What A Shame!
Thread Starter
|
Posting Guru
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 1,406
Likes: 0
From: West Texas
What A Shame!
how terribly tragic that the members of the judicial system would bend over backwards to enforce an injunction that (legally) should have never been issued.
story
The initial judge that issued that injuntion legally had no ability to do so. Additionally, the people voted for Judge Moore and put him in office. The people put somebody in there ahead of time that they knew was a very religious man.... a man that previously had displayed such items in his public office. This is a sad day...a day where the people's vote seems to no longer matter..... A day where someone several states away can override (even illegally) the voting majority of the people.....what's next?
story
The initial judge that issued that injuntion legally had no ability to do so. Additionally, the people voted for Judge Moore and put him in office. The people put somebody in there ahead of time that they knew was a very religious man.... a man that previously had displayed such items in his public office. This is a sad day...a day where the people's vote seems to no longer matter..... A day where someone several states away can override (even illegally) the voting majority of the people.....what's next?
Posting Guru
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 2,263
Likes: 0
From: N. Florida - The "No 4x4
Re: What A Shame!
I don't know fisher_of_man, this is a tough one.
On one hand, IF he in fact willingfully and knowingly failed to comply with a legally issued* Federal Order - he got the appropriate treatment.
* - Legally issued as to THE CHARGES THAT GOT HIM BOOTED. Remember, there are technically two separate things going on here. He refused to comply with the order to remove it. THEN charges were pressed that have resulted in his getting the boot . . as I am getting this. Correct me *please* if I am mistaken.
On the other hand, he is darnd sure right about the hiprocacy. No Doubt. (in my opinion)
Even my old boots know that this country is founded on God, Guns, Guts, and Glory. Trying to remove God 200 years into it is just plain goofy. And in case you didn't know, I'm not even a religious guy.
I subscribe to the Alien Experiment Theory
On one hand, IF he in fact willingfully and knowingly failed to comply with a legally issued* Federal Order - he got the appropriate treatment.
* - Legally issued as to THE CHARGES THAT GOT HIM BOOTED. Remember, there are technically two separate things going on here. He refused to comply with the order to remove it. THEN charges were pressed that have resulted in his getting the boot . . as I am getting this. Correct me *please* if I am mistaken.
On the other hand, he is darnd sure right about the hiprocacy. No Doubt. (in my opinion)
Even my old boots know that this country is founded on God, Guns, Guts, and Glory. Trying to remove God 200 years into it is just plain goofy. And in case you didn't know, I'm not even a religious guy.
I subscribe to the Alien Experiment Theory
Postmaster
Joined: Feb 2002
Posts: 3,496
Likes: 0
From: Calgary Canada
fisher,
Again we'll disagree.
I base my opinion that he got what he deserved based on the fact that he new what the consequences of his actions would be, and chose to go ahead anyway.
I can't fault a man for standing up for what he believes in, but that often carries a high price.
Waxy
Again we'll disagree.
I base my opinion that he got what he deserved based on the fact that he new what the consequences of his actions would be, and chose to go ahead anyway.
I can't fault a man for standing up for what he believes in, but that often carries a high price.
Waxy
Elder User
Joined: Nov 2003
Posts: 987
Likes: 3
From: Bass Lake, CA
I agree that it should have never happened, however the judge was totally wrong. he had to know this would happen....
I feel the will of the people is the only thing that should matter, we are supposed to be a democracy, instead we live more and more in a socialist enviroment. with one person dictating how we all live, and what laws we must obey. why do we even have elections? I assume just so a president can appoint federal judges that actually rule this country.
dad gummit, now im pissed!
think ill go to a honda site and troll for a while to vent my anger.
I feel the will of the people is the only thing that should matter, we are supposed to be a democracy, instead we live more and more in a socialist enviroment. with one person dictating how we all live, and what laws we must obey. why do we even have elections? I assume just so a president can appoint federal judges that actually rule this country.
dad gummit, now im pissed!
think ill go to a honda site and troll for a while to vent my anger.
Thread Starter
|
Posting Guru
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 1,406
Likes: 0
From: West Texas
guys...my big problem with this is a federal judge issued the original injunction....this is a state issue...According the the Constitution...any right not expressly given to the federal government is reserved to the state government. This is and was an issue in the STATE of Alabama. If the voters of the state put him in office, KNOWING AHEAD OF TIME his sincere convictions and still put him there....and they don't have a problem with it....WHY should the FEDERAL goverment have a problem with it? Why does some federal judge in another state with too much time on his hands get to decide what's right and wrong for Alabama?
My concern over this isn't necessarily the 10 Commandments...God is big enough He can take care of this HIS way...my concern is we have given our judicial system TOO MUCH POWER....now any judge, any where ( especially the 9th Circuit Court in California) can overrule anything, anywhere, anytime and claim some obsurd, off-the-wall violation of law.
WHEN DOES IT ALL STOP?
My concern over this isn't necessarily the 10 Commandments...God is big enough He can take care of this HIS way...my concern is we have given our judicial system TOO MUCH POWER....now any judge, any where ( especially the 9th Circuit Court in California) can overrule anything, anywhere, anytime and claim some obsurd, off-the-wall violation of law.
WHEN DOES IT ALL STOP?
Trending Topics
Posting Guru
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 2,263
Likes: 0
From: N. Florida - The "No 4x4
Fisher_of_man,
you have several good points. But a couple stand out that it may help to 'hear' an alternative perspective on . .
As you didn't correct me on this point I will assume at the moment that we are on the same sheet of music regarding the two separate issues. The latter being the "charges" that have resulted in his LOJ (loss of job).
Thus, what was at issue for the judge in the other state was NOT what was "right or wrong" for your state, but whether this judge in violation of a "legal order of the court".
Remember, legal seldom has any correlation to "fairness" OR "justice".
It starts to stop (it would take another 200 years to fix this crap, even if we start today) when you and I and most of the people we know do something about it.
I think the 64 dollar question is: "How do we get sufficient air time to compete with the career politicians"?
My, wouldn't it be handy to have a couple of those professional liars like they have on our staff too - for consultation only, you understand.
you have several good points. But a couple stand out that it may help to 'hear' an alternative perspective on . .
Originally posted by fisher_of_man
. . . Why does some federal judge in another state with too much time on his hands get to decide what's right and wrong for Alabama?
. . . Why does some federal judge in another state with too much time on his hands get to decide what's right and wrong for Alabama?
Thus, what was at issue for the judge in the other state was NOT what was "right or wrong" for your state, but whether this judge in violation of a "legal order of the court".
Remember, legal seldom has any correlation to "fairness" OR "justice".
My concern over this isn't necessarily the 10 Commandments...God is big enough He can take care of this HIS way...my concern is we have given our judicial system TOO MUCH POWER....now any judge, any where ( especially the 9th Circuit Court in California) can overrule anything, anywhere, anytime and claim some obsurd, off-the-wall violation of law.
WHEN DOES IT ALL STOP?
WHEN DOES IT ALL STOP?
I think the 64 dollar question is: "How do we get sufficient air time to compete with the career politicians"?
My, wouldn't it be handy to have a couple of those professional liars like they have on our staff too - for consultation only, you understand.
FTE Stories
Ford Trucks for Ford Truck Enthusiasts
Top 10 Most Expensive Ford Trucks Ever Sold on Bring a Trailer
Joe Kucinski
2027 Ford Super Duty Buyer's Guide (Every Model, Engine, & Package)
Brett Foote
Top 10 Ford Truck Tragedies
Joe Kucinski
AEV FXL Super Duty - the Super Duty Raptor Ford Doesn't Make
Brett Foote
Lobo Vs Lobo: Proof the F-150 Lobo Should Be Even Lower!
Michael S. Palmer
Ford's 2001 Explorer Sportsman Concept Looks For a New Home
Verdad Gallardo
10 Best Ford Truck Engines We Miss the Most!
Joe Kucinski
2026 Shelby F-150 Off-Road: Better Than a Raptor R?
Brett Foote
2027 Super Duty Carhartt Package First Look: 12 Things You NEED to Know!
Michael S. Palmer
Elder User
Joined: Nov 2003
Posts: 987
Likes: 3
From: Bass Lake, CA
since we cannot vote a federal judge out of office, or fire them....we have to wait for them to die, and only appoint judges that will follow the constitution to the letter in enforcing the law...well, another hiccup! they write the damned thing everytime they hear a case in which it is challenged....not to mention, you cannot get them confirmed!
if our fore fathers could see the constitution now....
if our fore fathers could see the constitution now....
Posting Guru
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 2,263
Likes: 0
From: N. Florida - The "No 4x4
That's why I said it'd take another 200 years to fix it.
I believe that as long as interpretation of the constitution is left in the hands of appointed people we are going to have these problems.
I believe that as long as we have people special interests actually elected appointing these appointed people, we are going to have these problems.
I believe a painless solution does not exist.
Dang, now I'm depressed
I believe that as long as interpretation of the constitution is left in the hands of appointed people we are going to have these problems.
I believe that as long as we have people special interests actually elected appointing these appointed people, we are going to have these problems.
I believe a painless solution does not exist.
Dang, now I'm depressed
Cargo Master
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 2,220
Likes: 26
The judge could reasonably expect the consequences of his actions. It was a shrewd political move on his part:
Step 1:
Install monument calculated to pander to public sentiment regarding Christianity in the local area.
Step 2:
Wait for response to monument from folks higher in the legal chain who read the Constitution and background material from the Founders, (who did not write the Ten Commandments verbatim into the Constitution for reasons they were happy to explain and are available to anyone with a search engine).
Step 3:
Profit politically as a defender of the faith.
If one is planning to move on, the loss of a judgeship is a fine swap for a shot at higher office.
Like proposing legally indefensible laws outlawing flag burning (which would be banning political "speech") the judge is using a "litmus" issue to polarise support for himself and opposition to others.
I'm not anti-Right Wing Christian, just aware of their tactics. They serve the state, favor the Second Amendment, oppose Islam, support the military, and don't generally get in my way.
Step 1:
Install monument calculated to pander to public sentiment regarding Christianity in the local area.
Step 2:
Wait for response to monument from folks higher in the legal chain who read the Constitution and background material from the Founders, (who did not write the Ten Commandments verbatim into the Constitution for reasons they were happy to explain and are available to anyone with a search engine).
Step 3:
Profit politically as a defender of the faith.
If one is planning to move on, the loss of a judgeship is a fine swap for a shot at higher office.
Like proposing legally indefensible laws outlawing flag burning (which would be banning political "speech") the judge is using a "litmus" issue to polarise support for himself and opposition to others.
I'm not anti-Right Wing Christian, just aware of their tactics. They serve the state, favor the Second Amendment, oppose Islam, support the military, and don't generally get in my way.
Thread Starter
|
Posting Guru
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 1,406
Likes: 0
From: West Texas
Originally posted by ctfuzzy
Fisher_of_man,
As you didn't correct me on this point I will assume at the moment that we are on the same sheet of music regarding the two separate issues. The latter being the "charges" that have resulted in his LOJ (loss of job).
Thus, what was at issue for the judge in the other state was NOT what was "right or wrong" for your state, but whether this judge in violation of a "legal order of the court".
Fisher_of_man,
As you didn't correct me on this point I will assume at the moment that we are on the same sheet of music regarding the two separate issues. The latter being the "charges" that have resulted in his LOJ (loss of job).
Thus, what was at issue for the judge in the other state was NOT what was "right or wrong" for your state, but whether this judge in violation of a "legal order of the court".
Posting Guru
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 2,263
Likes: 0
From: N. Florida - The "No 4x4
I'm getting two seaprate issues in my mental picture:
#1 - Ordered to remove said object and refused.
#2 - Prosecuted for *refusing the order*, not for not removing the object (which he obvioulsy had done eventually)
To wit; if a cop tells me to move my truck, I can legally refuse and tell him to go fly a kite - as long as I do it after I move my truck.
See the (legal) difference?
#1 - Ordered to remove said object and refused.
#2 - Prosecuted for *refusing the order*, not for not removing the object (which he obvioulsy had done eventually)
To wit; if a cop tells me to move my truck, I can legally refuse and tell him to go fly a kite - as long as I do it after I move my truck.
See the (legal) difference?
Postmaster
Joined: Mar 2003
Posts: 4,513
Likes: 0
From: La Tech University, La
ct, I am sorry, but that made no sense, telling a cop no you are not going ot moveit, After you already did what he said? makes no sense, looks like tryin ot ride two sides of a fence
Elder User
Joined: Aug 2003
Posts: 834
Likes: 0
From: Buffalo, Minnesota
Originally posted by fisher_of_man
I guess I'm a little confused now....from what I understand the decisions went back and forth several times and ended on the fact that it wasn't a problem. then a federal judge (from another state) issued the order for Judge Moore to remove the monument. .....this is the order I'm questioning...he made an order to do something that he had no power to make. He involved the federal government in a state matter...and furthermore in state he isn't even a citizen of.
I guess I'm a little confused now....from what I understand the decisions went back and forth several times and ended on the fact that it wasn't a problem. then a federal judge (from another state) issued the order for Judge Moore to remove the monument. .....this is the order I'm questioning...he made an order to do something that he had no power to make. He involved the federal government in a state matter...and furthermore in state he isn't even a citizen of.
If I understand your position, you believe the state has primacy over the federal government on this. Yet Moore's peers, the other justices of the Alabama Supreme Court, ruled that he should remove the monument.
How can you claim the federal government is the bogey man?