Jerry is smart enuff not to be the 'Fal' guy...
I am afraid I do not have all the factoids re: this
Jerry is smart enuff not to be the 'Fal' guy...
I am afraid I do not have all the factoids re: this
"Peach"
Never attribute to malice what can be adequately explained by stupidity.
Actually, the issue isn't really one of separation of church and state or the 10 commandments. It is really about whether a sworn officer of the court can ignore the law and get away with it. No matter what his motives or feelings, he swore to uphold the law first before his own beliefs. If this is something that he is unwilling to do, then he should either resign or be forcefully removed from office.Originally posted by DC Law
Wow...That issue sure stuck a nerve with somebody here. But I guess the Ten Commandments scare some people.
You have to wonder about folks like that.
Put it simply - do you think you have the right to ignore a court order? What do you think would happen to you if you ignored one?
To add a little background: The Alabama Supreme Court Justice was given 9 months to comply with the order. The appellate judge didn't want to make this a big issue, but understood that the law takes presidence over your beleifs (the justice should have put errected the monument on his front lawn). The appellate judge could have ordered the state police to forefully remove the statue, but he didn't. He is given the judge a $5,000. a day penalty that he has to pay out of his own pocket for violation of a court order. The Supreme Court has already refused to hear the case. Had the Justice errected equal statues of the Koran, the Torah, the code of Hammarabi, etc. then it might have been able to stay.
I am still wondering why CSPAN, a government sponsored media was covering Jerry Falwell. Would this same government agency cover other extremists like the Islamic Jihad or Hamas? (or even Rev. Farakkan?).
Just food for thought...
Jerry's involvement was to incite people to break the law (something he said directly on CSPAN). Had this been a leader in the anit-war movement, I bet they would have been arrested for inciting.
Just food for thought...
(but again, the thought of having that fat turd of a human being being shackled and placed in a cell with bubba makes my heart glow - lol - that would put this POS in his place where he belongs)
gdowkpc, glad everything was ok.
I doubt that the ten commandments scare anyone, but I don't support his imposing his beliefs on those who have different beliefs. He clearly said that he placed the commandments there to acknowledge God. There are many Americans who don't acknowledge God,, and he has no right to place that monument on a government building. That's why there is a first amendment to prevent the government from imposing any religion on the public.Originally posted by DC Law
Wow...That issue sure stuck a nerve with somebody here. But I guess the Ten Commandments scare some people.
You have to wonder about folks like that.
Spy
I have to wonder if this man (the Chief Justice of the Alabama Supreme Court) believed in what he was doing was legal, how come he chose to install the monument in the "dead of the night"? Do you think he subconsciously knew that what he was doing was illegal and thought that he could get away with it because of his position? This is the real troubling issue.
Perhaps the Alabama Supreme Court could erect the Torah, the Code of Hammarabi, the Koran, the beliefs of Buddhists, the devil, a Pagan statue, as well as a Wicca statue or two.
:rolleyes:
(by the way - the last paragraph was meant to be sarcastic in case you didn't realize it!)
This just in from Yahoo news: The judge has been suspended with pay. The ethics board is going to decide whether he should receive sanctions for disobeying a court order. These sanctions can be all the way up to permanent removal from office and forefiture of all pension rights.
Another interesting tidbit: The ACLU along with the Federal District Judge who ordered the removal agreed that if the monument were moved to a less conspicuous place besides the rotunda, then it could be displayed. I guess the judge doesn't beleive in compromise.