Federal Court orders State Supreme Court to Remove Ten Commandments

[Chewbacca]

Originally posted by Sir Taliesin: But Chewie, that's exactly how your first statement came off sounding like. Rokenn's too for that matter.

Chewy's original statement:

I'm a Pagan from Alabama originally and know just how radical and intolerant the religious right can get down there. They would probably spit brimstone and ash and all the Lord's wrath if the Koran and a Witch's book of shadows were on display at the public courthouse. Leave religion at home or at church or on the bumper of your car, not on or in goverment buildings.

I am refering to the religious right, not Christians on the whole here. The religious right is a religious/political group with a very narrow and set agenda. I am also refering to a type of fundamentalist behavior, a type of behavior who isnt exclusive to christianity, or any religion. I have enboldened and italicsized the words that clearly illustrate I wasn't speaking in absolutes, but in probables.

I can imagine some people in the religious right don't want to force christianity on me and don't want to fill our goverment and schools with material that belongs in church, but that goes against what the religiuos right is publicy and proudly all about, so I also imagine that type of person is a rare breed.


If I am intolerant towards in intolerance, and a bigot against bigots, then alls I can say is if good people don't speak out against evil, then evil will flourish. I don't apologize for it, and my conscience feels clear enough carrying this burden prejudice.

Of course I wish it didnt have to be this way. I wish people did live and let live, I wish people didnt have the desire to force their religion, or any veiwpoint on others by making it state-sanctioned in any way shape or form.

I have good, long-standing friendships with Christians, I'm not talking about fundamentalists here, but tolerant folk who understand that the path to enlightenment is a personal one, just as a persons veiwpoint of and relationship with Christ is.

This discussion is off-track and has become more personal than I like in my opinion, so I'm just gonna leave any more discussion about me, be.

I don't know anyting about the "Book of Shadows" but I do know that a goodly number of our basic laws are based on the 10 commandments. Some may also be based on old hammmurabi (sp?) So unless the "Book of Shadows" were in some way connected to our legal system...I'd have to say it doesnt belong in a court of law....BUT the statue of "Blind Justice" and any documents that form the foundations of our legal systems would belong.

The 10 Commandments do not form a religion. The are the LAWS set down for a people, who adopted the jewish religion not christians alone.

Just being included in the bible doesn't make it religious. If you think so, please explain to me exactly what the book of "numbers" has to do with religion?


[ 07-03-2003, 01:41 PM: Message edited by: MagiK ]

[Chewbacca]

Originally posted by MagiK: I don't know anyting about the "Book of Shadows" but I do know that a goodly number of our basic laws are based on the 10 commandments. Some may also be based on old hammmurabi (sp?) So unless the "Book of Shadows" were in some way connected to our legal system...I'd have to say it doesnt belong in a court of law....BUT the statue of "Blind Justice" and any documents that form the foundations of our legal systems would belong. The 10 Commandments do not form a religion. The are the LAWS set down for a people, who adopted the jewish religion not christians alone. Just being included in the bible doesn't make it religious. If you think so, please explain to me exactly what the book of "numbers" has to do with religion?

Laws given to Moses by God is how the story goes, correct? If thats not religious I dont know what is.

I refered to the book of shadows metaphoricly, Im a metaphoric kinda guy,

Witches have few "moral" codes, only one really and it is more of an ethic or a rede than a moral.

The Witch's rede is:

As long as it harms none, do as thou will.

Also, Witches have what is called the three-fold law. It is based on the idea of Karma, except that your actions rebound to you three fold. Do good and get 3 times good back, do evil and get 3 times evil back.

Thats all well and good Chewie, but except the first three the 10 don't refer to god at all and ARE used as a basis for our legal system.

So I have to say your argument was specious since the book you poke of doesn't contain the laws for witches. IF there were such a document and it did pertain to our civil/secular legal system, I would say put it on display with the other symbols of our legal system.

[Chewbacca]

Alabama has the death penalty, which some followers of Christ believe is a violation of "Thou shall not kill". This is an inconsistency with regards to this topic, regardless of the constitutional issue.

Sorry to bring the death penalty into the fray here, but its too obvious for me to ignore. Seems like some people want to have the cake and eat it too.

[pritchke]

Originally posted by MagiK: Thats all well and good Chewie, but except the first three the 10 don't refer to god at all and ARE used as a basis for our legal system. So I have to say your argument was specious since the book you poke of doesn't contain the laws for witches. IF there were such a document and it did pertain to our civil/secular legal system, I would say put it on display with the other symbols of our legal system.

I have an idea, why don't we modify the thing to add vines over the first 3 This will eliminate the word god nobody can read them and be offended by them. Then we have the laws that apply to our legal system. Better yet lets have the offended people pay to get the work of adding the stone vines to the exhibit. That way thay can feel like they are really contributing.

[HolyWarrior]

10 Commandments judge defies court order
Alabama chief justice won't remove granite monument from state building


By Jon Dougherty
© 2003 WorldNetDaily.com

Alabama Chief Justice Roy Moore vowed yesterday to keep a 2½ ton granite monument depicting the Ten Commandments in the rotunda of the judiciary building in Montgomery, in defiance of a federal appeals court order to have the testimonial removed. "We must defend our rights and preserve our constitution," Moore told reporters. "For the federal courts to adopt the agenda of the ACLU (American Civil Liberties Union) and to remove the knowledge of God and morality from our lives is wrong." Moore, who penned a treatise regarding his battle to retain the monument in this month's Whistleblower magazine, WND's monthly print publication, says he's not sure if he'll ask the federal courts to rehear his case or appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court, CNN reported. On Tuesday, the 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Atlanta ruled unanimously that the monument must be removed from the judiciary building because it represented a government promotion of a particular religion, in violation of the First Amendment. In its decision, the panel compared Moore to Southern officials and governors of the past who refused to integrate schools after being ordered to do so by federal courts. The court also predicted Moore would lose if he appealed the decision to the Supreme Court. "If necessary, the court order will be enforced. The rule of law will prevail," the judges wrote. Moore insisted he is upholding the rule of law. "The rule of law must prevail in this case," he told reporters. The chief justice, who has become known as the "Ten Commandments judge," was sued by the ACLU after placing the monument in the courthouse in the middle of the night in July 2001. The four-foot tall monument features the Commandments inscribed on two tablets along with historical quotations. Philip Drake, Moore's attorney, said federal courts, along with the three lawyers who sued, have misconstrued the true intent and real meaning of the Constitution, CNN said. Drake maintains that the First Amendment says only that Congress shall make no law "respecting the establishment of religion." "This monument is not a law respecting the establishment of religion," Drake said. The federal appeals court saw it differently. "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 judges wrote in their 50-page ruling. "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." The Michigan-based Thomas More Law Center, which filed a brief on behalf of Moore, noted the appeals ruling came one week after another federal appellate court, the 3rd Circuit in Philadelphia, upheld display of the Ten Commandments on a wall outside a courthouse. "Because there appears to be a conflict between the decisions of these appellate courts, we hope the United States Supreme Court will review these cases and reaffirm government's ability to acknowledge in public our religious heritage, especially the moral foundation of our law," said Edward L. White III, associate counsel for the legal group. Moore first drew national attention after posting a wooden, hand-carved plaque of the Ten Commandments in his courtroom while a state court judge in Gadsden, Ala. The Civil Liberties Union of Alabama and the state of Alabama unsuccessfully sued Moore in 1995 over his actions. He then mounted and won by a landslide margin an election to the Alabama Supreme Court in 2000, which he viewed as a mandate from the people to "restore the moral foundation of law."

Thank God, a Chief Justice who has a brain, and knows he's supposed to defend the Constitution, not legislate from his bench.

[Timber Loftis]

The Michigan-based Thomas More Law Center, which filed a brief on behalf of Moore, noted the appeals ruling came one week after another federal appellate court, the 3rd Circuit in Philadelphia, upheld display of the Ten Commandments on a wall outside a courthouse. "Because there appears to be a conflict between the decisions of these appellate courts, we hope the United States Supreme Court will review these cases and reaffirm government's ability to acknowledge in public our religious heritage, especially the moral foundation of our law," said Edward L. White III, associate counsel for the legal group.

Classic case for the Supreme Court. Where the circuits cannot agree, the S.C. is much more likely to take up the case and resolve the issue. Very nice to see two nearly-identical fact patterns as well. I predict the 3rd Circuit will win out if the issue goes up on appeal.

[John D Harris]

Originally posted by Timber Loftis: quote: The Michigan-based Thomas More Law Center, which filed a brief on behalf of Moore, noted the appeals ruling came one week after another federal appellate court, the 3rd Circuit in Philadelphia, upheld display of the Ten Commandments on a wall outside a courthouse. "Because there appears to be a conflict between the decisions of these appellate courts, we hope the United States Supreme Court will review these cases and reaffirm government's ability to acknowledge in public our religious heritage, especially the moral foundation of our law," said Edward L. White III, associate counsel for the legal group.

Classic case for the Supreme Court. Where the circuits cannot agree, the S.C. is much more likely to take up the case and resolve the issue. Very nice to see two nearly-identical fact patterns as well. I predict the 3rd Circuit will win out if the issue goes up on appeal. [/QUOTE]Well it should win out, Isn't the statue of the blindfolded lady holding the scales that adorns nearly every court house in the US of A. In Fact a staute of a Greek/Roman godess or demi godess? And didn't the Greeks and Roman acctualy worship the statues of their gods & godesses?
So TL if the court rules against Judge Moore, you can represent me in your first Old Fart's case for free

[skywalker]

I, personally, do not think the statue of Themis the Greek Goddess of Justice (or Justitia the Roman version) has the same religious power as the 10 Commandments.

Is it not part of the problem that this issue is fought with such religious (or anti-religious) fervor? It seems that there is so much deep-seated emotion involved that some people cannot debate this issue without temperatures rising.

Sorry to disagree, but I don't think it belongs in the courthouse.

Mark