| Topic: |
Religions > Atheism |
| User: |
"MarkA" |
| Date: |
12 Aug 2003 03:34:44 PM |
| Object: |
Re: Judge Roy Moore on public radio |
On Tue, 12 Aug 2003 14:58:51 +0000, Carol Lee Smith wrote:
9:00 PM Central time The Connection WHAD 90.7 FM (in Milwaukee) Public
Radio
Check your local listings for time and station.
After nine on The Connection: The chief justice of Alabama says he may
defy a federal court order to remove the monument of the Ten Commandments
he put in the state court building. The new debate over religion in public
places.
Listen on the web:
http://www.theconnection.org/shows/2003/08/20030812_a_main.asp
Suppose "da judge" *does* defy the federal court order. What happens?
Does the FBI arrest him? Will the Bush admin prosecute him?
--
MarkA
(still caught in the maze of twisty little passages, all different)
.
|
|
| User: "Larry Smith" |
|
| Title: Re: Judge Roy Moore on public radio |
12 Aug 2003 04:03:06 PM |
|
|
"MarkA" <manthony@stopspam.net> wrote in message
news:pan.2003.08.12.20.35.05.433404@stopspam.net...
On Tue, 12 Aug 2003 14:58:51 +0000, Carol Lee Smith wrote:
9:00 PM Central time The Connection WHAD 90.7 FM (in Milwaukee) Public
Radio
Check your local listings for time and station.
After nine on The Connection: The chief justice of Alabama says he may
defy a federal court order to remove the monument of the Ten
Commandments
he put in the state court building. The new debate over religion in
public
places.
Listen on the web:
http://www.theconnection.org/shows/2003/08/20030812_a_main.asp
Suppose "da judge" *does* defy the federal court order. What happens?
Does the FBI arrest him? Will the Bush admin prosecute him?
Moore would be in violation of an order of the U. S. District Court,
therefore, in contempt. I'm just surmising here, based on experience
practicing in the federal courts some time ago, but probably a federal judge
would issue Moore an 'order to show cause' and order it served on him by
United States Marshals requiring him to appear before the federal judge and
show cause why he should not be held in contempt of the United States Court.
The federal judge could fine Moore for each day he fails to comply with the
order to remove the rock or he could jail him, or both, until Moore purged
himself of the contempt by complying with the order to remove the rock.
Presumably Moore could remove the words of the decalogue from the rock and
be in compliance, but noooooo, he has a make a martyr of himself. I have
seen such 'brave' martyrs recant and whimper, beg for mercy, and cry like
babies (or quickly agree to comply) when faced with the clanging doors and
the cold steel bars of the jailhouse.
--
MarkA
(still caught in the maze of twisty little passages, all different)
.
|
|
|
| User: "Baghdad Bob" |
|
| Title: Re: Judge Roy Moore on public radio |
12 Aug 2003 06:05:32 PM |
|
|
"Larry Smith" <dbrigman3@charter.net> wrote in message
news:vjilgcpqjkmo13@corp.supernews.com...
"MarkA" <manthony@stopspam.net> wrote in message
news:pan.2003.08.12.20.35.05.433404@stopspam.net...
On Tue, 12 Aug 2003 14:58:51 +0000, Carol Lee Smith wrote:
9:00 PM Central time The Connection WHAD 90.7 FM (in Milwaukee)
Public
Radio
Check your local listings for time and station.
After nine on The Connection: The chief justice of Alabama says he may
defy a federal court order to remove the monument of the Ten
Commandments
he put in the state court building. The new debate over religion in
public
places.
Listen on the web:
http://www.theconnection.org/shows/2003/08/20030812_a_main.asp
Suppose "da judge" *does* defy the federal court order. What happens?
Does the FBI arrest him? Will the Bush admin prosecute him?
Moore would be in violation of an order of the U. S. District Court,
therefore, in contempt. I'm just surmising here, based on experience
practicing in the federal courts some time ago, but probably a federal
judge
would issue Moore an 'order to show cause' and order it served on him by
United States Marshals requiring him to appear before the federal judge
and
show cause why he should not be held in contempt of the United States
Court.
The federal judge could fine Moore for each day he fails to comply with
the
order to remove the rock or he could jail him, or both, until Moore purged
himself of the contempt by complying with the order to remove the rock.
Presumably Moore could remove the words of the decalogue from the rock and
be in compliance, but noooooo, he has a make a martyr of himself. I have
seen such 'brave' martyrs recant and whimper, beg for mercy, and cry like
babies (or quickly agree to comply) when faced with the clanging doors and
the cold steel bars of the jailhouse.
What delicious poetry there would be in such justice for him.
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Carol Lee Smith" |
|
| Title: Re: Judge Roy Moore on public radio |
12 Aug 2003 04:13:27 PM |
|
|
On Tue, 12 Aug 2003, MarkA wrote:
Suppose "da judge" *does* defy the federal court order. What happens?
Does the FBI arrest him? Will the Bush admin prosecute him?
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
EDITORIAL
Did Moore plan confrontation?
If Alabama Chief Justice Roy Moore wanted to keep his Ten
Commandments monument in the state judicial building, why didn't he
ask a federal appeals court to allow it to remain while he appealed
to the U.S. Supreme Court?
Could it be because Moore actually wants the looming confrontation
over the removal?
Only Moore knows what his motivation is, but it is troubling that the
chief justice seems intent on violating a lawful order of a higher
court to remove the monument. In fact, it seems he is intent on
orchestrating a situation where he can violate such an order.
Moore is using the same arguments to defend ignoring the federal
court order to remove the monument that Southern political racists
used to defend ignoring federal court orders on civil rights four
decades ago. The argument didn't work then, and in the long run, it's
not likely to work now.
But plenty of demogogic Southern politicians built huge followings by
running against the federal courts back then. Will it still work? We
hope the people of Alabama have progressed beyond that point.
There are representations of the nation's religious heritage in many
public buildings, but the courts have allowed them to remain because
there is no indication they were put there for the expressed purpose
of supporting a particular state religion.
But Moore's own arguments have undermined any chance that the federal
courts would allow Alabama to keep the monument that he placed in
this public building.
But now, thanks to Moore, the issue is not whether the monument
should stay or go, but whether the state's judicial system will allow
the state to ignore a lawful order of a federal court.
This issue will cost the state dearly for the legal fees that have
already been expended in the court fight. It will cost even more for
the overtime of police officers at the state and local level who will
be called on to protect the public if demonstrations get out of hand.
And there is always the possibility that someone could get hurt if
Moore allows a confrontation to occur.
We urge Moore to avoid a showdown by allowing the monument to be
relocated as the courts have ordered, at least until the U.S. Supreme
Court has ruled.
But if Moore insists on forcing this confrontation by refusing to
remove the monument, the state Judicial Inquiry Commission and Court
of the Judiciary should begin proceedings against him for violating
judicial canons of behavior.
In addition, it is time for the remaining eight members of the
Alabama Supreme Court to show some backbone on this issue. Moore is
chief justice, but he is still just one among nine.
http://www.montgomeryadvertiser.com/NEWS/StoryOpinionedten812web.htm
.
|
|
|
| User: "Witziges Rätsel" |
|
| Title: Re: Judge Roy Moore on public radio |
12 Aug 2003 06:41:14 PM |
|
|
After nine on The Connection: The chief justice of Alabama says he may
defy a federal court order to remove the monument of the Ten
Commandments
he put in the state court building. The new debate over religion in
public places.
Suppose "da judge" *does* defy the federal court order. What happens?
Does the FBI arrest him? Will the Bush admin prosecute him?
Maybe they'll hand him over to the Pharisees for stoning.
.
|
|
|
| User: "quibbler" |
|
| Title: Re: Judge Roy Moore on public radio |
13 Aug 2003 10:01:46 AM |
|
|
In article <bhbtu0$me9$1@news.chatlink.com>, says...
After nine on The Connection: The chief justice of Alabama says he may
defy a federal court order to remove the monument of the Ten
Commandments
he put in the state court building. The new debate over religion in
public places.
Suppose "da judge" *does* defy the federal court order. What happens?
Does the FBI arrest him? Will the Bush admin prosecute him?
Maybe they'll hand him over to the Pharisees for stoning.
Moore is a pharisee, in case you couldn't tell, but I'm all for him being
stoned to death. It couldn't happen to a more deserving scumbag.
--
_____________________________________________________
Quibbler (quibbler247atyahoo.com)
"It is fashionable to wax apocalyptic about the
threat to humanity posed by the AIDS virus, 'mad cow'
disease, and many others, but I think a case can be
made that faith is one of the world's great evils,
comparable to the smallpox virus but harder to
eradicate." -- Richard Dawkins
.
|
|
|
| User: "GIMME" |
|
| Title: Re: Judge Roy Moore on public radio |
21 Aug 2003 06:14:39 PM |
|
|
There some hippocracy in your summary. It's biased far to the left.
If a Federal judge, Judge Pfaelzer , stops most of the provisions
of California's prop 187 to halt the costs of illegal immigration
- you don't complain about disturbing crusades then.
If one Federal judge, U.S. District Judge Napoleon Jones Jr., can
stops the Boy Scounts from using a camp ground on City land in San Diego
(which had been used every year for the last 80 years)
- you don't complain about distrubing crusades then.
When SF 9th District Court Justice Breyer calls parts of the
Pledge of Alligance unconstitutional and bans it from schools
- you don't complain about distrubing crusades then.
But when Alabama Chief Justice Roy Moore sticks the commandments
behind his desk and then later in the rotunda - it's disturbing crusade.
O H P L E A S E.
Justice Moore's disturbing crusade recently spread to Congress, where the
House of Representatives attached an amendment to an appropriations bill
that would ban the use of federal funds to enforce the order to remove the
Ten Commandments monument. The Senate must make sure that this lawless
provision does not find its way into the final bill, and members of both
houses of Congress should make clear that this sort of attack on federal
judicial power is unacceptable.
--------------end of excerpt-------------
.
|
|
|
| User: "Wolf333" |
|
| Title: Re: Judge Roy Moore on public radio |
21 Aug 2003 08:14:33 PM |
|
|
"GIMME" <gimme_this_gimme_that@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:3f12b4fb.0308211514.4aaa928b@posting.google.com...
There some hippocracy in your summary. It's biased far to the left.
If a Federal judge, Judge Pfaelzer , stops most of the provisions
of California's prop 187 to halt the costs of illegal immigration
- you don't complain about disturbing crusades then.
If one Federal judge, U.S. District Judge Napoleon Jones Jr., can
stops the Boy Scounts from using a camp ground on City land in San Diego
(which had been used every year for the last 80 years)
- you don't complain about distrubing crusades then.
Well, if the Boy Scouts want to use city land, then they have to follow the
rules that must be followed by all other groups.
When SF 9th District Court Justice Breyer calls parts of the
Pledge of Alligance unconstitutional and bans it from schools
- you don't complain about distrubing crusades then.
The pledge was not banned. It just can't be compulsory.
But when Alabama Chief Justice Roy Moore sticks the commandments
behind his desk and then later in the rotunda - it's disturbing crusade.
Since this is a judge who claims that his authority comes from the bible,
and not from the constitution, I do find it disturbing. A judge's job is to
uphold the law, mainly the constitution. Since some of the ten commandments
are in direct violation of the First Ammendment, the ten commandments have
no place in a building built to promote the constitution, and the law of the
land.
When a judge claims that his authority comes from god, then that man should
no longer be a judge. When that same judge flaunts the law, continues his
foolishness, and ignores the ruling of a superior court, he becomes a
criminal.
What do you hink Moore has done to those who have blatantly ignored his
rulings? How many has he fined, or put in jail for contempt because they did
not follow his rulings? Yet we are supposed to ignore the factt hat he is in
contempt, simply because he is promoting a christian worldview?
O H P L E A S E.
Justice Moore's disturbing crusade recently spread to Congress, where
the
House of Representatives attached an amendment to an appropriations bill
that would ban the use of federal funds to enforce the order to remove
the
Ten Commandments monument. The Senate must make sure that this lawless
provision does not find its way into the final bill, and members of both
houses of Congress should make clear that this sort of attack on federal
judicial power is unacceptable.
--------------end of excerpt-------------
--
__________
"blood-red canal birds particular traffic climb" - anonymous, oddly Zen-like
spammer
Michael Wolfe
aa #1912
__________
.
|
|
|
| User: "Dana" |
|
| Title: Re: Judge Roy Moore on public radio |
21 Aug 2003 10:20:15 PM |
|
|
"Wolf333" <wolfe333@excite.com> wrote in message
news:vkarjm5sittk57@corp.supernews.com...
"GIMME" <gimme_this_gimme_that@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:3f12b4fb.0308211514.4aaa928b@posting.google.com...
There some hippocracy in your summary. It's biased far to the left.
If a Federal judge, Judge Pfaelzer , stops most of the provisions
of California's prop 187 to halt the costs of illegal immigration
- you don't complain about disturbing crusades then.
If one Federal judge, U.S. District Judge Napoleon Jones Jr., can
stops the Boy Scounts from using a camp ground on City land in San Diego
(which had been used every year for the last 80 years)
- you don't complain about distrubing crusades then.
Well, if the Boy Scouts want to use city land, then they have to follow
the
rules that must be followed by all other groups.
And they did.
When SF 9th District Court Justice Breyer calls parts of the
Pledge of Alligance unconstitutional and bans it from schools
- you don't complain about distrubing crusades then.
The pledge was not banned. It just can't be compulsory.
It has not been compulsory since 1943.
But when Alabama Chief Justice Roy Moore sticks the commandments
behind his desk and then later in the rotunda - it's disturbing crusade.
Since this is a judge who claims that his authority comes from the bible,
and not from the constitution,
You are a liar.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Dhas" |
|
| Title: Re: Judge Roy Moore on public radio |
22 Aug 2003 08:46:39 AM |
|
|
Dana - your a nut.
Judge Moore should not be a judge. If a judge can't adhere to the law how
can they expect the people that appear before them to. I can only hope that
after all this is over he is out of there.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Al Klein" |
|
| Title: Re: Judge Roy Moore on public radio |
23 Aug 2003 12:19:42 PM |
|
|
On Thu, 21 Aug 2003 19:20:15 -0800, "Dana" <yourname@example.com>
posted in alt.atheism:
"Wolf333" <wolfe333@excite.com> wrote in message
news:vkarjm5sittk57@corp.supernews.com...
Well, if the Boy Scouts want to use city land, then they have to follow the
rules that must be followed by all other groups.
And they did.
One of the rules all other groups have to follow is to not
discriminate on the basis of either religion or gender preference.
The BSA didn't meet either criterion.
When SF 9th District Court Justice Breyer calls parts of the
Pledge of Alligance unconstitutional and bans it from schools
- you don't complain about distrubing crusades then.
The pledge was not banned. It just can't be compulsory.
It has not been compulsory since 1943.
Until some school districts very recently made it so. That's what was
banned.
But when Alabama Chief Justice Roy Moore sticks the commandments
behind his desk and then later in the rotunda - it's disturbing crusade.
Since this is a judge who claims that his authority comes from the bible,
and not from the constitution,
You are a liar.
It's what he said - that our laws come from his god.
--
"If anyone comes to me, and does not hate his father, mother, wife, brothers, and sisters and even himself, he cannot be my disciple."
Luke 14:26
(random sig, produced by SigChanger)
rukbat at optonline dot net
.
|
|
|
| User: "John Gault" |
|
| Title: Re: Judge Roy Moore on public radio |
23 Aug 2003 02:39:25 PM |
|
|
"Al Klein" <rukbat@pern.invalid> wrote in message
news:5e8fkv494klokn99gkidj99t0ua9h10mvd@Pern.rk...
On Thu, 21 Aug 2003 19:20:15 -0800, "Dana" <yourname@example.com>
One of the rules all other groups have to follow is to not
discriminate on the basis of either religion or gender preference.
The BSA didn't meet either criterion.
Mr. Klein, how long do you plan on obsessing about the Boy Scouts? Is
there some partticular reason you want access to the "Boy" scouts so badly
that you go on about it for two years? There is something in that, that just
isn't "normal."
.
|
|
|
| User: "freedom" |
|
| Title: Re: Judge Roy Moore on public radio |
24 Aug 2003 12:32:50 PM |
|
|
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Harry <hmags@NSexcite.com> wrote:
John Gault wrote:
"Al Klein" <rukbat@pern.invalid> wrote in message
news:5e8fkv494klokn99gkidj99t0ua9h10mvd@Pern.rk...
On Thu, 21 Aug 2003 19:20:15 -0800, "Dana" <yourname@example.com>
One of the rules all other groups have to follow is to not
discriminate on the basis of either religion or gender preference.
The BSA didn't meet either criterion.
Mr. Klein, how long do you plan on obsessing about the Boy Scouts? Is
there some partticular reason you want access to the "Boy" scouts so badly
that you go on about it for two years? There is something in that, that just
isn't "normal."
geez, Kenny-boy. I'm surprised to see you here, especially after you got
your ***** handed to you the last time you debated public support for the
boy scouts.
I always wondered myself...what's with Ken's obsession with Boy Scouts
anyway? Especially with him having a sex crime conviction on his
record....
http://www.aboutkenpangborn.com
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: N/A
iQCVAwUBP0jfPGlsHRFUcSzVAQEZhAQAl6Tcq2OPxOGlKG4IxlZBClPv9Z+vjNxR
q32NM8xu9rF560V2FB7FXp4co9g1EJ0NuP5ZzLiPsw2w/zlGB6fiJnNmqR7OaKUE
GkuwZS85oHDtv7JpsCEaPjDWtt+mm6olzVzuGUb0oCS2LkIqT1hWpniCA1JVAIr2
FNV4LQKQlGA=
=23md
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Al Klein" |
|
| Title: Re: Judge Roy Moore on public radio |
24 Aug 2003 05:30:45 PM |
|
|
On Sun, 24 Aug 2003 15:34:12 GMT, Harry <hmags@NSexcite.com> posted in
alt.atheism:
John Gault wrote:
Mr. Klein, how long do you plan on obsessing about the Boy Scouts? Is
there some partticular reason you want access to the "Boy" scouts so badly
that you go on about it for two years? There is something in that, that just
isn't "normal."
geez, Kenny-boy. I'm surprised to see you here, especially after you got
your ***** handed to you the last time you debated public support for the
boy scouts.
It's YOUR week to not have Kenny killfiled, John? My sympathies.
--
"Christians, it is needless to say, utterly detest each other. They slander each
other constantly with the vilest forms of abuse and cannot come to any sort of
agreement in their teachings. Each sect brands its own, fills the head of its own
with deceitful nonsense, and makes perfect little pigs of those it wins over to its
side."
- Celsus (2nd century C.E.)
(random sig, produced by SigChanger)
rukbat at optonline dot net
.
|
|
|
| User: "Steve Krulick" |
|
| Title: Re: Judge Roy Moore on public radio |
24 Aug 2003 07:16:18 PM |
|
|
Al Klein wrote:
On Sun, 24 Aug 2003 15:34:12 GMT, Harry <hmags@NSexcite.com> posted in
alt.atheism:
John Gault wrote:
Mr. Klein, how long do you plan on obsessing about the Boy Scouts? Is
there some partticular reason you want access to the "Boy" scouts so badly
that you go on about it for two years? There is something in that, that just
isn't "normal."
geez, Kenny-boy. I'm surprised to see you here, especially after you got
your ***** handed to you the last time you debated public support for the
boy scouts.
It's YOUR week to not have Kenny killfiled, John? My sympathies.
Omigod, they killfiled Kenny? You bastards! ;)
"Christians, it is needless to say, utterly detest each other. They slander each
other constantly with the vilest forms of abuse and cannot come to any sort of
agreement in their teachings. Each sect brands its own, fills the head of its own
with deceitful nonsense, and makes perfect little pigs of those it wins over to its
side."
- Celsus (2nd century C.E.)
(random sig, produced by SigChanger)
rukbat at optonline dot net
--
Steven Krulick /
Ellenville NY 12428-130727
.
|
|
|
| User: "Al Klein" |
|
| Title: Re: Judge Roy Moore on public radio |
24 Aug 2003 09:53:32 PM |
|
|
On Mon, 25 Aug 2003 00:16:18 GMT, Steve Krulick <s@krulick.com> posted
in alt.atheism:
Omigod, they killfiled Kenny? You bastards! ;)
ROFLOAO
(Both my wife and myself)
--
"Properly read, the Bible is the most potent force for atheism ever conceived."
- Isaac Asimov
(random sig, produced by SigChanger)
rukbat at optonline dot net
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Brian Westley" |
|
| Title: Re: Judge Roy Moore on public radio |
21 Aug 2003 06:55:38 PM |
|
|
(GIMME) writes:
There some hippocracy in your summary. It's biased far to the left.
....
If one Federal judge, U.S. District Judge Napoleon Jones Jr., can
stops the Boy Scounts from using a camp ground on City land in San Diego
(which had been used every year for the last 80 years)
- you don't complain about distrubing crusades then.
A right wing lie; the judge declared that the lease was unlawfully
awarded only to the Boy Scouts for $1/year, instead of going through
the normal process to lease public land.
When SF 9th District Court Justice Breyer calls parts of the
Pledge of Alligance unconstitutional and bans it from schools
- you don't complain about distrubing crusades then.
Another right wing lie; schools are stopped from promoting a
religious pledge, but students can say it if they like (or not).
Just like prayer, it isn't banned, it's just the school can't
promote it.
But when Alabama Chief Justice Roy Moore sticks the commandments
behind his desk and then later in the rotunda - it's disturbing crusade.
Because he's imposing his religion on the state supreme court.
The court building is not his personal property; he can put
his monument on private property.
---
Merlyn LeRoy
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "GIMME" |
|
| Title: Re: Judge Roy Moore on public radio |
22 Aug 2003 12:37:07 PM |
|
|
Al Klein
Oh, you don't think disobeying ther law is wrong?
Personally, I do. I think the commandments should be moved.
Although I'm tolerant. No problem with me if you believe
in God. You don't have to believe what I believe
so that the thought police should come and
destroy your career and steal your state's money.
However ...
Groups like the ACLU, AU, and GLADD have been able to force
their intollerant meanspirted minority view on the majority.
These groups love it when the majority suffers. Who cares about
teens and single moms when the only thing that matters is are the
views of activist lawyers. Right? Like good communist everyone
should get in line. Right? And who cares if our health care system
disintegrates? We're on track to become a third world nation
anyway? Right?
The situation with judicial activism is way out of control.
So I hope Judge Moore has some success and unleashes a movement
to where we get back to democracy instead of rule by self
important judges.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Peacenik" |
|
| Title: Re: Judge Roy Moore on public radio |
23 Aug 2003 09:28:48 AM |
|
|
"GIMME" <gimme_this_gimme_that@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:3f12b4fb.0308220937.6187427a@posting.google.com...
Al Klein
Oh, you don't think disobeying ther law is wrong?
Personally, I do. I think the commandments should be moved.
Although I'm tolerant. No problem with me if you believe
in God.
Neither with me. I DO object, however, when people force religion down the
throats of others.
You don't have to believe what I believe
so that the thought police should come and
destroy your career and steal your state's money.
Moore can believe all he wants. He cannot use the government to promote his
religious beliefs.
However ...
Groups like the ACLU, AU, and GLADD have been able to force
their intollerant meanspirted minority view on the majority.
Since when are freedom and equal rights "intolerant" and "mean-spirited"?
These groups battle against those who hate freedom and equal rights.
These groups love it when the majority suffers.
Tell, me, how does the majority "suffer" when gays have equal rights, when
the separation of church and state is upheld, and free speech is
safeguarded?
Who cares about
teens and single moms when the only thing that matters is are the
views of activist lawyers. Right?
Wrong. This is not part of the discussion anyway.
Like good communist everyone
should get in line. Right?
Wrong. Indeed, that's perfectly describes the right-wing extremists.
And who cares if our health care system
disintegrates?
This is not part of the discussion.
We're on track to become a third world nation
anyway? Right?
Right, if the right-wing has its way.
The situation with judicial activism is way out of control.
Indeed. Moore, a judicial activist, is out of control. Scalia, too, for that
matter, as the irrational thinking and sheer bigotry displayed by his
dissenting opinion in the sodomy ruling shows.
So I hope Judge Moore has some success and unleashes a movement
to where we get back to democracy instead of rule by self
important judges.
Judge Moore cares nothing for democracy or the American way of life. He and
his followers want theocracy.
--
Chris
.
|
|
|
| User: "GIMME" |
|
| Title: Re: Judge Roy Moore on public radio |
23 Aug 2003 12:02:50 PM |
|
|
"Peacenik" wrote ...
Neither with me. I DO object, however, when people force religion down the
throats of others.
It's interesting that the gay's who won't settle for DADT are the same ones
who complain that a simple religious display is forcing religion "down the
throats" of others ...
Groups like the ACLU, AU, and GLADD have been able to force
their intollerant meanspirted minority view on the majority.
Since when are freedom and equal rights "intolerant" and "mean-spirited"?
These groups battle against those who hate freedom and equal rights.
Since they started attacking the Boy Scouts.
Since they started blaming the Catholic Church for the deeds of a few
slimy homosexual deviants.
Since they started taking educational opportunities from the qualified.
Since they engaged in character assissination against individuals
who don't tow the anti-god line. The situation with Roy Moore is
a perfect example.
These groups love it when the majority suffers.
Tell, me, how does the majority "suffer" when gays have equal rights, when
the separation of church and state is upheld, and free speech is
safeguarded?
When employers can't terminate who isn't doing their job because the
employee has put on a "I'm gay you can't fire me - I've got a lawyer."
routine.
When employers have to pay health benefits for gay convience marriages.
Like good communist everyone
should get in line. Right?
Wrong. Indeed, that's perfectly describes the right-wing extremists.
The right-wing has it's problems. But the left wing thought police
are the frighting ones. Most people, especially in San Francisco,
are more far frightened by frivolous lawsuits than they are by terrorism.
Especially property owners.
And who cares if our health care system
disintegrates?
This is not part of the discussion.
In the context of judicial activism and the actions of Pfzaler it is.
We're on track to become a third world nation
anyway? Right?
Right, if the right-wing has its way.
The left wing is for open borders. Right?
So I take it that you believe that if everyone abides by the
rules of the left-wing thought police that's going to make it
so that we're more properous?
That might be true for lawyers, but to the guy in the street,
the waiter, the security guard, the policeman, the nurse,
the housekeeper, the janitor - open borders mean depressed wages.
It's a matter of supply and demand, not of politically correct
politics.
The people who suffer the most are Blacks and Latinos!
And the tax payers of California who are educating k-12 which
is 50% 1st or 2nd generation Mexicans.
Thanks to Judge Failzure.
The situation with judicial activism is way out of control.
Indeed. Moore, a judicial activist, is out of control. Scalia, too, for that
matter, as the irrational thinking and sheer bigotry displayed by his
dissenting opinion in the sodomy ruling shows.
This says something about your character. So to you sodomy is a
good thing. Right? Anyone who disagrees with you is a bigot.
So I hope Judge Moore has some success and unleashes a movement
to where we get back to democracy instead of rule by self
important judges.
Judge Moore cares nothing for democracy or the American way of life. He and
his followers want theocracy.
Are you familiar with the rulings in any other case of his? Probably
not. You don't know what you are talking about. Bitterness is clouding
your judgement.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Al Klein" |
|
| Title: Re: Judge Roy Moore on public radio |
24 Aug 2003 09:16:55 PM |
|
|
On 23 Aug 2003 10:02:50 -0700, (GIMME)
posted in alt.atheism:
"Peacenik" wrote ...
Neither with me. I DO object, however, when people force religion down the
throats of others.
It's interesting that the gay's who won't settle for DADT are the same ones
who complain that a simple religious display is forcing religion "down the
throats" of others ...
Being gay isn't against the law. Putting a public display of religion
on government property is. Being in contempt of a court order is.
Inciting to violate the law is.
Groups like the ACLU, AU, and GLADD have been able to force
their intollerant meanspirted minority view on the majority.
Since when are freedom and equal rights "intolerant" and "mean-spirited"?
These groups battle against those who hate freedom and equal rights.
Since they started attacking the Boy Scouts.
For being a private religious organization that demands to be treated
like a public organization.
Since they started blaming the Catholic Church for the deeds of a few
slimy homosexual deviants.
Whose actions were hidden by that same Catholic Church. Since the
same Catholic Church told the parents of the victims that they
couldn't seek any response to their accusations but the response of
the Church.
Since they started taking educational opportunities from the qualified.
Citation?
Since they engaged in character assissination against individuals
who don't tow the anti-god line. The situation with Roy Moore is
a perfect example.
Roy Moore is a law-breaker. Calling a criminal a criminal isn't
character assassination.
These groups love it when the majority suffers.
Tell, me, how does the majority "suffer" when gays have equal rights, when
the separation of church and state is upheld, and free speech is
safeguarded?
When employers can't terminate who isn't doing their job because the
employee has put on a "I'm gay you can't fire me - I've got a lawyer."
routine.
Companies document reasons for firing all the time. If yours doesn't
get another job. But don't expect them to fire someone because you
feel that it's your Christian right to not have to work with a gay
person.
When employers have to pay health benefits for gay convience marriages.
How is the marriage of two people who love each other "convenience"?
Like good communist everyone
should get in line. Right?
Wrong. Indeed, that's perfectly describes the right-wing extremists.
The right-wing has it's problems. But the left wing thought police
are the frighting ones.
Only for those who would force others to think like them.
Most people, especially in San Francisco,
are more far frightened by frivolous lawsuits than they are by terrorism.
Especially property owners.
If you refuse to rent to someone solely because he's gay you DESERVE
to be sued. And you deserve to lose.
We're on track to become a third world nation
anyway? Right?
Right, if the right-wing has its way.
The left wing is for open borders. Right?
The right wing is for unilaterally attacking any nation it takes a
fancy to attack. Multiculturalism made the US what it is today. If
the nation had been insular from the beginning, people like our
president would be back in their ancestors' country. "I got mine, so
screw everyone else" is *NOT* the motto of the US.
The situation with judicial activism is way out of control.
Indeed. Moore, a judicial activist, is out of control. Scalia, too, for that
matter, as the irrational thinking and sheer bigotry displayed by his
dissenting opinion in the sodomy ruling shows.
This says something about your character. So to you sodomy is a
good thing. Right?
It's no one's business.
Anyone who disagrees with you is a bigot.
If you think the sexual practices of two consenting adults, neither of
which is you, are your business, you ARE a bigot.
So I hope Judge Moore has some success and unleashes a movement
to where we get back to democracy instead of rule by self
important judges.
Judge Moore cares nothing for democracy or the American way of life. He and
his followers want theocracy.
Are you familiar with the rulings in any other case of his? Probably
not. You don't know what you are talking about. Bitterness is clouding
your judgement.
Are you familiar with the fact that he bases his rulings on
Christianity? Probably not because you don't know what you're talking
about. Christianity is clouding your ability to think.
--
"Christians, it is needless to say, utterly detest each other. They slander each
other constantly with the vilest forms of abuse and cannot come to any sort of
agreement in their teachings. Each sect brands its own, fills the head of its own
with deceitful nonsense, and makes perfect little pigs of those it wins over to its
side."
- Celsus (2nd century C.E.)
(random sig, produced by SigChanger)
rukbat at optonline dot net
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Christopher A. Lee" |
|
| Title: Re: Judge Roy Moore on public radio |
23 Aug 2003 12:33:59 PM |
|
|
On 23 Aug 2003 10:02:50 -0700, (GIMME)
wrote:
"Peacenik" wrote ...
Neither with me. I DO object, however, when people force religion down the
throats of others.
It's interesting that the gay's who won't settle for DADT are the same ones
who complain that a simple religious display is forcing religion "down the
throats" of others ...
It's interesting that the people who force religion down the throats
of others are the same intolerant bigots who imagine that equal rights
don't apply to others.
Groups like the ACLU, AU, and GLADD have been able to force
their intollerant meanspirted minority view on the majority.
Since when are freedom and equal rights "intolerant" and "mean-spirited"?
These groups battle against those who hate freedom and equal rights.
Since they started attacking the Boy Scouts.
Nobody is "attacking" the boy scouts outside the imagination of the
bigots who support the BSA's discrimination against atheists and
others - yet see nothing wrong woth official support for this
organiusationand allow it to recruit in schools without telling their
audience that membership is restricted.
Since they started blaming the Catholic Church for the deeds of a few
slimy homosexual deviants.
How does the ACLU etc do this? However it is very revealing that the
same Catholic Church has covered this up for decades. Personally, I
feel sorry for not just the victims but the lay membership.
Since they started taking educational opportunities from the qualified.
Who does that? If the bar were level there would be no nned to give
disavantaged minorities a leg up. Why don't you do something to mean
that this is un-nencessary, like improving the earlier education in
minority communities?
Since they engaged in character assissination against individuals
who don't tow the anti-god line. The situation with Roy Moore is
a perfect example.
Bwaaaaaaahahahahahahahaha.... There is no "anti-god line outside the
paraniod fantasies of individuals like you. Nobody would give a flying
***** about something as irrelevant as somebody else's religion, if
they kept it to themselves. However demagogues like Moore use their
position to impose it on others. He has made a career of flouting
Constitution of the United States of America, particularly its First
Amendment. He does not seem to be aware of the difference between Roy
Moore, private citizen, and Roy Moore, government official who hhas to
be religiously neutral and not let his own religious beliefs intefere
with his duty as a judge. He has sworn to uphold the law of the land.,
an dis expected to do that. He cannot, now he has taken on that
responsibility, lie about the 10 commandments being the basis for that
law, or pretend he is subject to some non-existant higher laws that
those is sworn to uphold.
These groups love it when the majority suffers.
Tell, me, how does the majority "suffer" when gays have equal rights, when
the separation of church and state is upheld, and free speech is
safeguarded?
When employers can't terminate who isn't doing their job because the
employee has put on a "I'm gay you can't fire me - I've got a lawyer."
routine.
They can terminate somebody for just cause. Not because he is a
different religion or orientation.
When employers have to pay health benefits for gay convience marriages.
I can't make head nor tail of this.
Like good communist everyone
should get in line. Right?
Wrong. Indeed, that's perfectly describes the right-wing extremists.
The right-wing has it's problems. But the left wing thought police
are the frighting ones. Most people, especially in San Francisco,
are more far frightened by frivolous lawsuits than they are by terrorism.
Especially property owners.
Right wing bigots like you are the frightening ones.
I've lived in the San Francisco area and there are no "left wing
thought police" outside your paranoid imagination. There are however
people different from you and me, who are just as deserving of civil
rights.
And who cares if our health care system
disintegrates?
This is not part of the discussion.
In the context of judicial activism and the actions of Pfzaler it is.
The only "judicial activism" in this context is Moore's attempt to
enforce his religion by judicial fiat.
We're on track to become a third world nation
anyway? Right?
Right, if the right-wing has its way.
The left wing is for open borders. Right?
Is it?
Although you do realise that without immigration (legal or otherwise)
to do the jobs in the fields that you won't do, one of the US's major
export successes (the agricultural industry) would not be half as
productive.
So I take it that you believe that if everyone abides by the
rules of the left-wing thought police that's going to make it
so that we're more properous?
What "left wing thought police"?
That might be true for lawyers, but to the guy in the street,
the waiter, the security guard, the policeman, the nurse,
the housekeeper, the janitor - open borders mean depressed wages.
It's a matter of supply and demand, not of politically correct
politics.
Nobody ever said it was.
And I don't think you realise just how unfriendly the USA is, for the
people who came to do the jobs you won't do.
The people who suffer the most are Blacks and Latinos!
Just to mention two of the groups that suffer from the
institutionalised bigotry of you and your kind.
And the tax payers of California who are educating k-12 which
is 50% 1st or 2nd generation Mexicans.
It reflects the population demographic. Which means Hispanic
Americans. Only the first generation are Mexican. But I don't think
you reralsie just how many Hispanics are actually descendants of
people who lived in California when it was still the Mexican provice
of Alta California before the "Anglos" arrived for the 1849 gold rush.
It hasn't been a State for very long.
Thanks to Judge Failzure.
What a maroon.
The situation with judicial activism is way out of control.
Indeed. Moore, a judicial activist, is out of control. Scalia, too, for that
matter, as the irrational thinking and sheer bigotry displayed by his
dissenting opinion in the sodomy ruling shows.
This says something about your character. So to you sodomy is a
good thing. Right? Anyone who disagrees with you is a bigot.
Personally I find gays far less threatening than the religious
extremists and judicial loonies like Scalia, Moore etc who use their
courts to enforce their religion, and to legislate matters of
individual conscience.
The bigotry is the unthinking hatred of people who aren't like you.
Exhibited by yourself in spades.
So I hope Judge Moore has some success and unleashes a movement
to where we get back to democracy instead of rule by self
important judges.
Oh, the irony. Judge Moore breaks one of the first laws of the United
States by establishing his religion, he's the "self-important judge"
who is imposing his beliefs. Not the others wo are standing up for the
law.
Moore has made himself unfit to be a judge. He deliberately flouted
the law from day one, to cause conflict with his superiors.
Judge Moore cares nothing for democracy or the American way of life. He and
his followers want theocracy.
Are you familiar with the rulings in any other case of his? Probably
not. You don't know what you are talking about. Bitterness is clouding
your judgement.
Lies are clouding yours.
.
|
|
|
| User: "GIMME" |
|
| Title: Re: Judge Roy Moore on public radio |
23 Aug 2003 04:02:59 PM |
|
|
I've lived in the San Francisco area and there are no "left wing
thought police" outside your paranoid imagination. There are however
people different from you and me, who are just as deserving of civil
rights.
So you didn't hear about Gay Pride where the only candidate who doesn't
make is gayness an issue was attacked with lead pipes by Gay Shame?
What "left wing thought police"?
Start with the ACLU, then GLADD, the San Francisco Bar, the Bay Gardian and
the San Francisco Chronicle (but not sfgate.com).
And I don't think you realise just how unfriendly the USA is, for the
people who came to do the jobs you won't do.
What a myth. 80 percent of black teens are unemployed and you're
insisting they don't want to work. You've really got a Latino
only racist attitude if you think that only Latinos want to work.
Personally I find gays far less threatening than the religious
extremists and judicial loonies like Scalia, Moore etc who use their
courts to enforce their religion, and to legislate matters of
individual conscience.
The bigotry is the unthinking hatred of people who aren't like you.
So indeed, your words suggest you agree that anyone whose opinion differs
from yours is a bigot.
I don't hate anyone. That includes all immigrants who come to the US
legally and gays who don't parade around like perverts.
Please answer. Do you think sodomy is a good thing? Is it moral?
Oh, the irony. Judge Moore breaks one of the first laws of the United
States by establishing his religion, he's the "self-important judge"
who is imposing his beliefs. Not the others wo are standing up for the
law.
Agreed. But why is it only a big deal when the self-important judge
is on the right?
Moore has made himself unfit to be a judge. He deliberately flouted
the law from day one, to cause conflict with his superiors.
Maybe he has.
But it's interesting how much activists focus on the law when it
comes to Judge Moore and the Scouts while applauding civil
disobediance to protest the war on Iraq.
.
|
|
|
| User: "John Gault" |
|
| Title: Re: Judge Roy Moore on public radio |
24 Aug 2003 07:12:34 AM |
|
|
"Dr. Smartass" <gekiskivviesdo@astroboyskivviesmail.com> wrote in message
news:Xns93E0B4E14A76Easkifyouwantit@65.82.44.187...
gimme_this_gimme_that@yahoo.com (GIMME) wrote in
news:3f12b4fb.0308231302.22cc0f6f@posting.google.com:
Please answer. Do you think sodomy is a good thing? Is it moral?
Who cares? Why are you obsessed with it?
Beware the sex police. They aren't getting any!
.
|
|
|
| User: "JJGun" |
|
| Title: Re: Judge Roy Moore on public radio |
25 Aug 2003 10:59:57 AM |
|
|
"John Gault" <> wrote in message news:<bia9lj$2jfh$1@news1.ij.net>...
"Dr. Smartass" <gekiskivviesdo@astroboyskivviesmail.com> wrote in message
news:Xns93E0B4E14A76Easkifyouwantit@65.82.44.187...
gimme_this_gimme_that@yahoo.com (GIMME) wrote in
news:3f12b4fb.0308231302.22cc0f6f@posting.google.com:
Please answer. Do you think sodomy is a good thing? Is it moral?
Who cares? Why are you obsessed with it?
Beware the sex police. They aren't getting any!
You don't have time to "get" much yourself Ken, jumping from your
kenpangborn@aol.com back and forth to your alias.
Before everyone reads any further you should know that it was proven
in milw.general that "John Gault" <> and Ken Pangborn
<kenpangborn@aol.com> are the same person. Pangborn uses the Gault
alias to support his lies on usenet. A quick step down the google
archives will eliminate any doubt you might have about this. Frther
proof can be found at http://www.aboutkenpangborn.com
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Al Klein" |
|
| Title: Re: Judge Roy Moore on public radio |
24 Aug 2003 09:27:50 PM |
|
|
On 23 Aug 2003 14:02:59 -0700, (GIMME)
posted in alt.atheism:
What a myth. 80 percent of black teens are unemployed
Most of them because they don't want a job, or because they don't want
the kind of jobs they're qualified for.
and you're
insisting they don't want to work. You've really got a Latino
only racist attitude if you think that only Latinos want to work.
How many unemployed, qualified, looking-for-work black teen-agers have
you actually known on a one-to-one basis? One? Zero?
Please answer. Do you think sodomy is a good thing? Is it moral?
Do you think it's a good thing when a heterosexual married couple
engage in it? Is it moral then? (What has morality to do with how
two consenting adults have sex in the privacy of their home?)
Oh, the irony. Judge Moore breaks one of the first laws of the United
States by establishing his religion, he's the "self-important judge"
who is imposing his beliefs. Not the others wo are standing up for the
law.
Agreed. But why is it only a big deal when the self-important judge
is on the right?
Only when a judge flouts the law. How many leftist judges openly
defied a court order?
Moore has made himself unfit to be a judge. He deliberately flouted
the law from day one, to cause conflict with his superiors.
Maybe he has.
But it's interesting how much activists focus on the law when it
comes to Judge Moore and the Scouts while applauding civil
disobediance to protest the war on Iraq.
Which is *not* illegal.
But it's interesting how you pretend that flouting the law and
protesting are equivalent.
--
"I like your Christ, I do not like your Christians. Your Christians are so unlike your
Christ."
- Mohandas Gandhi
(random sig, produced by SigChanger)
rukbat at optonline dot net
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Gregory Gadow" |
|
| Title: Re: Judge Roy Moore on public radio |
22 Aug 2003 12:58:17 PM |
|
|
GIMME wrote:
Groups like the ACLU, AU, and GLADD have been able to force
their intollerant meanspirted minority view on the majority.
Only when their "intollerant (sic) meanspirited (sic) minority view" is
embodied in the Constitution of the United States of America. No matter
popular opinion and regardless of the size of the majority, the
Constitution is the supreme law of the land.
If the Constitution offends you, get it changed.
--
Gregory Gadow
techbear@serv.net
http://www.serv.net/~techbear
"If you make yourself a sheep, the wolves will eat you."
-- Benjamin Franklin
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Al Klein" |
|
| Title: Re: Judge Roy Moore on public radio |
23 Aug 2003 10:46:55 AM |
|
|
On 22 Aug 2003 10:37:07 -0700, (GIMME)
posted in alt.atheism:
Al Klein
Oh, you don't think disobeying ther law is wrong?
Personally, I do. I think the commandments should be moved.
So you DO think that a violation of the law is okay.
Although I'm tolerant. No problem with me if you believe
in God. You don't have to believe what I believe
so that the thought police should come and
destroy your career and steal your state's money.
No, but if your job is the highest arbiter of the law in your state,
and you blatantly violate the law and show contempt for higher courts,
your destroyed your own career and you're stealing your state's money
every time you cash your pay check.
However ...
Groups like the ACLU, AU, and GLADD have been able to force
their intollerant meanspirted minority view on the majority.
Obeying the law is now a minority view? Neocons never fail to amaze
me.
The situation with judicial activism is way out of control.
What Moore did is judicial activism. The other 8 justices of his
court said that what he did was wrong.
So I hope Judge Moore has some success and unleashes a movement
to where we get back to democracy instead of rule by self
important judges.
Moore's action is "rule by important judge". The rest of his court
disagrees with him - and you.
--
"To assume the existence of an unperceivable being ... does not facilitate understanding
the orderliness we find in the perceivable world."
- Letter to an Iowa student who asked, What is God? July, 1953; Einstein Archive 59-085
(random sig, produced by SigChanger)
rukbat at optonline dot net
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Gregory Gadow" |
|
| Title: Re: Judge Roy Moore on public radio |
22 Aug 2003 08:44:23 AM |
|
|
GIMME wrote:
There some hippocracy in your summary. It's biased far to the left.
If a Federal judge, Judge Pfaelzer , stops most of the provisions
of California's prop 187 to halt the costs of illegal immigration
- you don't complain about disturbing crusades then.
I'm not familiar with that case, so I can't comment.
If one Federal judge, U.S. District Judge Napoleon Jones Jr., can
stops the Boy Scounts from using a camp ground on City land in San Diego
(which had been used every year for the last 80 years)
- you don't complain about distrubing crusades then.
The Boy Scouts of America argued before the Supreme Court of the United States
that they were a private religious organization and that, as such, they had the
right to exclude people for perceived moral failings and for not acknowledging a
deity. The Court agreed with them. Private religious organizations are
restricted in the government handouts and favors they may receive. It would have
been a violation of the Constitution if Judge Jones had ruled any other way.
When SF 9th District Court Justice Breyer calls parts of the
Pledge of Alligance unconstitutional and bans it from schools
- you don't complain about distrubing crusades then.
It is unconstitutional -- and therefore beyond illegal -- for the government to
require an affirmation of deity.
But when Alabama Chief Justice Roy Moore sticks the commandments
behind his desk and then later in the rotunda - it's disturbing crusade.
In the other two cases, the court determined that the Constitution still stands
and that establishment of religion -- or even the appearance of religious
favoratism by government -- is a violation of that Constitution. Moore's placing
of the Commandments is a violation of the Constitution.
--
Gregory Gadow
techbear@serv.net
http://www.serv.net/~techbear
"If you make yourself a sheep, the wolves will eat you."
-- Benjamin Franklin
.
|
|
|
| User: "GIMME" |
|
| Title: Re: Judge Roy Moore on public radio |
23 Aug 2003 03:42:50 PM |
|
|
If you'd be so kind.
Where does the Scout's Oath or Law refer to a deity?
Where does the Pledge refer to a diety?
.
|
|
|
| User: "Smitty Jagermanjenson" |
|
| Title: Re: Judge Roy Moore on public radio |
23 Aug 2003 04:07:10 PM |
|
|
"GIMME" <gimme_this_gimme_that@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:3f12b4fb.0308231242.42bb6c1c@posting.google.com...
If you'd be so kind.
Where does the Scout's Oath or Law refer to a deity?
"On my honor I will do my best to do my duty to god"
Where does the Pledge refer to a diety?
"one nation, under god"
What was your point?
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
