A judges priority should be oath to God

[Never]

Article about the swearing in of Alabama state justices from the Birmingham News:

http://www.al.com/news/birminghamnews/index.ssf?/base/news/110578420462860.xml

"Many stood and applauded former Alabama Chief Justice Roy Moore as he walked to the stage to administer the oath to Parker. Moore's action was ceremonial, since Parker took his formal oath of office Thursday before U.S. Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas in Washington. Parker said Thomas told him a judge should be evaluated by whether he faithfully upholds his oath to God, not to the people, to the state or to the Constitution."

Is the part from Thomas for real?

:o

[Toto]

Yup.

Larry Darby's Atheist Newsletter (formerly the Daily Briefing) (http://www.atheistlaw.org/news-subscribe.cfm) has been keeping track of this.

Another link (http://www.montgomeryadvertiser.com/NEWSV5/storyV5sworn15w.htm) During his brief speech to the audience, Parker -- like the others who were sworn in -- made frequent Biblical references.

"By what standards should we govern ourselves?" Parker asked. "Truly the source of authority is the higher authority. We are endowed by our Creator. No judge can ban from the courtroom the very source of law that our Creator gives."

Afterward, however, Parker shied away from questions about reviving the Ten Commandments issue, noting that he was only an associate justice.

Former Gov. Fob James and his wife, Bobbie, were part of Parker's honorary robing committee.

Prior to his election victory over Democrat Robert Smith of Mobile, Parker was the special projects manager for The Foundation for Moral Law, where he worked with Moore.

[Toto]

Here's a blog comment on the "oath to God" issue (from the II Newswire):

Blue Mass (http://bluemassgroup.typepad.com/blue_mass_group/2005/01/clarence_thomas.html)

Several replies claim that an oath is always "to God" and if he swore to God that he would uphold the Constitution, what is the problem? :rolleyes:

[Bill Snedden]

Considering that it would appear that Thomas can't take a nap on the bench without getting a by-your-leave from Scalia, this really isn't surprising. They are both blights on the face of the court. :mad: