanction of a particular religious tradition.

State religions are always dreadful things, and so are religious states.

[RapidCreek]

30. Hey that's GREAT!!!

Let the Christians in that state enjoy exclusively the comfort of paying for the legal battle! Why the fuck should those who don't feel they have the right to market their faith on state grounds have to pay the way for those who do?

RC

[Skittles]

37. I absolutely agree

I don't understand what it is about SEPARATION OF CHURCH AND STATE that religious folk just don't seem to comprehend. I DON'T WANT TO SEE *ANY* RELIGION IN GOVERNMENT/POLITICS.

[Voltaire99]

42. Agreed here too--American Talibanism is poison

Religion must be driven from the political sphere--that's been the challenge of the United States for two centuries, laid out by the wise Jefferson.

Lately, we're looking less and less capable of doing the job.

[rook1]

46. I would agree

...that organized religion is a dangerous thing...In fact Locke,Adams and a few others you may remember cautioned against organized religion the same way they warned about big government....

That being said...there is no reference to the seperation of church and state in the US Constitution.

***Amendment I***

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.

"Shall make no law respecting"

respecting: Preposition, With regard or relation to:

Just because there is a copy of the ten commandments on state property does not mean that the 1st Amendment has been violated. If a person does not want to read it, then walk on by.

If you don't want to say the pledge of allegiance, then don't say it.

...and before everyone jumps on me...NO I am not a freeper. Just remember that in your quest to rid America of religious icons in the fear that we are being taken over by "Jesus freaks" you may be robbing fellow Americans of their right to practice freedom of religion or freedom of speech.....

[treepig]

5. o my god, the oscar debacle,

and now this! (whatever it is he's done now)

[wryter2000]

7. Jail

Throw his ass in jail for contempt of court.

[madmax]

9. YES! Jail!

[Atlant]

10. Hear hear! Haul him off in shackles.

Hear hear! Haul him off in shackles.

Impound his monument to a safe place while the case is pending.

But don't expect to win political points; there'll be ***holes
standing on the site 24x7, reminding everyone that we've "kicked
Gawd out of the Courthouse".

Atlant

[CO Liberal]

34. Even Better -- CRUCIFY HIM!!!!!!

:-)

[Avatar13]

24. Nah, the fine would suffice

U.S. District Judge Myron Thompson of Montgomery, who ruled the monument violates the Constitution’s ban on government promotion of religion, had said fines of about $5,000 a day would be imposed against the state after the deadline if the monument were not removed.


Not to mention the bad PR Alabama would get if this jackass doesn't do as he's told would be more than enough to damage Moore's reputation and credibility.

[PurityOfEssence]

8. Watched it all; what a sickening, ludicruous display

Somebody please remind the entire world that the Declaration of Independence is not a legally binding document; it's a position paper. The Constitution is the law, and there is no mention of God or the concept of a supreme being in it at all, period.

"Establishment of religion" is not picking preferences between various guesses, it's stating that the issue may not be endorsed at all. It is unconstitutional for the government to endorse the existence of god. Period. The problem is that we've played "nice", and what that always gets you with true believers is that they take this as a precedent. There should be no "In God We Trust" on our money or on the wall in the Capitol; once that's done--illegally--it's used as a justification for further abuse.

It's the law.

There's a reason why it's the law: religions (individually) and religion itself are elitist and hence UNDEMOCRATIC. To not believe is to not be a full member of society. This is not anti-religion, it's religion-neutral. This is not a case of saying the god concept is bad, it's saying that it shouldn't be there.

This is not a christian nation and it was never intended to be one.

How dare people demand to force their religion on others and feign outrage and persecution should anyone resist their aggression. Regardless of that: it's the law. That's the big problem with religious belief in society: for society to function sincerely, civil authority MUST HAVE PRIMACY; when one owes one's allegiance to a belief system before one's fellow citizens, all sorts of abuses will follow.

How would this Roy Moron like it if I placed a big bleeding crucifix on the wall with a red circle and diagonal slash superimposed over it?

It's not establishment of "a religion", but of "religion". The subject doesn't belong in government.

[Zhade]

39. One small point.

"There should be no "In God We Trust" on our money..."

Unfortunately, since our money is not produced by the government but by a private institution (the Federal Reserve), the existence of said slogan is not in conflict with the Constitution (that our money is not backed by specie and not under government control is another issue entirely).

That said, haul this guy to jail for violating a court order.

</nitpick>

[PurityOfEssence]

40. Nope. the design is approved by the government

Sorry to be bitchy, since you seem to be a comrade here, but it's the granting of wiggle room on "ceremonial deism" and other incremental encroachments that's aided idiocy like this.

I think a little incarceration's in order.

[grecco1]

41. No, You are wrong

and that is what is causing trouble. The establishment of religion is NOT merely done by having a display. It says "congress SHALL MAKE NO LAW" establishing one religion over the other. Unfortunately, those in power have twisted and changed this in the courts to "acknowledge any existence of". While I do not agree witih the display, it is not really a violation. But I take what I read pretty literally..............

[newyawker99]

43. Hi grecco1!!

Welcome to DU!! :toast:

[PurityOfEssence]

45. No, YOU are very wrong, and in fact, dangerously wrong

It says "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion..."

It's not a particular religion, it's religion itself. The very concept is not to be mandated. What you're saying--like what many fundies say--is that it's just a preference issue between different religions. That is flat-out wrong; it's a preference issue between COSMOLOGIES. My worldview (althoug held with the caveat that it's merely my personal guess, and hence a working theory) holds that there is no god, no controlling hand, no superior anything and that's just it. By the constitution, my views are equal to yours because NEITHER IS TO BE ENDORSED BY THE LAW OF THE PEOPLE. Once "sure, there's a god" is an assumption that the government lays down, then anyone who doesn't hold that assumption is and inferior and not really part of the society. Marginalization happens by degrees.

Furthermore, it's not even possible to really infer the concept of favoritism of one guess over another truth by reading the document. That's just hysterical hyperbole with absolutely no basis in fact. Where does one get that from the concept of "no law respecting an establishment of religion"? Just because the current conservatives think that something's true merely if they say it, it just ain't necessarily so.

Directly to your point: any law or action of the government that says, in effect: "there is a god" is in direct violation of the Constitution. "Ceremonial Deism" be hanged; that's just back-door thievery by people who accept their religious law as more important than the law of the land. Now THAT'S undemocratic. The covenant of our society is that we're going to live together as EQUALS. That means non-believers and others are not to be discriminated against.

"Respecting" in this case means "pertaining to". We're not even to really address the situation as far as governmental endorsement goes.

It's precisely this kind of muddying of the issue that's why the line should always be held. "Gee, It says 'In God We Trust' on the wall, well, since that's obviously okay, then it's just fine to force our kids to kiss Jesus' feet in class under penalty of ridicule?" Wrong. That never should have been allowed because it's seen as a precedent.

It's all the more important to note that having this view in the late eighteenth century was far less tolerable than it is now, so the very fact that it was included as the first breath of protection in the first sentence of the Bill of Rights says volumes.

The right wing choruses endlessly that it was just to make sure that no particular religion got favors, and they've done it for so long that it's widely accepted. It is nonetheless a gross distortion, a complete inaccuracy and a LIE.

I don't believe that you are a party to the deliberate deception; I'll give you the benefit of the doubt that you are just buffaloed by popular foolishness.

What kind of deceptive misuse of quotations is it to say "Congress shall MAKE NO LAW" and then follow it up with unsubstantiated claptrap to justify your contention? How would you like it if I said "Congress shall MAKE NO LAW" shoving guesswork down the throats of its citizenry? That is a direct equivalent.

I'm going to go back to work now, so I can make money to pay the property taxes that support the L.A.P.D. salaries for religious parades, the fire and other municipal services and host of other goodies I provide to the local purveyors of guesswork sold as fact.

[chiburb]

11. Roger? Michael? Link please? n/t

.

[underpants]

15. ABC News LINK

http://www.abcnews.go.com/wire/US/ap20030814_1144.html

[chiburb]

20. Thanks. n/t

.

[LizW]

12. Did anyone expect anything else?

This is not about praising God, it's about praising Roy Moore. By defying the court order, he keeps his pious mug on the television and newspapers a little longer. It's all about stretching out his fifteen minutes of fame and working his way into the Governor's Mansion or the U.S. Congress.:puke:

[Syrinx]

16. I knew it

The little beady-eyed bastard needs to be in jail. At least, I wish the governor would make him pay the fines personally. Of course i know that'll never happen.

[PapaClay]

38. Absolutely

I told my wife that the other day. The 10C got him into the ASC and it will probably get him into the Governor's mansion, especialy since Riley has committed political suicide.

I don't think he'll go for Congress though. I can't imagine his ego being able to handle the concept of being a "freshman". And the first time that Barney Frank got in his face, old Roy would probably blow a head gasket. :evilgrin:

No he'll settle for being the big dog at home.

[Syrinx]

14. link/details

http://www.al.com/newsflash/national/index.ssf?/base/national-7/1060866541269330.xml

[underpants]

17. Wow what a nutjob that guy is

U.S. District Judge Myron Thompson of Montgomery, who ruled the monument violates the constitution's ban on government promotion of religion, had said fines of about $5,000 a day would have been imposed against the state if the monument were not removed.

Moore accused Thompson of a "callous disregard for the people of Alabama" and their tax dollars.

Uh what about the taxdollars you are spending by not removing it and appealing to the SC


In office as chief justice, he had the gray granite Ten Commandments monument moved into the judicial building in the middle of the night on July 31, 2001, without announcing the event to the public or to the news media. He did inform a Christian television ministry, which filmed the installation and used it on the TV program.

Moore had testified during the trial that one reason he became interested in the public display of the Ten Commandments was because of what he called a decline of moral values in America, which he blamed on federal court rulings concerning prayer in school and other issues.

Yeah look how displaying the Ten Commandments kept anything from happening in Catholic churches

[benfranklin1776]

19. Good point!

The sight of the ten commandments never discouraged Jimmy Swaggart or Jerry Falwell either...
The do as I say not as I do school of hypocritical theology to which they all belong does not require adherence to the tenets which they preach.

[0007]

31. Jessica Hahn got to the top

by doing it with a man of the cloth.

Now here was women who was indeed inspired!

[PurityOfEssence]

32. Lawdy, talk about moral decline...

How about this rampant lawbreaking and installing unauthorized objets d'art like reverse thieves in the night? So much for the rule of law or the acceptance of the covenants of plurality.

[MountainLaurel]

22. This'll be entertaining, almost

To sit back and watch the relevant parties fight over this one. Who's bring the popcorn?

[Name removed]

23. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[VolcanoJen]

25. Kick... I locked this thread in error.

Sorry, syrinx! :-)

VolcanoJen
DU Moderator

[Syrinx]

26. A public thanks to VolcanoJen!

You're okay with me. :loveya:

[headlouse]

28. Protesting for a Theocracy?

Several religious groups have scheduled a rally on the Capitol steps for Saturday to protest Thompson's decision. Organizers have said they expect thousands to come to Montgomery from across the country for the rally. Religious groups have also said Christians would kneel in prayer in front of the monument if there is an attempt by Thompson to have it removed.

http://www.ajc.com/news/content/news/0803/14alacommandments.html

These people taking time out of their lives to protest their state government's right to be a theocracy are probably the same ones yelling "Don't you have anything better to do? get a job you hippy trash!" at the anti-war protesters.

[mumon]

29. YES- that means we can throw the bastard out!

for violating his oath of office and judicial ethics.

KOOL!

[Toots]

33. This man needs to be disbarred or impeached or whatever you

do to remove a judge in Alabama or whereever he is from. He obviously has a total disregard for the law. A higher court told him to remove it and he disregarded them. Grounds for impeachment. He is not fit to judge others.

[Catshrink]

44. I would love for someone to ask that moran

to recite the Ten Commandments. Bet ya a bottle of Jack he can't do it.

edited to fix spelling....