Judge Removed

[Rich Parsons]

Read Here
for the details of the Judge and the Ten Commandments in Court

:asian:

 

[rachel]

I applaud this man for what he's done. Separation of church and state is one thing but come on. Why does God have to be pushed under the rug because of non believers? If they don't like the ten commandments where they are then don't look at them. Look somewhere else. This man is not denying God and I back him 100% for sticking to his beliefs even though it cost him his job. This country would be in much better shape if we didn't push God out of the picture and we had more people like this judge willing to stand up for their beliefs.

 

[ABN]

The Constitution gives us freedom of religion not freedom from it. Besides that whole "separation of Church and State" thing is so poorly interpreted. it was never in the Constitution it was in a letter Jefferson wrote.
I applaud his stand. It's about time someone stood up for their beliefs rather than allowing themselves to be marginalized and sacrificed on the altar of political correctness.

andy

 

[michaeledward]

. . . but I do believe you are wrong in this case. If Judge Moore wanted to place his 10 Commandments statue on his front lawn, he is absolutely entitled to do so. But to place them in the courthouse is exactly the wrong thing to do.

Were I charged with a criminal offence against the state of Alabama, I would be prosecuted in a court that is supposed to uphold the laws of the State of Alabama. I would want to be certain that I was going to be judged in accordance of the laws of the State of Alabama. By having a monument in the gallery of the courthouse, the state is indicating that I will be judge by the laws of the Christian Church, as well as the laws of Alabama. I would not want to be judged against two different sets of standards.

Another thought ...according to one version of the 10 Commandments (and there are several different versions .. go figure) ... the 4th commandment is to 'Keep Holy the Sabbath'. How exactly does this commandment fit into the rules that we as a society adopt into our laws. And hell, most Christains could be prosecuted under this law, because the Sabbath is Saturday, not Sunday, as we Christains practice it. .... Things that make you go "Hmmm!"

Peace - Mike

 

[Touch Of Death]

Judges refusing to recognize the ruling of judges is bad policy. Why should anyone abide by the law if judge won't? He chose to die on the wrong hill.:soapbox:

 

[Cthulhu]

Thread moved as it didn't quite meet the criteria of the former thread, which is religion and spirituality in the arts.

Cthulhu
-MT Admin.-

 

[don bohrer]

I applaud this man for what he's done. Separation of church and state is one thing but come on. Why does God have to be pushed under the rug because of non believers?

Good point Rachel. My thinking exactly.

The Constitution gives us freedom of religion not freedom from it. Besides that whole "separation of Church and State" thing is so poorly interpreted. it was never in the Constitution it was in a letter Jefferson wrote.

ABN you've hit the nail right on the head!

I wish others would understand this, but this is why we all must vote and let those in office understand what we expect from them. Don't we elect people to represent the majority? If recent polls are an idication of opinion then most people don't mind prayer in school, or the commandments being displayed.

I would not want to be judged against two different sets of standards.

Mike, I think personal bias will always play part in any decision a judge makes. Displayed or not.

Judges refusing to recognize the ruling of judges is bad policy.

I agree with you on this, but admire the judge for his convictions. I believe this judge understood there would be a heavy cost for disobeying the ruling of his peers and was willing to accept that. He was willing to take his lumps.

don

 

[michaeledward]

Originally posted by ABN
The Constitution gives us freedom of religion not freedom from it. Besides that whole "separation of Church and State" thing is so poorly interpreted. it was never in the Constitution it was in a letter Jefferson wrote.

andy

If I choose to be free from religion, do my attitudes and opinions not count, in this free country? Am I not, as a citizen, entitled to the same protections as those who choose to participate in a religion?

Also, Jefferson was very careful not to put the word 'GOD' in the constitution.

Mike, I think personal bias will always play part in any decision a judge makes. Displayed or not.

Of course, personal bias plays a part in any decision the judge makes. But when I am enpanelled in a jury, I am asked to put aside my personal bias, and make judgements only on the evidence entered in proceedings, and the instructions of law presented by the judge. Should we expect less from the officers of the court?

And, while we can't prevent personal biases, we can certainly prevent them from being publicly advocated with a 5,000 pound sculpture in the rotunda of the courthouse. . . and, if I am not mistaken, this is the only thing that was being asked of Judge Moore. No one was asking him to give up his personal beliefs.

It seems to me that the next move by Judge Moore is to run from Governor or Senator or Congressman for the state.

Peace - Mike

 

[michaeledward]

Just a side note ... I posted my previous message before this news report hit MSNBC http://www.msnbc.com/news/992496.asp?0cv=CB10

MONTGOMERY, Ala., Nov. 14 — After being ousted as Alabama chief justice for refusing to remove a Ten Commandments monument from the state courthouse, Roy Moore vowed to lobby for legislation that would “alter the direction of our country” and didn’t rule out a run for political office.

 

[Crouching Tiger]

Originally posted by ABN
The Constitution gives us freedom of religion not freedom from it. Besides that whole "separation of Church and State" thing is so poorly interpreted. it was never in the Constitution it was in a letter Jefferson wrote.
I applaud his stand. It's about time someone stood up for their beliefs rather than allowing themselves to be marginalized and sacrificed on the altar of political correctness.

andy

I couldn't have said that better! I quite agree.

:asian:

 

[Ceicei]

Originally posted by michaeledward

Another thought ...according to one version of the 10 Commandments (and there are several different versions .. go figure) ... the 4th commandment is to 'Keep Holy the Sabbath'. How exactly does this commandment fit into the rules that we as a society adopt into our laws. And hell, most Christains could be prosecuted under this law, because the Sabbath is Saturday, not Sunday, as we Christains practice it. .... Things that make you go "Hmmm!"

Peace - Mike

I understand that Seventh Day Adventists are one of the few Christian religions that worship on Saturday. The only difference is that for them, their Sabbath is on Saturdays and is in keeping with the Old Testament. Many other Christian religions changed from Saturday to Sunday to coincide with the day that Christ was risen, which was said to be Sunday. This is in keeping with the New Testament.

The thing is, the 10 Commandments are broad enough to guide a variety of Judeo-Christian religions....

You are asking how does this commandment fit into the rules that we as a society adopt into our laws? Simple: the government should allow free worship how, when, and where the people may. It would be overstepping the bounds to say that *ALL* religions have to worship on a *Sunday* and not any other day.

As another poster mentioned, the consititution is supposed to protect our freedom of religion, not freedom from religion.

- Ceicei

 

[Rich Parsons]

Well the religion of Islam has services on Friday Afternoon, before the Sabbath. So there is more than one religious group that follows teh Saturday Sabbath even if it is not in there 10 Commandmants or their 5 Pillars.


The Problem with one religion be represented in a court room is that all should then get equal play. Would this judege hang the Five Pillars of Islam? Would he have writings of Confusious? or Buddha? Would they allow Shinto practitioners to have their words and symbols present? Would the Judge or the Government then allow American Indians to have totems present? THe list goes on and on.

Some Quick Links:

Adherents.com This site offers good statistics on populations and percentages.

World Religions By Numbers Including this link that discusses the world and the number of followers.

More Data on the number of adherents including a note or two about schism and divisions

USA Data This link has osme data bout the USA and percentages and populations of religons.

Predominate This sites lists the religion and the country where that religion has a predominate (Defined as greater than 50% ) hold. You will note that the USA does not have a predominate religion. Yes Christianity is the largest single Religon, yet with all the divisions it does not hold over 50%. So, even if were to get a refendum going for Christianity to be the state recognized religion, this would be difficult. Not only since there is not a predominate presence the in fighting between to Christian groups would be enough to cause people to either not vote or to be upset and get their own group on the referendom. This would cause further division. And the winner may not be what some people would like.

So, as the papers of Jefferson discussed the Seperation of Church and State, and there is no reference to God in the U.S. Constitution, and the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that the Preamble is not part of the Constitution, it just a Preamble. OUr Society allows for the individual to meet in groups and or alone to practice what they believe without being condemned by the Government. Yet, when the Government supports one religion over another, then the perception is that you may be persecuted if you are of a different belief or no belief.

And as always, this board and the media and your vote allows you to express your opinion to try to make others think like you or to get your point across. The only thing you have to do is follow the rules or laws, depending upon the place one is presenting their opinion.

:asian:

 

[ABN]

Originally posted by michaeledward
If I choose to be free from religion, do my attitudes and opinions not count, in this free country? Am I not, as a citizen, entitled to the same protections as those who choose to participate in a religion?Peace - Mike

Mike you are certainly entitled to the same protections as those who choose to practice their religion. however you are not more entitled to that protection than others. This was what the establishment clause sought to do, create a society where there would be no state religion (such as CofE) and where all were free to practice what they wished (or to practice nothing) so long as it did not harm the public good or impugne upon the rights of others. Why shouldn't I be able to pray by myself or with a group of like minded friends in school if I choose to do so? Why should your desire not pray supercede mine? Why can't I pray while you do whatever you do? How does my desire to pray (note I said pray, not proselytize) cause you harm? Your desire not to pray does no harm to me.

Does not restricting my ability to pray infringe upon the same freedom of expression held so dearly by artists, writers, actors, and even ponrographers? Their right to create and express themselves has been protected in ruling after ruling whether I or you find it offensive or not. Yet, let me utter the words "Our Father" without my sisters around in a public place or the words "Hail Mary" when I'm not at a football game and many of those same people who rant about freedom of expression want to have me gagged, hung, drawn and quartered.

The 10 Commandments are a concrete reminder of the fact that whether we like it or not, our society was founded upon Judeo-Christian principles just as the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia was founded upon Koranic ones, etc. In many courtrooms around the world is a quote from Cicero, "The good of the people is the highest law." Should I demand that it be taken down because he was a pagan and paganism is a religion?

Finally isn't it a good thing that we can have this debate in an open forum? Is not the exchange of ideas about religion pro or con in a free environment what the establishment clause sought to protect and defend? Take the logic a step further, then isn't the attempt to silence the expression/ discussion of religion in the public place a violation of the ammendment itself?


Regards,

andy

 

[MisterMike]

I think it was a poor decision for the court to have ordered it removed. Let's say 99% of the people in Alabama wanted it there, and the 1% file suit to have it removed based on some poor interpretation then you have to see the case for what it is.

The monument, there or not, had no effect on any of the cases heard in that courtroom.

Let's say the state of Rhode Island was made up mostly of Muslims when it was added to the Union. And the state laws and constitution were base on the Koran and they had a monmument and various plaques hanging in all the city halls. If that's where a mojority of that population's beliefs and laws came from, what's the big deal?

If you have that big of a problem with something like that, and you are the minority, why would you live there? Go live where people have the same beliefs as you.

This was just some bull$hit tactic to piss off the opposite political group. One commonly attributed to the far left-wing.

The bottom line is that all people of different colors will never completely live together, and as we can see the bigger problem now, nor will people of different religions. And anyone with some utopian dream of a diverse happy planet is only kidding themselves.

I don't mean to sound harsh, or come off racist, but let's face reality. That's the first step.

 

[Touch Of Death]

Originally posted by MisterMike
I think it was a poor decision for the court to have ordered it removed. Let's say 99% of the people in Alabama wanted it there, and the 1% file suit to have it removed based on some poor interpretation then you have to see the case for what it is.

The monument, there or not, had no effect on any of the cases heard in that courtroom.

Let's say the state of Rhode Island was made up mostly of Muslims when it was added to the Union. And the state laws and constitution were base on the Koran and they had a monmument and various plaques hanging in all the city halls. If that's where a mojority of that population's beliefs and laws came from, what's the big deal?

If you have that big of a problem with something like that, and you are the minority, why would you live there? Go live where people have the same beliefs as you.

This was just some bull$hit tactic to piss off the opposite political group. One commonly attributed to the far left-wing.

The bottom line is that all people of different colors will never completely live together, and as we can see the bigger problem now, nor will people of different religions. And anyone with some utopian dream of a diverse happy planet is only kidding themselves.

I don't mean to sound harsh, or come off racist, but let's face reality. That's the first step.

Why would a Muslim expect justice or trust a political system, and by trust I mean participate in as informants, that refuses to show recognition and respect for other cultures by merely neutralizing its Legal establishments?

 

[Jay Bell]

John Adams --

“The Government of the United States of America is not in any sense founded on the Christian religion...”

Thomas Jefferson --

“I have recently been examining all the known superstitions of the world, and do not find in our particular superstition [Christianity] one redeeming feature. They are all alike, founded upon fables and mythologies.”

"Christianity neither is, nor ever was apart of the common law." Feb. 10, 1814

The commandments should have never been there in the first place. This *is* symbolic of a union of Church and State. To me, it has nothing to do with left-wingedness...I'm conservative.

 

[Ceicei]

Originally posted by Jay Bell
John Adams --

“The Government of the United States of America is not in any sense founded on the Christian religion...”

Thomas Jefferson --

“I have recently been examining all the known superstitions of the world, and do not find in our particular superstition [Christianity] one redeeming feature. They are all alike, founded upon fables and mythologies.”

"Christianity neither is, nor ever was apart of the common law." Feb. 10, 1814

Could you tell me from what resources are these citations quoted? I would like to see the whole thing, not just the quotes. Quotes may sometimes be taken out of context from the entire article.

Thank you.

- Ceicei

 

[michaeledward]

Mike you are certainly entitled to the same protections as those who choose to practice their religion. however you are not more entitled to that protection than others. . . .

I did not ask that my atheism, or agnosticism superceed your religous beliefs. I did not ask for more rights. I asked that my rights be held to the same level as the judges, when we are on state property (you'll recall, I said if Judge Moore wanted to put his monument up in his front lawn, he is entitled to).

Why shouldn't I be able to pray by myself or with a group of like minded friends in school if I choose to do so?

I believe you should be able to practice your beliefs in any way you desire, as long as they are not being imposed on those who do not share those beliefs. For instance, I think a high school level Christain organization should be able to hold prayer meetings or faith healings on school grounds AFTER SCHOOL has been concluded. (I do note, and would demand, as you say below, that you not proselytize in school). * I also understand, and can respect the arguement (even if I don't agree) that public buildings should not be used for this purpose.

Why should your desire not pray supercede mine?

It should not, and I am not asking it to. See preceding paragraph.

Why can't I pray while you do whatever you do?

You can, and should be able to, as long as it does not impose your beliefs on me. I am follower of Terry Pratchets' half-blind turtle god, OM.

How does my desire to pray (note I said pray, not proselytize) cause you harm? Your desire not to pray does no harm to me.

Your desire to pray does not cause me harm, and I am not asking you to give up your rights to pray. See all preceding paragraphs.


One more thought, Please understand those of the 'Judeo' heritage of the 'Judeo-Christian' heritage some of claim as the founding of our country, were subject to over 600 commandments. How big would Judge Moore's rock have to be to support that?

Peace - Mike

 

[qizmoduis]

Moore's entire purpose in mounting that stone boondoggle monument of his was to impose, using the power of his office, his religious viewpoint on all people who needed to enter the courthouse. It was a direct violation of the our constitution and should never have been allowed to stand as long as it did. He had every right to stick that monstrosity on his own property, but he chose to tie it to the government, thereby making it and himself a target.

His goal, of course, was to become a political martyr, and thus build himself a ready-made, and easily manipulable powerbase. And he succeeded.

RE: separation of church and state.

This is the way the Jefferson described the doctrine laid out in the First Amendment. He wrote the amendment, he wrote it's description. I would think he would understand what he was talking about.

RE: freedom of religion, not freedom from religion

Bollocks! You can't seriously suggest that you can have one without the other.


Look, it's simple. The government cannot force me to worship. It cannot tell me to be religious, nor can it even suggest it. It cannot push one religion over another, or no religion. Moore was using the power of his office to push his religion. It was an unconstitutional exercise of the power of the government and was rightly removed. There is no reasonable interpretation of our system of government that would allow what he did.

In fact, doing what he did goes against the very scripture and commandments of his avowed religous figure. The whole episode suggested to me that he knows little to nothing about his own religon. But then, as I said previously, his mission was to become a martyr.

 

[Jay Bell]

The Adams quote comes from the Treaty of Tripoli, Article 11.

The Jefferson quotes can be found in "Six Hostoric Americans" by John E. Remsburg....as well as Jefferson's "The Memoirs, Correspondence and Miscellanies from the Papers of Thomas Jefferson" by Thomas Jefferson Randolph....Thomas Jefferson's grandson.

Hope that helps some...