Arrests after Ten Commandments appeal fails

HeXp£Øi±

Well-Known Member
Wednesday, August 20, 2003 Posted: 10:48 PM EDT (0248 GMT)


WASHINGTON (CNN) -- Protesters were arrested at an Alabama state judicial building after the U.S. Supreme Court refused Wednesday to block a lower court's order to remove a Ten Commandments monument from the building.

Alabama Supreme Court Chief Justice Roy Moore will technically be in contempt of court if the monument is not removed by 12:01 a.m. CT (1:01 a.m. ET).

Moore vowed after the Supreme Court decision to continue the fight and said he expects to be vindicated.

"If we do not acknowledge God we do not know where our rights come from. We are standing for the law," he told CNN'S 'Newsnight.'

In a statement immediately after the ruling, Moore said: "The U.S. Supreme Court denial of a stay today will not deter me from continuing to fight for the right of our state to acknowledge God as the moral foundation of our law.

"I still have pending a petition for writ of mandamus and prohibition in the Supreme Court. I will also petition the Supreme Court for an appeal on the merits in this case."

State Attorney General Bill Pryor said earlier that officials were prepared to remove the 3-foot-high, 5,300-pound granite monument from the building in the Alabama capital of Montgomery "very soon."

Two federal courts had previously upheld the removal order, saying the monument is unconstitutional.

Moore, who installed the monument in the building's rotunda two years ago following his election to the state's highest judicial post, asked the high court to temporarily block enforcement of the removal order pending further appeals.

Herbert Titus, Moore's attorney, asked the court in a written appeal "to permit the chief justice to fulfill the campaign promise that he made to the citizens of Alabama to restore the moral foundation of law."
vert.commandments.ap.jpg

But in a one-sentence order the nine Supreme Court justices said they would not intervene in the dispute, at least for now.

In 1980, the Supreme Court prohibited the Ten Commandments from being displayed in public school classrooms. But it has never ruled on whether displays in other government buildings are constitutional.

After the high court's decision, a few dozen protesters gathered inside the rotunda at the monument in prayerful protest. When they refused a police order to leave the building, many were arrested.

Protests outside the building continued peacefully, with those both for and against the decision holding signs on the stairs to the building. Earlier Wednesday, several preachers led a group of about three dozen people in prayer.

One man told CNN, "I think if you stand for this country, this whole country was founded on 'In God we trust.' I think that if you were to put it in those terms, I think, yeah, everyone should defy it [the court order]."

U.S. District Judge Myron Thompson threatened to fine the state $5,000 a day if the monument was not taken down by the Wednesday deadline he set when he ruled it violates the Constitution's prohibition of government promotion of religion.

"This is not about a monument or politics or religion," Moore said Wednesday on CNN. "It's about the acknowledgment of God, and the judge made that perfectly clear in closing argument when he said the issue is, 'Can the state acknowledge God?'

"He simply said we cannot. And that conflicts with the Alabama Constitution, which says our justice system is established in invoking the guidance of almighty God."

-- CNN's Bill Mears contributed to this report.
 
"He simply said we cannot. And that conflicts with the Alabama Constitution, which says our justice system is established in invoking the guidance of almighty God."

I guess they'll have to secede.
 
isn't one of the states sayings in God we trust? if so why remove it? it is part of the countys religious heritage. next they will be saying that churches cant have crosses on them and that sikhs cant wear turbans
 
I was reading about this on AOL today-and "MY" opinion, it should stay and as far as the schools with pledge of allegiance-they should still have to say, never hurt any of us when we were kids. Things now adays get so blown out of proportion with whats proper and whats not, urghhhh gets frustrating. I just feel sorry for my children when they get older and hope they feel the same way i do.
BUT-this is all just my thoughts...
 
peterska2 said:
isn't one of the states sayings in God we trust? if so why remove it? it is part of the countys religious heritage. next they will be saying that churches cant have crosses on them and that sikhs cant wear turbans



yes however it is thought to be an endorsment of religion or something like that. yes we have religious heritage but if you read the Constitution it clearly does state that there cant be a gov't endorsement of any one religion. ill agree with flav on this one he was asked to remove it. though i think it better to be displayed as well as other laws from religions not just the one
 
The 10 commandments are a christian thing. A lot of people wouldn't a big Budha outside their courthouse, other people don't want christian stuff there. It's covered under the seperation of church and state and should accordingly be saved for the churches.
 
itd be great but i hate to admit this yet again but technically there is no separation of church/state. id like there to be one but one isnt mentioned per se
 
isn't one of the states sayings in God we trust? if so why remove it? it is part of the countys religious heritage. next they will be saying that churches cant have crosses on them and that sikhs cant wear turbans
You know, I have trouble with that one myself. How do you espouse freedom of religion and yet have the motto "In God We Trust?"

No I don't, are they trying to tell me I have to?

Interesting sidelight, nowhere in the constitution is there a specific provision for a separation of church and state. It is implied though.
 
its implied problem is that they never wrote it in so like i said technically its not there. but the first amendment does have freedom of religion as well as the idea of no gov't sponsered religions
 
Anti-religion and legalism seems to be becoming more and more a religion into and of itself.

Oh wait, that would mean that by taking down the display that they were endorsing the religion of anti-religion: there by putting themselves in contempt of court by showing favoritism for the one particular belief system. (and the philosophy of having no favoritism is a belief system and it can very easily be argued as constituting a "religion" weather you want to admit it or not)
 
AnomalousEntity said:
Anti-religion and legalism seems to be becoming more and more a religion into and of itself.

Oh wait, that would mean that by taking down the display that they were endorsing the religion of anti-religion: there by putting themselves in contempt of court by showing favoritism for the one particular belief system. (and the philosophy of having no favoritism is a belief system and it can very easily be argued as constituting a "religion" weather you want to admit it or not)

That's quite a stretch. It's not "anti-religion", the idea is that religion is separate from government. Just because the two don't mix well doesn't mean you have to be against one or the other.
 
If we do not acknowledge God we do not know where our rights come from.

Ok Im gonna get jumped on hard here but what if you dont believe in god. at all. ever. where do your rights come from then?

I am one of the above people so do I have rights or not?
 
freako104 said:
yes however it is thought to be an endorsment of religion or something like that. yes we have religious heritage but if you read the Constitution it clearly does state that there cant be a gov't endorsement of any one religion. ill agree with flav on this one he was asked to remove it. though i think it better to be displayed as well as other laws from religions not just the one

Help me out here please - does this mean God can endorse the government, but the government cannot endorse God? :confused:

(I'm easily confused today it seems)
 
there should be a separation of both religion and gov't is what im saying. to me god has nothing to do with our gov't.
 
flavio said:
Just because the two don't mix well doesn't mean you have to be against one or the other.


What do you call removing the monument, erasing "in god we trust" from money and banning prayer in school and the showing of religous symbols if not "against"?

Whats worse is that they will bend over backwards to allow people of OTHER BELIEFS to continue to observe their religion AS LONG AS THEIR NOT CHRISTIAN.

What do you call that if not against??????
 
AnomalousEntity said:
What do you call removing the monument, erasing "in god we trust" from money and banning prayer in school and the showing of religous symbols if not "against"?
Separation of church and state.

Say for example you don't like cheese in your soda, this doesn't mean that you are "against" cheese...only that you don't think it mixes well with soda. :)
Whats worse is that they will bend over backwards to allow people of OTHER BELIEFS to continue to observe their religion AS LONG AS THEIR NOT CHRISTIAN.
Really? Where does that happen?
 
flavio said:
Separation of church and state.

Say for example you don't like cheese in your soda, this doesn't mean that you are "against" cheese...only that you don't think it mixes well with soda. :)
Really? Where does that happen?


Ive observed it on college campuses for starters. I have also seen it iin the work environment, and very very much so in the popular media.

(not a religous thing but a good example) The same yeare GLSA (gay lesbian student association) got their campus charter, the campus ministrys were all combined and significantly decreased in size and moved to the edge of campus (off campus actual-and of course they didnt stand a chance in hell of getting a campus charter).

I mentioned the possibility of starting a heterosexual student association and was scoffed at.
 
AnomalousEntity said:
Ive observed it on college campuses for starters. I have also seen it iin the work environment, and very very much so in the popular media.

Well, I have not seen any encouragement of all religions except christianity, but it seems that you haven't noticed it in the government which is basiccally what this is about.
 
Back
Top