Vision Forum E-mail Newsletter

« Last Link To Hitler's Inner Circle Dies | Main | Vision Forum Interns Enjoy a Little Sushi »

David Barton Opposes the Civic illiteracy of Those Christians Who Claim Moore Is Not Following the Rule of Law

After the enormously disappointing behavior of World Magazine, Richard Land and others, who continue to communicate a fundamental misunderstanding of the legal issues in the case of Judge Moore, I was blessed to see that David Barton has issued an article in which points out the civic illiteracy of those who falsely accuse the Chief Justice of disregarding the rule of law. The following is a brief excerpt:

“Interestingly, voices of condemnation against Judge Moore have been raised around the nation, alleging that he refuses to follow ‘the rule of law.’ Such claims constitute some of the more civically-illiterate statements made in recent years. Consider: in every student civics or government book in America is a page on ‘How a Bill Becomes a Law.’ Anyone who examines those pages will notice that the judiciary has no role in making law; laws come from bills passed by the legislature and signed by the president or governor. Since no such law has been passed in this case, what ‘rule of law’ is Judge Moore not upholding? Can it actually be that these critics talking about ‘the rule of law’ believe that an order by a single unelected federal judge is actually the equivalent of a law? Apparently so. Don’t misunderstand: this is not to suggest that judicial rulings should be ignored based on the personal predilections of an individual in a case; however, this ruling goes against every deeply embedded legal standard in America’s common law, and Judge Moore’s refusal is not based solely on his selfish or personal inclinations. (To learn how deeply the Ten Commandments have been implanted into American law and traditions, read our legal brief on this issue that has been filed on this issue. Go to www.wallbuilders.com and click on the link for the Ten Commandments Brief, located on the front page.)

“Following Judge Myron Thompson’s edict, the other eight justices on the Alabama Supreme Court announced their unanimous opposition to Judge Moore’s position and agreed to cooperate in the removal of the monument. Judge Moore was subsequently suspended from his judgeship by the Alabama Judicial Inquiry Commission for his refusal to comply with the federal judge’s order. Importantly, Judge Moore is elected (as are the other eight State Supreme Court judges) and therefore ultimately accounts directly to the people of Alabama, who can have the final say on this issue. When that time comes, the decision of the voters likely will not agree with the State’s other Supreme Court judges or the State’s Judicial Inquiry Commission. Moore was already well-known for his stand for the Ten Commandments before he was elected to the Supreme Court (he had already won three legal decisions on the Ten Commandments at the time of his election) and recent polls show that 77 percent of the State supports the display.”