Update on the Ten Commandments courtroom removal.

N&P: Discuss governments, nations, politics and recent related news here.

Moderators: Alyrium Denryle, Edi, K. A. Pital

User avatar
Saurencaerthai
Jedi Master
Posts: 1091
Joined: 2003-04-22 11:33pm
Location: New England

Update on the Ten Commandments courtroom removal.

Post by Saurencaerthai »

http://www.cnn.com/2003/LAW/08/22/ten.c ... index.html
MONTGOMERY, Alabama (CNN) -- Alabama Chief Justice Roy Moore was suspended Friday pending the outcome of an ethics complaint for defying a federal court order to move a Ten Commandments monument from the rotunda of the Alabama Supreme Court building.

The plaintiffs who sought the monument's removal -- Stephen Glassroth and Melinda Maddox -- filed the complaint with the state judicial board of inquiry, arguing that Moore is guilty of judicial misconduct for failing to carry out a court order.

The complaint charges that Moore, a Republican, failed "to respect and comply with the law" and "willfully failed to comply with an existing and binding court order directed at him."

It also said the chief justice failed "to uphold the integrity and independence of the judiciary," "failed to observe high standards of conduct" and "failed to avoid impropriety and the appearance of impropriety in his activities."

Tom Parker, Moore's spokesman, said the chief justice had not yet seen the complaint, nor had his lawyers.

"We'll see what we do from here," Parker said.

The case has been referred to an Alabama judicial court, which will hold a trial-like proceeding where evidence of alleged wrongdoing will be presented and Moore will have a chance to defend his actions. Should Moore be found guilty, the court has the power to punish him -- and even remove him from the bench.

During his suspension, Moore will continue to receive his salary but will be prohibited from carrying out his duties as a judge.

Moore's supporters prayed outside the state judicial building Friday evening.

Meanwhile, Alabama state officials have made plans to remove the 5,300-pound monument from the building, attorneys for those demanding the removal told CNN Friday.

U.S. District Judge Myron Thompson, who ordered the monument taken out, held a conference call Friday morning with both sides in the case that led to his ruling.

According to attorneys for the plaintiffs, State Attorney General Bill Pryor said during the call that removal plans are under way, but he gave no specifics.
The plaintiffs' attorneys said they were satisfied and planned another phone conference in a week.

They said they hope the monument will be removed by then. If it isn't, they said, they will revisit the possibility of pursuing contempt charges against the state -- which could trigger $5,000-a-day fines until the monument is removed.

On Friday, Moore stood near the monument as he talked to Judicial Building manager Graham George, who was told Thursday by the rest of the justices on the state's high court to carry out the removal, according to a report from The Associated Press. It wasn't known what was said.

In an interview Friday with CNN, Moore made it clear he would not back down.

"The issue is: Can the state acknowledge God?" he said. "If this state can't acknowledge God, then other states can't. ... And eventually, the United States of America ... will not be able to acknowledge the very source of our rights and liberties and the very source of our law. ...

"When a court order departs from the law and tells you what you can think and who you can believe in," he said, the judge issuing that order is "telling you to violate your oath. And he can't do that. Judges simply don't have that power."

Thompson, in his ruling, agreed with the plaintiffs that the massive monument, prominently displayed in the rotunda, violates the constitutional ban on government promotion of religion.

A federal appeals court refused to overturn the ruling. Moore has filed an appeal with the U.S. Supreme Court.

After the deadline to remove the monument expired at midnight Wednesday, the Alabama Supreme Court's eight associate justices ordered that the monument be removed "as soon as practicable."

"The refusal of officers of this court to obey a binding order of a federal court of competent jurisdiction would impair the authority and ability of all of the courts of this state to enforce their judgments," the justices ruled.

Pryor, a Republican who has been nominated for a federal judgeship, applauded the justices' order. "The rule of law means that no person, including the chief justice of Alabama, is above the law," he said.

Asked on CNN whether he would support an Islamic monument to the Koran in the rotunda of the federal building, Moore replied, "This nation was founded upon the laws of God, not upon the Koran. That's clear in the Declaration [of Independence], so it wouldn't fit history and it wouldn't fit law."

Moore installed the monument in August 2001 without consulting other justices. The lawsuit was filed shortly afterward.
Quoting fixed.
-Durandal
Music can name the un-nameable and communicate with the unknowable.
-Leonard Bernstein
User avatar
Bob McDob
Rabid Monkey
Posts: 1590
Joined: 2002-07-25 03:14am

Post by Bob McDob »

The Republican reference really gets me - is CNN or whatever saying that Republicans are more zealous than Democrats or something?
That's the wrong way to tickle Mary, that's the wrong way to kiss!
Don't you know that, over here lad, they like it best like this!
Hooray, pour les français! Farewell, Angleterre!
We didn't know how to tickle Mary, but we learnt how, over there!
User avatar
The Dark
Emperor's Hand
Posts: 7378
Joined: 2002-10-31 10:28pm
Location: Promoting ornithological awareness

Post by The Dark »

Well, the Religious Right does kinda control large parts of the Republican Party right now.

And Moore falls into that category of people known as "damnfools." I'm amazed a person with such an apparent lack of both intelligence and interpersonal skills could pass the bar and succeed well enough to become a judge. Screw removing the stupid monument; pass the C4.
Stanley Hauerwas wrote:[W]hy is it that no one is angry at the inequality of income in this country? I mean, the inequality of income is unbelievable. Unbelievable. Why isn’t that ever an issue of politics? Because you don’t live in a democracy. You live in a plutocracy. Money rules.
BattleTech for SilCore
User avatar
Wicked Pilot
Moderator Emeritus
Posts: 8972
Joined: 2002-07-05 05:45pm

Post by Wicked Pilot »

Bob McDob wrote:The Republican reference really gets me - is CNN or whatever saying that Republicans are more zealous than Democrats or something?
They always attach party to names. That way you know always know their stance. R=fundie, D=freeloader, I=loony pro wrestler. Duh.
The most basic assumption about the world is that it does not contradict itself.
User avatar
Perinquus
Virus-X Wannabe
Posts: 2685
Joined: 2002-08-06 11:57pm

Post by Perinquus »

Asked on CNN whether he would support an Islamic monument to the Koran in the rotunda of the federal building, Moore replied, "This nation was founded upon the laws of God, not upon the Koran. That's clear in the Declaration [of Independence], so it wouldn't fit history and it wouldn't fit law."
I can't stand these ignorant fundies who speak out arrogantly about things like this without actually knowing their history.

I say arrogantly because notice the presupposition in his statement: "This nation was founded upon the laws of God, not upon the Koran." In other words, the Christian Bible is "the law of God", whereas the Koran is just "the Koran".

The second thing to note is that this country was NOT founded on his supposed "law of God". The Declaration of Independence he mentions merely refers to a "Creator", not to the Christian God specifically. This is not surprising since the Declaration's writer, Thos. Jefferson, along with a great many of the other founding fathers, was a Deist, not a Christian.

As the Treaty of Tripoli (June 7, 1797), signed by John Adams states in Article 11: “The government of the United States is not in any sense founded on the Christian religion.”
EmperorSolo51
Jedi Knight
Posts: 886
Joined: 2002-07-04 05:25pm
Location: New Hampshire

Post by EmperorSolo51 »

Perinquus wrote:
As the Treaty of Tripoli (June 7, 1797), signed by John Adams states in Article 11: “The government of the United States is not in any sense founded on the Christian religion.”
Nitpick, Article 11 only exists in the English version and does not appear anywhere on the Arabic version.
EmperorSolo51
Jedi Knight
Posts: 886
Joined: 2002-07-04 05:25pm
Location: New Hampshire

Post by EmperorSolo51 »

John Adams wrote, "The general principles, on which the Fathers achieved
independence, were...the general principles of Christianity." - John Adams
to Thomas Jefferson, June 28, 1813.
User avatar
The Dark
Emperor's Hand
Posts: 7378
Joined: 2002-10-31 10:28pm
Location: Promoting ornithological awareness

Post by The Dark »

*Sigh* Dude, you're gonna get your ass beat with quotes stating why the Founding Fathers weren't Christian (and none of them were orthodox Christians...Washington, Adams, Franklin, Jefferson...all Deist). I'm not even gonna bother, cause I know the other guys here know the quotes better than I do. Better get ready to strap a pillow around your waist so you can sit down.
Stanley Hauerwas wrote:[W]hy is it that no one is angry at the inequality of income in this country? I mean, the inequality of income is unbelievable. Unbelievable. Why isn’t that ever an issue of politics? Because you don’t live in a democracy. You live in a plutocracy. Money rules.
BattleTech for SilCore
EmperorSolo51
Jedi Knight
Posts: 886
Joined: 2002-07-04 05:25pm
Location: New Hampshire

Post by EmperorSolo51 »

The Dark wrote:*Sigh* Dude, you're gonna get your ass beat with quotes stating why the Founding Fathers weren't Christian (and none of them were orthodox Christians...Washington, Adams, Franklin, Jefferson...all Deist). I'm not even gonna bother, cause I know the other guys here know the quotes better than I do. Better get ready to strap a pillow around your waist so you can sit down.
The way I see is that the Founding Fathers flip flop several times on this issue giving both pro and anti-christian statements.
HemlockGrey
Fucking Awesome
Posts: 13834
Joined: 2002-07-04 03:21pm

Post by HemlockGrey »

Nitpick, Article 11 only exists in the English version and does not appear anywhere on the Arabic version.
I've rebutted this so many times, I'm not actually aware that I'm typing. I just sorta see those words and my mind locks into autopilot. I think my brain is actually thinking about lesbians right now.

Anyway, it doesn't matter what's in the Arabic version, because Adams(I believe it was Adams) signed the English version, which did, in fact, contain Article II. Ergo, he agreed to it.

And before you bring up the next Treaty of Tripoli, even though that Treaty did not contain Article 11, it did not revoke Article 11 either.
The End of Suburbia
"If more cars are inevitable, must there not be roads for them to run on?"
-Robert Moses

"The Wire" is the best show in the history of television. Watch it today.
EmperorSolo51
Jedi Knight
Posts: 886
Joined: 2002-07-04 05:25pm
Location: New Hampshire

Post by EmperorSolo51 »

HemlockGrey wrote:
Nitpick, Article 11 only exists in the English version and does not appear anywhere on the Arabic version.
I've rebutted this so many times, I'm not actually aware that I'm typing. I just sorta see those words and my mind locks into autopilot. I think my brain is actually thinking about lesbians right now.

Anyway, it doesn't matter what's in the Arabic version, because Adams(I believe it was Adams) signed the English version, which did, in fact, contain Article II. Ergo, he agreed to it.

And before you bring up the next Treaty of Tripoli, even though that Treaty did not contain Article 11, it did not revoke Article 11 either.
Here's a question, ( iam being sincere here) since the nation of Tripoli no longer exists, since it was absorbed by the Italians in 1911, does that not make both Treaty's of Tripoli null and void?
HemlockGrey
Fucking Awesome
Posts: 13834
Joined: 2002-07-04 03:21pm

Post by HemlockGrey »

How could it make Article 11 void? Article 11 states that the United States was not founded on Christianity- past tense. When Tripoli ceased to be, did the United States suddenly become founded upon Christianity?
The End of Suburbia
"If more cars are inevitable, must there not be roads for them to run on?"
-Robert Moses

"The Wire" is the best show in the history of television. Watch it today.
EmperorSolo51
Jedi Knight
Posts: 886
Joined: 2002-07-04 05:25pm
Location: New Hampshire

Post by EmperorSolo51 »

HemlockGrey wrote:How could it make Article 11 void? Article 11 states that the United States was not founded on Christianity- past tense. When Tripoli ceased to be, did the United States suddenly become founded upon Christianity?
That's not my argument. My Argument is wether or not those treaties would considered leagally null void in thier entirety because they refer to a nation that no longer exists.
EmperorSolo51
Jedi Knight
Posts: 886
Joined: 2002-07-04 05:25pm
Location: New Hampshire

Post by EmperorSolo51 »

Like I said, the Founding Fathers were always flip-flopping on the issue of God and Christianity, so we can't anything they said at face value.
User avatar
Darth Wong
Sith Lord
Sith Lord
Posts: 70028
Joined: 2002-07-03 12:25am
Location: Toronto, Canada
Contact:

Post by Darth Wong »

EmperorSolo51 wrote:Like I said, the Founding Fathers were always flip-flopping on the issue of God and Christianity, so we can't anything they said at face value.
You're a fucking moron. There's a huge difference between "there are good things about Christianity" and "I believe Jesus Christ was the son of God".
Image
"It's not evil for God to do it. Or for someone to do it at God's command."- Jonathan Boyd on baby-killing

"you guys are fascinated with the use of those "rules of logic" to the extent that you don't really want to discussus anything."- GC

"I do not believe Russian Roulette is a stupid act" - Embracer of Darkness

"Viagra commercials appear to save lives" - tharkûn on US health care.

http://www.stardestroyer.net/Mike/RantMode/Blurbs.html
User avatar
Darth Wong
Sith Lord
Sith Lord
Posts: 70028
Joined: 2002-07-03 12:25am
Location: Toronto, Canada
Contact:

Post by Darth Wong »

EmperorSolo51 wrote:That's not my argument. My Argument is wether or not those treaties would considered leagally null void in thier entirety because they refer to a nation that no longer exists.
Actually, "moron" is far too charitable a description for you. The Treaty of Tripoli makes a statement about the founding basis of the United States, and was publicly signed by John Adams himself. The question of whether it is still legally binding today is completely irrelevant to the fact that John Adams publicly proclaimed the United States' secular origins on what was a legally binding document at the time.

In short, it is hardly an off-the-cuff statement; it was something of serious importance at the time it was created.
Image
"It's not evil for God to do it. Or for someone to do it at God's command."- Jonathan Boyd on baby-killing

"you guys are fascinated with the use of those "rules of logic" to the extent that you don't really want to discussus anything."- GC

"I do not believe Russian Roulette is a stupid act" - Embracer of Darkness

"Viagra commercials appear to save lives" - tharkûn on US health care.

http://www.stardestroyer.net/Mike/RantMode/Blurbs.html
User avatar
RedImperator
Roosevelt Republican
Posts: 16465
Joined: 2002-07-11 07:59pm
Location: Delaware
Contact:

Post by RedImperator »

EmperorSolo51 wrote:Like I said, the Founding Fathers were always flip-flopping on the issue of God and Christianity, so we can't anything they said at face value.
A few genuinely did flip-flop, but none of the big names did. Do I have to explain to you why politicians in the late 18th century might have to say one thing about religion in public even though it's clear from their private correspondance that they believe something else?
Image
Any city gets what it admires, will pay for, and, ultimately, deserves…We want and deserve tin-can architecture in a tinhorn culture. And we will probably be judged not by the monuments we build but by those we have destroyed.--Ada Louise Huxtable, "Farewell to Penn Station", New York Times editorial, 30 October 1963
X-Ray Blues
User avatar
Perinquus
Virus-X Wannabe
Posts: 2685
Joined: 2002-08-06 11:57pm

Post by Perinquus »

Darth Wong wrote:
EmperorSolo51 wrote:Like I said, the Founding Fathers were always flip-flopping on the issue of God and Christianity, so we can't anything they said at face value.
You're a fucking moron. There's a huge difference between "there are good things about Christianity" and "I believe Jesus Christ was the son of God".
Exactly.

There were things that Jefferson admired very much about Christianity. For example, he said:
Of all the systems of morality, ancient or modern, which have come under my observation, none appear to me so pure as that of Jesus. -- Thomas Jefferson, letter to William Canby (September 18, 1813)
But while Jefferson thought highly of Christ as a moral philosopher and teacher, he was a flat out disbeliever in the idea that Christ was the incarnate son of the Creator.
The day will come when the mystical generation of Jesus, by the Supreme Being as his father, in the womb of a virgin, will be classed with the fable of the generation of Minerva in the brain of Jupiter.
-- Thomas Jefferson, letter to John Adams, April 11, 1823
He also had little good to say of other aspects of Judeo-Christianity and the Bible.
It is between fifty and sixty years since I read the Apocalypse, and I then considered it merely the ravings of a maniac, no more worthy, nor capable of explanation than the incoherences of our own nightly dreams.... what has no meaning admits no explanation.
-- Thomas Jefferson, to Alexander Smyth, January 17, 1825
That sect had presented for the object of their worship, a being of terrific character, cruel, vindictive, capricious and unjust.
-- Thomas Jefferson, referring to the god of the Jews under Moses, in his letter to William Short (August 4, 1822)
It is possible to admire certain aspects of Christ and his teachings without admiring the Christian religion, which is, after all, mostly the creation of men who lived after Christ (assuming Jesus was a real historical figure, which I am inclined to doubt that he was).

But this all digresses somewhat from the subject at hand, which is Justive Moore's lamentable ignorance of the origins of our law, country, and legal institutions. I refer once again to Mr. Jefferson:
Christianity neither is, nor ever was, a part of the common law.
-- Thomas Jefferson, letter to Dr. Thomas Cooper, February 10, 1814, responding to the claim that Chritianity was part of the Common Law of England, as the United States Constitution defaults to the Common Law regarding matters that it does not address. This argument is still used today by "Christian Nation" revisionists who do not admit to having read Thomas Jefferson's thorough research of this matter.
This is exactly correct, since most of our law is based on Anglo-Saxon common law, which had its origins among the peoples of Anglo-Saxon England in pre-Chiristian times. Roy Moore needs to study up on his history, and leave his preconceptions aside.
User avatar
Bob McDob
Rabid Monkey
Posts: 1590
Joined: 2002-07-25 03:14am

Post by Bob McDob »

EmperorSolo51 wrote:
HemlockGrey wrote:How could it make Article 11 void? Article 11 states that the United States was not founded on Christianity- past tense. When Tripoli ceased to be, did the United States suddenly become founded upon Christianity?
That's not my argument. My Argument is wether or not those treaties would considered leagally null void in thier entirety because they refer to a nation that no longer exists.
None of the governments that signed the Treaty of Westphalia exist today - does that mean sovereignty is null and void?
That's the wrong way to tickle Mary, that's the wrong way to kiss!
Don't you know that, over here lad, they like it best like this!
Hooray, pour les français! Farewell, Angleterre!
We didn't know how to tickle Mary, but we learnt how, over there!
User avatar
Xon
Sith Acolyte
Posts: 6206
Joined: 2002-07-16 06:12am
Location: Western Australia

Post by Xon »

EmperorSolo51 wrote:
Perinquus wrote:
As the Treaty of Tripoli (June 7, 1797), signed by John Adams states in Article 11: “The government of the United States is not in any sense founded on the Christian religion.”
Nitpick, Article 11 only exists in the English version and does not appear anywhere on the Arabic version.
So? its the English version they would have signed. The Arabic version could have been complextelt different. As long as they agreed on the version that was signed. Which is the english version.
"Okay, I'll have the truth with a side order of clarity." ~ Dr. Daniel Jackson.
"Reality has a well-known liberal bias." ~ Stephen Colbert
"One Drive, One Partition, the One True Path" ~ ars technica forums - warrens - on hhd partitioning schemes.
User avatar
Edi
Dragonlord
Dragonlord
Posts: 12461
Joined: 2002-07-11 12:27am
Location: Helsinki, Finland

Post by Edi »

There's also the little matter that treaties such as the treaty of Tripoli, as far as I know, become as law when signed, and remain in effect until repealed, and thus it is explicitly stated in US code of laws that the US is not founded on Christianity. I don't see anybody trying to get the treaty of Tripoli repealed anytime soon just so they could foist religion on everyone, especially when it's also forbidden to do so in the Constitution.

Edi
Warwolf Urban Combat Specialist

Why is it so goddamned hard to get little assholes like you to admit it when you fuck up? Is it pride? What gives you the right to have any pride?
–Darth Wong to vivftp

GOP message? Why don't they just come out of the closet: FASCISTS R' US –Patrick Degan

The GOP has a problem with anyone coming out of the closet. –18-till-I-die
User avatar
CaptainChewbacca
Browncoat Wookiee
Posts: 15746
Joined: 2003-05-06 02:36am
Location: Deep beneath Boatmurdered.

Post by CaptainChewbacca »

I don't see what the problem is. On the tablet, they include doccuments which were guiding principles in the movement towards freedom and independence. The Preamble to the Constitution, the Declaration of Independence, and the 10 Commandments.

Like it or not, those 10 Commandments were a guiding influence in our country's history. As such, they should be accorded all reverence due the Emancipation Proclomation.
Stuart: The only problem is, I'm losing track of which universe I'm in.
You kinda look like Jesus. With a lightsaber.- Peregrin Toker
ImageImage
User avatar
Edi
Dragonlord
Dragonlord
Posts: 12461
Joined: 2002-07-11 12:27am
Location: Helsinki, Finland

Post by Edi »

The ten commanments do not merit the same respect with regard to the state as the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution do. Of course they had some effect, because most of the population was Christian, but the state was not, and thus religious commandments that specifically elevate Christianity have no place in state institutions.

Edi
Warwolf Urban Combat Specialist

Why is it so goddamned hard to get little assholes like you to admit it when you fuck up? Is it pride? What gives you the right to have any pride?
–Darth Wong to vivftp

GOP message? Why don't they just come out of the closet: FASCISTS R' US –Patrick Degan

The GOP has a problem with anyone coming out of the closet. –18-till-I-die
User avatar
The Yosemite Bear
Mostly Harmless Nutcase (Requiescat in Pace)
Posts: 35211
Joined: 2002-07-21 02:38am
Location: Dave's Not Here Man

Post by The Yosemite Bear »

RedImperator wrote:
EmperorSolo51 wrote:Like I said, the Founding Fathers were always flip-flopping on the issue of God and Christianity, so we can't anything they said at face value.
A few genuinely did flip-flop, but none of the big names did. Do I have to explain to you why politicians in the late 18th century might have to say one thing about religion in public even though it's clear from their private correspondance that they believe something else?
Watch it, most of the R.R. crowd don't think that the hundred years war, and all of it's abuses of the people for suspicion of not having a proper attitude to the church could result in your death by torcher without a trial. Some of them don't believe that church had a hand in the attempted genocide of the natives in this conteniant....
Image

The scariest folk song lyrics are "My Boy Grew up to be just like me" from cats in the cradle by Harry Chapin
User avatar
Stravo
Official SD.Net Teller of Tales
Posts: 12806
Joined: 2002-07-08 12:06pm
Location: NYC

Post by Stravo »

This whole debacle is truly sad. On one hand you have a man who obviously has a deep abiding faith in the religion of his choice, yet the very laws he is supposed to uphold forbid him from expressing his faith in such a blunt manner as he does.

It has been my experience that judges tend to have a god complex when it comes to their court and this state court judge is obviously experiencing such a complex. He has been ordered by a higher court to pull down the monument, case closed. He of all people should know better. I have no sympathy for him in his defiance. He should be stripped of his judgeship for his blatant disregard for judicial power and respect for the law. I wonder how he would react if a defendant in his court refused to abide by one of his orders? I'm sure there would be hell to pay.

One question I have is who is sueing to have this monument taken off? This smells susppicously like a tailormade suit by the ACLU types and they simply found someone to go along with their agenda.
Wherever you go, there you are.

Ripped Shirt Monkey - BOTMWriter's Guild Cybertron's Finest Justice League
This updated sig brought to you by JME2
Image
Post Reply