Closed Thread Icon

Topic awaiting preservation: re: Two ton Ten Commandments monument (Page 1 of 1) Pages that link to <a href="http://ozoneasylum.com/backlink?for=14368" title="Pages that link to Topic awaiting preservation: re: Two ton Ten Commandments monument (Page 1 of 1)" rel="nofollow" >Topic awaiting preservation: re: Two ton Ten Commandments monument <span class="small">(Page 1 of 1)</span>\

 
metahuman
Paranoid (IV) Inmate

From: 92064
Insane since: Aug 2003

posted posted 08-24-2003 23:48

Abstracted from http://www.religioustolerance.org/chr_10cc.htm

In 2002-FEB, Moore wrote a separate concurring opinion in a case
before the Alabama Supreme Court in which he blasted homosexuality on
religious as well as legal grounds. The case involved a lesbian who
sought custody of her three minor children. The court unanimously
rejected her case. Moore wrote that homosexuality is "a sin [that]
violates both natural and revealed law." He cited verses from the
books of Genesis and Leviticus in the Bible. He called homosexuality
"an evil disfavored under the law," "an inherent evil," a "detestable
and an abominable sin," and "an act so heinous that it defies one's
ability to describe it." He suggested that the death penalty is an
appropriate response to homosexual behavior. He wrote: "The State
carries the power of the sword, that is, the power to prohibit conduct
with physical penalties, such as confinement and even execution. It
must use that power to prevent the subversion of children toward this
lifestyle, to not encourage a criminal lifestyle."

So, Bugimus, do you see now that it's not only about such a huge monument?

_________________________
A devil's work is never done.

counterfeitbacon
Paranoid (IV) Inmate

From: Vancouver, WA
Insane since: Apr 2002

posted posted 08-25-2003 00:00

Well, he's taking it way overboard (in terms of how bad it is and the punishment for it), but I do see homosexuality as a sin, albeit a popularly accepted sin.

Shiiizzzam
Paranoid (IV) Mad Scientist

From: Nurse's Station
Insane since: Oct 2000

posted posted 08-25-2003 00:17

Being a part of the court system here and living where this is going on I want to add my 2 cents worth. The monument isn't JUST the 10 commandments. There's other things carved in the sides that has to do with Godly things used in our government papers.
Sometimes you have to take a stand for what you feel is right. Judge Moore did that. He did it through legal means...ie...appeals and such until the last night. He was out of town at a funeral when the order came down and then once everything went into motion he stood his ground. I see both sides of the issue but I stand with Judge Moore after reading the filings and really knowing the full story...not to mention I can't stand the SPLC (Southern Poverty Law Center) nor most of what it stands for.



[This message has been edited by Shiiizzzam (edited 08-25-2003).]

metahuman
Paranoid (IV) Inmate

From: 92064
Insane since: Aug 2003

posted posted 08-25-2003 01:09

It's not legal if it's constitutionally prohibited.

_________________________
A devil's work is never done.

[This message has been edited by metahuman (edited 08-25-2003).]

Shiiizzzam
Paranoid (IV) Mad Scientist

From: Nurse's Station
Insane since: Oct 2000

posted posted 08-25-2003 01:11

He filed legal appeals and went about his fight in a legal way. As far as if it's legal, that's a matter of opinion.

metahuman
Paranoid (IV) Inmate

From: 92064
Insane since: Aug 2003

posted posted 08-25-2003 04:42

It's a matter of the the United States Constitution and the Bill of Rights not opinion.

_________________________
A devil's work is never done.

Bugimus
Maniac (V) Mad Scientist

From: New California
Insane since: Mar 2000

posted posted 08-25-2003 04:57

The Constitution does not automatically prohibit monuments like this from being on public property. It is a matter for the courts to decide. Currently, the courts seem to favor relocating the monument to another part of the court house.

metahuman, the problem I have with you using that quote above to prove your point is that you are saying that the monument *causes* the court to follow religious law instead of US law. It sounds ridiculous on its face but aren't you making a leap?

If the judge oversteps his bounds as a judge then the system will overrule him. We should decide the monument issue on its own merits.

How many times have people from my side opposed acceptable things for fear that it would lead to something else? metahuman, how are you different from a Baptist prohibiting dancing because it *might* lead to fornication? Or how about locking people up that you think *might* commit a crime before they do? That is not how this society is supposed to work. The point is that we judge each thing separately and draw the line as soon as we've reached the line, not before.

. . : slicePuzzle

metahuman
Paranoid (IV) Inmate

From: 92064
Insane since: Aug 2003

posted posted 08-25-2003 05:10

Read up on the issue before you develop prejudices.

_________________________
A devil's work is never done.

warjournal
Maniac (V) Mad Scientist

From:
Insane since: Aug 2000

posted posted 08-25-2003 05:37

After doing some link hopping, I found this to be the most interesting:
http://www.religioustolerance.org/chr_10ce.htm

Personally, I don't think they belong there.

I don't know much about Moore and his practices, but he *definitely* strikes me as the kind of guy that will pass judgement based on his personal beliefs in God instead of the "law of the land".



Lacuna
Maniac (V) Inmate

From: the Asylum ghetto
Insane since: Oct 2002

posted posted 08-26-2003 11:23

yes warjournal, i agree with you on that!

CNN Update

__________________________
Cell 1007::

Xel
Bipolar (III) Inmate

From: Trumansburg, NY, USA
Insane since: Nov 2002

posted posted 08-26-2003 13:32

Are the taxpayers paying for this would-be monument, or is it funded by some other source?

« BackwardsOnwards »

Show Forum Drop Down Menu