I feel embarassed to be a Southener when I read these kinds of things. The rest of the country already thinks we all have Billy-Bob teeth, chew tobacco and marry our first cousins but a judge??
Is it me?? Does this not sound like Minnie Pearl's hat with the price tag dangling?? This is America where judges should realize that many many people are not Jewish or Christian and how are they going to feel about it??
How would we feel if we were put on trial in Iran and the judge comes out wearing a robe with verses from the Koran on it? Would we really feel just hunky dory with it? Would we even be glad because we had ourselves a religious judge?? Naw.. I don't think so folks because we'd be danged afraid that he wasn't so fond of Christians.
So put the shoe on the other foot. I think its very poor form for a judge to do this. And I question his judicial temperment when he displays such bad judgement, IMO.
I feel embarassed to be a Southener when I read these kinds of things. The rest of the country already thinks we all have Billy-Bob teeth, chew tobacco and marry our first cousins . . .QUOTE]
If you and your wife get married in Kentucky, and divorced in Tennessee - are you still brother and sister?
"'Truth is an absolute value,' McKathan said, 'and you can't divorce the law from the truth. I feel we must resist the modern attempts to discount the truth.'"
The fact that the judge can't seem to distinguish between "truth" and his own, personal beliefs, alone disqualifies him for the office.
Having lived in Alabama, I can't say it surprises me much. The state was always in stiff competition with Mississippi to see who could best exhibit the qualities of an in-bred hillbilly.
Took one of my clients to vote this past November, and he was refused entrance into the voting area, unless he took off his Kerry/Edwards button that he was wearing.
The folks there had no objection to Kerry (I'm betting they all voted for him), but the rules of the polling place are -- "No political propoganda allowed on the grounds -- inside, or out". If Jeff had to take off his button, in order to vote for Kerry, I see no difference in the judge having to change his robe - to preside in court.
By the way -- Jeff's polling place (as was mine) was in a church.
How does that work with separation of *church and state*? -->
The question you raise about voting inside a church is indeed a good one.
Is the church providing a politically/religiously neutral polling place, as a civil service? If so, I for one have no problem with it, so long as there is also no propagandizing going on religiously/politically speaking.
The church that I voted at in my precinct seemed to be well within bounds in that respect.
The concept of separation of church and state is still Constitutionally valid, regardless of whatever loopholes that are still in place.
Garth -- I can't quote you the "chapter and verse" about the voting laws up here in Minny-soda, but the ruling is quite strict. No one is allowed to be on the grounds of the polling place with either placards, or leaflets, or whatever -- and as I and Jeff found out -- that included a button worn on his shirt.
We had an interesting talk for about an hour after the fact, cause he couldn't understand exactly why they made him take it off. (FYI -- he is 50 years old, mildly mentally retarded, but is his own conservator, so he gets to vote) --- I had to help him "pull the lever" to vote - cause even though I knew he wanted to vote a straight democratic ticket, he got it wrong somehow, and I wanted to see his wishes honored.
Now -- My question about the *church and state issue*, is simply this, and I'm not looking for a fight here, but I am wondering (and I think legitimately so) -- How is it that voting (state) can be held in a church (church) -- yet "church" (10 commandments) cannot be displayed in a government building (state)?-->
That is the part I don't understand. You (as an example) find no problem voting in the space provided by some local congregation. Neither do I -- yet -- if church and state should truely be separated, how is it *right* to vote in a church???
That was my question, and I find it mildly amusing that those who wish for total separation of church and state, will go to a church, to cast their vote for the state. Nothing more, nothing less.
My non-objection to voting in a church building has to do with the fact that none of the church's officials and believers were there to propagate their beliefs into the voting process/who to vote for (unlike people wearing 'Vote for my candidate' buttons to the polling place, who ARE propagating what/who to vote for)
The 10 Commandments in a government building, on the other hand, isn't quite so neutral, nor is it *just* an historical/legal illustration. It is plainly, as folks like Moore and his 'bible-sleeve' sidekick show forth in a straight forward manner, a propoganda tool/establishment of religion or religious views into government. Ie., "God and His 10 Commandments are at the very basis for our law and govenment!" Now if that isn't establishing a religious viewpoint into government, you show me what is.
THAT is what I find 'amusing' (disgusting and alarming to tell the truth). -->
I suspect that denying a polling place because it is a church would be as much a violation of the First Amendment as requiring that polling places be at churches.
Recall that the First Amendment does not say "separation of church and state," so using that phrase to frame the law doesn't always work (although it sometimes does). The amendment is that Congress shall pass no law respecting the establishment of religion or prohibiting the free exercise thereof. If a church building meets all the legal requirements of a polling place, then it cannot be denied simply because it is a church. (I don't know how polling places are selected, so please don't ask).
dmiller, your story reminds me of what happened here. A girl I work with is a huge Bush supporter and she wore her Bush/Cheney shirt to her precinct to vote.
They told her she couldn't vote with that shirt on so she took it off right there in line with everyone watching....turned the shirt inside out....put it back on and went inside to vote. :D-->
TRUE STORY! She's always the first person invited to happy hour now.
Garth, I wasn't trying to imply anything about any candidate, only the humor in the situation. I don't know if I would have taken my shirt off in front of hundreds of people standing in a very slow moving line.
So, why is there forbidding of political propaganda at polling stations?
Because, after *months and months* of campaigns, 15 and 30 second TV sound bites and rabid attacks of one candidate upon another, sky-high promises made (and later broken), etc., etc., ad *nauseum*, when you get to the polls, the polling place should be _free_ of all that song-and-dance verbiage and pressure when you finally make the quiet and personal decision/action of voting.
Besides, if you're at the polling place, your mind is already made up on who you are going to vote for anyway, right?
quote: They told her she couldn't vote with that shirt on so she took it off right there in line with everyone watching....turned the shirt inside out....put it back on and went inside to vote. :D-->
quote: Oh, by the way, if you were wearing 'Kerry/Edwards' stickers/pins/clothing/et al, the same rule would apply, .... and you know it.
Sure I know it --- that was the point of the story of the episode at the voting booth.
quote:If Jeff had to take off his button, in order to vote for Kerry, I see no difference in the judge having to change his robe - to preside in court.
I was just pointing out that the political
button, and the 10 commandments on the robe were equal breaches of "protocol".
quote: The amendment is that Congress shall pass no law respecting the establishment of religion
Actually, it says "respecting AN establishment of religion", not THE establishment of religion. Don't tell me this is irrelevant. The means the and an means an. Are you the resident of Florida, or are you a resident of Florida.
The 10 commandments do not constitute AN establishment of religion. They constitute morality with a God behind them, but not AN establishment of religion.
Did you hear that news story about someplace in the Tampa area that had to remove Christmas trees from some public display because they supposedly were religious symbols. The insanity continues. Next, those of us who are born again will have to leave our holy spirit at the door when we enter a government building.
quote: Actually, it says "respecting AN establishment of religion", not THE establishment of religion. Don't tell me this is irrelevant. The means the and an means an. Are you the resident of Florida, or are you a resident of Florida.
Getting a tad desperate here, aren't we? I mean, this gives 'straining at a gnat' a whole new meaning and level of anal retentive pickyness. -->
Establishment is happening whether we're talking about AN establishment or THE establishment.
The 10 Commandments are laws that God specifically gave to Isreal that has elements that cross over into other religions and even morals. Consider, for example, the first 4 commandments. They *specifically* have to do with making God your god, to have no other gods beside him, not to have graven images, and the like.
Morality has been around a LONG time before Moses was a gleam in his daddy's eye. AND morality is not specific to those who practice religion. Contrary to popular opinion, one could be an atheist and still have morals; don't kill, don't steal, you know the drill.
quote: Next, those of us who are born again will have to leave our holy spirit at the door when we enter a government building.
MWUHAhahahaha! Why, thats part of the Grande, One World, Communist Corn-spiracy, doncha know. To *drive* out Christianity from this country, back to the Midle East where it belongs! :P--> And it all started with the first step: The outlawing of government sponsored prayer in the public schools!!
--> Would someone please tell me why some folks go ape-.... because the government isn't allowed to get involved with the matters of religion/spiritualty please! I mean, anybody else gets on the 'gummint public trough', and they are told to 'get a job, and quit being a socialist freeloader!'. But when it comes to the Sovereign God Almighty, apparently He just can't do His Will without government assistance in keeping His people on the straight and narrow.
Garth --- the topic is the 10 commandments embroidered on the robe of a judge. I think you've addressed everything but that topic so far.
Rant, rave, comment, say what you will -- but I guess in your own way -- you have answered the topic, originally posted. I'm sure you can find some quote (from yourself) *proving* you made the connection, and we are all in the *wrong*.
Well -- have fun doing so, and the next time you go to vote at a church, for a political candidate, please ask the folks there to remove all *religious* symbols from that locale -- (bibles, crosses, the word "Holy" from their sign outside, hymnals, and even left-over *schedules* of the previous Sunday's service).
Cause if you don't -- you have no right to go to a public, governmental entity, and say that they are in violation, if the 10 commandments are somewhere on the property. (just an imo)
According to you -- the churches are not forcing anyone to believe their *spiel*, by holding polling stations at their locale. I can go along with that, but why can you not go along with the reverse, when it comes to a courthouse??
My post on December 17th, at 12:20? Read it again. Carefully. Note the non-coercive nature of allowing the voting to go on in the church building; no church leader is there to propagate who/what to vote for, no political commercials being allowed to go on there, nothing. Just a building being used as a polling place. (Now I could be wrong or mistaken legally. The Supreme Court/Constitutional legal scholars just might find out that it does violate the Constitution anyway. I am just not aware of it.)
Fast forward to Roy Moore's antics, and similar activities bt 'like minded' judges. There you have the specific aim of propagating (teaching, encouraging, even intimidating) the religious (almost always Christian) concepts/beliefs/etc. in the courtroom, via things like the 10 Commandment monument, signs, wearing them on the judge's robes, etc. It would be like having that same behavior at the polling place! Ooopsie!
Maybe you can answer the same question I put to Johniam. Please tell me why some folks go ape-.... because the government isn't allowed to get involved with the matters of religion/spiritualty? I mean, anybody else gets on the 'gummint public trough', and they are told to 'get a job, and quit being a socialist freeloader!'. But when it comes to the Sovereign God Almighty, apparently He just can't do His Will without government assistance in keeping His people on the straight and narrow.
Why is this?
I have put that question to quite a number of religious people that seem to get anal when it comes to the separation of church and state, and to this day, NONE could/would answer what I believe to be a legit question. (Not in a straightforward and honest manner anyway)
Even if you look past my 'diplomatic and loving ways' ;)-->
Garth: Are you the poster on GSC, or are you a poster on GSC. There is a difference which your own anal, obsessive/compulsive, nitpicky attitude won't allow you to see. I don't even understand your question. Your posts would be a lot easier to understand without the excess of hyperbole in them.
Recommended Posts
GarthP2000
In these cases, its as if they wear the 10 Commendments (and their entire religion) squarely on their a**es.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Sudo
Is it me?? Does this not sound like Minnie Pearl's hat with the price tag dangling?? This is America where judges should realize that many many people are not Jewish or Christian and how are they going to feel about it??
How would we feel if we were put on trial in Iran and the judge comes out wearing a robe with verses from the Koran on it? Would we really feel just hunky dory with it? Would we even be glad because we had ourselves a religious judge?? Naw.. I don't think so folks because we'd be danged afraid that he wasn't so fond of Christians.
So put the shoe on the other foot. I think its very poor form for a judge to do this. And I question his judicial temperment when he displays such bad judgement, IMO.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
johniam
Snicker.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
GarthP2000
Yeah, Johniam, that 'wear the bible verses on his robe' judge is quite a joke, isn't he?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Steve!
Link to comment
Share on other sites
George Aar
"'Truth is an absolute value,' McKathan said, 'and you can't divorce the law from the truth. I feel we must resist the modern attempts to discount the truth.'"
The fact that the judge can't seem to distinguish between "truth" and his own, personal beliefs, alone disqualifies him for the office.
Having lived in Alabama, I can't say it surprises me much. The state was always in stiff competition with Mississippi to see who could best exhibit the qualities of an in-bred hillbilly.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
GarthP2000
Let's not forget that genteel state of Bob Jones University, South Carolina, which has still yet to vote itself back into the Union.
But seriously, just kidding about the jokes, but with folks like Roy boy and Mr. Wear-a-Bible-in-Court, its hard to shake images like that off.
I mean, there are similar critters like that crawling around here in Gawgia!
Altho' it does help to explain the abundance of roadkill here.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Raf
So if I become a judge, can I wear a robe that says "Black Power" on it while presiding over a trial involving a hate crime? Hmm?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
dmiller
Took one of my clients to vote this past November, and he was refused entrance into the voting area, unless he took off his Kerry/Edwards button that he was wearing.
The folks there had no objection to Kerry (I'm betting they all voted for him), but the rules of the polling place are -- "No political propoganda allowed on the grounds -- inside, or out". If Jeff had to take off his button, in order to vote for Kerry, I see no difference in the judge having to change his robe - to preside in court.
By the way -- Jeff's polling place (as was mine) was in a church.
How does that work with separation of *church and state*?
-->
Link to comment
Share on other sites
GarthP2000
Dmiller,
The question you raise about voting inside a church is indeed a good one.
Is the church providing a politically/religiously neutral polling place, as a civil service? If so, I for one have no problem with it, so long as there is also no propagandizing going on religiously/politically speaking.
The church that I voted at in my precinct seemed to be well within bounds in that respect.
The concept of separation of church and state is still Constitutionally valid, regardless of whatever loopholes that are still in place.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
dmiller
Garth -- I can't quote you the "chapter and verse" about the voting laws up here in Minny-soda, but the ruling is quite strict. No one is allowed to be on the grounds of the polling place with either placards, or leaflets, or whatever -- and as I and Jeff found out -- that included a button worn on his shirt.
We had an interesting talk for about an hour after the fact, cause he couldn't understand exactly why they made him take it off. (FYI -- he is 50 years old, mildly mentally retarded, but is his own conservator, so he gets to vote) --- I had to help him "pull the lever" to vote - cause even though I knew he wanted to vote a straight democratic ticket, he got it wrong somehow, and I wanted to see his wishes honored.
Now -- My question about the *church and state issue*, is simply this, and I'm not looking for a fight here, but I am wondering (and I think legitimately so) -- How is it that voting (state) can be held in a church (church) -- yet "church" (10 commandments) cannot be displayed in a government building (state)?
-->
That is the part I don't understand. You (as an example) find no problem voting in the space provided by some local congregation. Neither do I -- yet -- if church and state should truely be separated, how is it *right* to vote in a church???
That was my question, and I find it mildly amusing that those who wish for total separation of church and state, will go to a church, to cast their vote for the state. Nothing more, nothing less.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
GarthP2000
Dmiller,
My non-objection to voting in a church building has to do with the fact that none of the church's officials and believers were there to propagate their beliefs into the voting process/who to vote for (unlike people wearing 'Vote for my candidate' buttons to the polling place, who ARE propagating what/who to vote for)
The 10 Commandments in a government building, on the other hand, isn't quite so neutral, nor is it *just* an historical/legal illustration. It is plainly, as folks like Moore and his 'bible-sleeve' sidekick show forth in a straight forward manner, a propoganda tool/establishment of religion or religious views into government. Ie., "God and His 10 Commandments are at the very basis for our law and govenment!" Now if that isn't establishing a religious viewpoint into government, you show me what is.
THAT is what I find 'amusing' (disgusting and alarming to tell the truth).
-->
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Raf
I suspect that denying a polling place because it is a church would be as much a violation of the First Amendment as requiring that polling places be at churches.
Recall that the First Amendment does not say "separation of church and state," so using that phrase to frame the law doesn't always work (although it sometimes does). The amendment is that Congress shall pass no law respecting the establishment of religion or prohibiting the free exercise thereof. If a church building meets all the legal requirements of a polling place, then it cannot be denied simply because it is a church. (I don't know how polling places are selected, so please don't ask).
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Belle
dmiller, your story reminds me of what happened here. A girl I work with is a huge Bush supporter and she wore her Bush/Cheney shirt to her precinct to vote.
They told her she couldn't vote with that shirt on so she took it off right there in line with everyone watching....turned the shirt inside out....put it back on and went inside to vote.
:D-->
TRUE STORY! She's always the first person invited to happy hour now.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
GarthP2000
Dmiller & Belle,
Despite all these stories, you DO know why there is the forbidding of political stickers/pins/clothing/et al to the polling station, don't you?
Oh, by the way, if you were wearing 'Kerry/Edwards' stickers/pins/clothing/et al, the same rule would apply, .... and you know it.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Belle
Garth, I wasn't trying to imply anything about any candidate, only the humor in the situation. I don't know if I would have taken my shirt off in front of hundreds of people standing in a very slow moving line.
So, why is there forbidding of political propaganda at polling stations?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
GarthP2000
Because, after *months and months* of campaigns, 15 and 30 second TV sound bites and rabid attacks of one candidate upon another, sky-high promises made (and later broken), etc., etc., ad *nauseum*, when you get to the polls, the polling place should be _free_ of all that song-and-dance verbiage and pressure when you finally make the quiet and personal decision/action of voting.
Besides, if you're at the polling place, your mind is already made up on who you are going to vote for anyway, right?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
dmiller
I need to get registered in that district!!
Link to comment
Share on other sites
dmiller
Sure I know it --- that was the point of the story of the episode at the voting booth.
I was just pointing out that the political
button, and the 10 commandments on the robe were equal breaches of "protocol".
Link to comment
Share on other sites
johniam
Raf:
quote: The amendment is that Congress shall pass no law respecting the establishment of religion
Actually, it says "respecting AN establishment of religion", not THE establishment of religion. Don't tell me this is irrelevant. The means the and an means an. Are you the resident of Florida, or are you a resident of Florida.
The 10 commandments do not constitute AN establishment of religion. They constitute morality with a God behind them, but not AN establishment of religion.
Did you hear that news story about someplace in the Tampa area that had to remove Christmas trees from some public display because they supposedly were religious symbols. The insanity continues. Next, those of us who are born again will have to leave our holy spirit at the door when we enter a government building.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
GarthP2000
Johniam,
Getting a tad desperate here, aren't we? I mean, this gives 'straining at a gnat' a whole new meaning and level of anal retentive pickyness.
-->
Establishment is happening whether we're talking about AN establishment or THE establishment.
The 10 Commandments are laws that God specifically gave to Isreal that has elements that cross over into other religions and even morals. Consider, for example, the first 4 commandments. They *specifically* have to do with making God your god, to have no other gods beside him, not to have graven images, and the like.
Morality has been around a LONG time before Moses was a gleam in his daddy's eye. AND morality is not specific to those who practice religion. Contrary to popular opinion, one could be an atheist and still have morals; don't kill, don't steal, you know the drill.
MWUHAhahahaha! Why, thats part of the Grande, One World, Communist Corn-spiracy, doncha know. To *drive* out Christianity from this country, back to the Midle East where it belongs!
:P--> And it all started with the first step: The outlawing of government sponsored prayer in the public schools!!
Perhaps you can tell us Johniam. Why is this?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
dmiller
Garth --- the topic is the 10 commandments embroidered on the robe of a judge. I think you've addressed everything but that topic so far.
Rant, rave, comment, say what you will -- but I guess in your own way -- you have answered the topic, originally posted. I'm sure you can find some quote (from yourself) *proving* you made the connection, and we are all in the *wrong*.
Well -- have fun doing so, and the next time you go to vote at a church, for a political candidate, please ask the folks there to remove all *religious* symbols from that locale -- (bibles, crosses, the word "Holy" from their sign outside, hymnals, and even left-over *schedules* of the previous Sunday's service).
Cause if you don't -- you have no right to go to a public, governmental entity, and say that they are in violation, if the 10 commandments are somewhere on the property. (just an imo)
According to you -- the churches are not forcing anyone to believe their *spiel*, by holding polling stations at their locale. I can go along with that, but why can you not go along with the reverse, when it comes to a courthouse??
I'm hearing "double-speak" here.
:P-->
Link to comment
Share on other sites
GarthP2000
Dmiller,
My post on December 17th, at 12:20? Read it again. Carefully. Note the non-coercive nature of allowing the voting to go on in the church building; no church leader is there to propagate who/what to vote for, no political commercials being allowed to go on there, nothing. Just a building being used as a polling place. (Now I could be wrong or mistaken legally. The Supreme Court/Constitutional legal scholars just might find out that it does violate the Constitution anyway. I am just not aware of it.)
Fast forward to Roy Moore's antics, and similar activities bt 'like minded' judges. There you have the specific aim of propagating (teaching, encouraging, even intimidating) the religious (almost always Christian) concepts/beliefs/etc. in the courtroom, via things like the 10 Commandment monument, signs, wearing them on the judge's robes, etc. It would be like having that same behavior at the polling place! Ooopsie!
Maybe you can answer the same question I put to Johniam. Please tell me why some folks go ape-.... because the government isn't allowed to get involved with the matters of religion/spiritualty? I mean, anybody else gets on the 'gummint public trough', and they are told to 'get a job, and quit being a socialist freeloader!'. But when it comes to the Sovereign God Almighty, apparently He just can't do His Will without government assistance in keeping His people on the straight and narrow.
Why is this?
I have put that question to quite a number of religious people that seem to get anal when it comes to the separation of church and state, and to this day, NONE could/would answer what I believe to be a legit question. (Not in a straightforward and honest manner anyway)
Even if you look past my 'diplomatic and loving ways'
;)-->
Hhhmmmm?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
johniam
Garth: Are you the poster on GSC, or are you a poster on GSC. There is a difference which your own anal, obsessive/compulsive, nitpicky attitude won't allow you to see. I don't even understand your question. Your posts would be a lot easier to understand without the excess of hyperbole in them.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.