Roy's Rock is being moved

[beejay]

According to nbc13.com, the 10C monument is in the process of being moved.

I'm having trouble getting a link to post.

It sounds like it is just being moved within the courthouse. (Why didn't they cover it up days ago?)

[BibleBelted]

The funniest part of this frightening and depressing story is that William Pryor, trying to prove to the Senate that he is not really one of the Christo-fascists, is now being accused of being a librul (spit) appeaser because he had to deal with the latest stupid lawsuit filed by a Christ-bot radio host.


From the NY Times:

Attorney General Bill Pryor, defending the associate justices, filed a motion Tuesday afternoon to dismiss the latest lawsuit, saying the Mobile court lacks jurisdiction and the complaint lacks merit.

About 150 monument supporters marched on Pryor's office Tuesday, demanding he resign for supporting the associate justices' decision. Seven representatives were allowed inside to meet with Pryor's chief deputy for about 20 minutes. The rest remained outside, chanting, "Resign now! Resign now!"

[frostymama]

I watched it on CNN. There is some idiot in the crowd screaming "Burn in Hell!" at the top of his lungs. The guy they were interviewing (wanted the rock to stay) even mentioned him.

Edit: Now there are several screaming with him and it sounds like they are screaming "Put it back!". I would swear that he was screaming "burn in hell" a minute ago.

[No-Preference]

I'm having trouble getting a link to post.

Here's the link:
MSNBC.COM (http://www.msnbc.com/news/954934.asp?0cv=CB10)

[Dreaming Skin]

According to a quote on CNN, the fundies plan to boycott the moving company once they find out who it is. What a shocker. The employees and their families will probably be threatened by rednecks for years. :rolleyes:

[Jacey]

Just saw it on TV.

This goes against free speech? I can't even comprehend the mental gymnastics required to contort that........

[Tony]

Yes!

Finally they moved it.

I have more respect now for US justice system.

CNN's e-mail choice surprised me. They showed two e-mails from viewers: one from Canada and one from US. The Canadian viewer said that because of immigration from other countries US is losing its principles. The American viewer said that America is going down the toilet.

I wonder if CNN received any e-mails with another opinion and if yes, why they didn't show both sides.

I sent them my comment to: http://edition.cnn.com/feedback/

I doubt they will show it, so here it is:

Hello,

You showed two comments from viewers about the monument removal. Both of them were against it.

I am not American, but since you showed one Canadian comment, I want to let you know that I support the monument removal 100%.

It's a big step for freedom from religious brainwashing in USA.

By the way, Canadian comment was against immigration. Some people forget that Canada and USA are countries of immigrants. Without the immigrants only native people would be here.

It's not recent immigrants who wrote US constitution. The US constitution was written by founders of USA.

I wish CNN would show the opinion supporting the monument removal. The monument should not be there in the first place.

By the way, how many Christian Americans follow the commandment about the Sabbath?

I think not even one.

Tony.

[Stephen Maturin]

Originally posted by BibleBelted
The funniest part of this frightening and depressing story is that William Pryor, trying to prove to the Senate that he is not really one of the Christo-fascists, is now being accused of being a librul (spit) appeaser because he had to deal with the latest stupid lawsuit filed by a Christ-bot radio host.

Boy howdy, ain't that the truth! Pryor's just doing his statutory duty in this instance, but even so, it feels strange and more than a little icky having Billy Boy on our side here.

Whatever Pryor's doing appears to be working, though. The article that No-Preference linked says that the court cancelled a hearing previously scheduled for today in that dumbass case. Looks as though the christ-bot radio host is about to be 12(b)(6)ed right out of court.

[RufusAtticus]

Originally posted by Dreaming Skin
According to a quote on CNN, the fundies plan to boycott the moving company once they find out who it is. What a shocker. The employees and their families will probably be threatened by rednecks for years. :rolleyes:

Considering that most of them are from out of state, I doubt it will impact the company's buisness one iota. That of course assumes that it was not a state department that did the moving.

[Buffman]

Tony

I just listened to CNN (The Christian News Network) attempting to fan the fires of controvery for the sake of ratings...and perhaps personal religious beliefs. They talked about 150 people outside and then estimated that there were probably 600 in the area, and then seemed interested in the fact that people were coming from "everywhere." Then the reporter claimed that perhaps 20% were from Montgomery, 30% from Alabama and 50% from "across the country." The reporter was quick to mention that some had come from as far away as Alaska and both coasts. (Talk about a recruitment plea...) They started interviewing a family who had driven in from Kentucky. A man, woman and children nine and five. He interviewed the nine year old after the mother and father. (I felt like barfing. Another little soldier in the Army of Jesus.) ---However, I do sense that someone has been briefing these people to avoid mentioning Jesus and stick solely to the word "God."

[Mullibok]

Here's some typically moronic tripe from Maggie Gallagher about the whole thing:

Here (http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=115&ncid=742&e=6&u=/030827/105/530na.html)

She never mentions that if removing the statue is favoring one faith over another, then it's obvious that installing it in the first place is also. Aside from that, another assertion about how the commandments are a foundation for our law, never bothering to say just how many of them actually made it into the books. Secularism is called a religion, when the very definition of secular is "not relating to a religion". It saddens me that some people may actually read this and be influenced by it.

[gilly54]

From CBS news:

Protest organizers had asked the crowd not to rush the building or do anything except pray .

If only all Christian fanatics just prayed instead of bombing abortion clinics, killing children during exorcisms, etc. we would have nothing to worry about.

[Alonzo Fyfe]

I am sorry that I cannot see this as a victory.

It will simply inspire those who oppose this court order to work that much harder to impose their views on others. They will grow that much more hateful and that much more determined to overthrow the system that required the removal of this monument.

Eventually, they will win. They will elect the politicians who will appoint the judges who will say that Moore was right all along and those who ordered the monument's removal were wrong.

The only way to avoid this outcome is to make the use of such monuments unpopular as they are wrong

[cheetah]

Originally posted by Alonzo Fyfe

The only way to avoid this outcome is to make the use of such monuments unpopular as they are wrong

How would you propose to do that?

[Alonzo Fyfe]

Originally posted by cheetah
How would you propose to do that?

Well, I presented some ideas in this thread. (http://www.iidb.org/vbb/showthread.php?s=&threadid=60961)

Mostly, the answer is, find some way to tell somebody why this is wrong and why you don't support it. Again, there are some more specific points in this regard contained in the thread referenced above.

[Buffman]

The momuments aren't wrong. It's the lies being told and promoted by the media, preachers, and some legal experts all the way up to the SCOTUS chambers, who are fostering the public drum beat that our laws and history are based on the 10 Commandments that are wrong.

Unless we are able to accurately educate believers and non-believers alike to know why these others are wrong , faith beliefs will undoubtedly triumph over facts.

[Alonzo Fyfe]

Originally posted by Buffman
The momuments aren't wrong.

Well, if it's not wrong, then what is everybody complaining about?

[Buffman]

Silencing their God.

[Alonzo Fyfe]

No. I mean the people here. If there is nothing wrong with puting monuments like this in public buildings, then why complain about putting monuments like this in public buildings?

Is this just a matter of going through the motions of moving religious monuments from public buildings out of tradition -- a blind ritual that serves no practical purpose?

Or are there some good reasons not to put religious monuments in public buildings?

I go with the latter.

[StrictSeparationist]

Originally posted by Alonzo Fyfe
No. I mean the people here. If there is nothing wrong with puting monuments like this in public buildings, then why complain about putting monuments like this in public buildings?

Is this just a matter of going through the motions of moving religious monuments from public buildings out of tradition -- a blind ritual that serves no practical purpose?

Or are there some good reasons not to put religious monuments in public buildings?

I go with the latter.

Ok, so what do you believe are the good reasons not put religious monuments in public buildings, and how do they differ from the standard coercion-related argument cited by many atheists?

[cheetah]

Originally posted by Alonzo Fyfe


I go with the latter.

I agree, but aren't you basically saying, in that other thread, that we should silently suffer these injustices in order not to cause more hatred and solidifying against our position? And that meanwhile, we might try to change public opinion, which could take ages, all the while suffering these injustices? It seems sad to give up that point.

Thank you, though, for linking to that excellent thread. I agree that changing the public perception can only be a good thing and can be very successful.

[Grumpy]

I watched as the movers were scratching their heads, trying to figure out how to haul the thing away. CNN had experts saying it would take hours. Moments later, it was like, "Oh, and there it goes." :D

Originally posted by Buffman
I just listened to CNN (The Christian News Network) attempting to fan the fires of controvery [sic] for the sake of ratings.

There was a quick interview with Michael Newdow, of all people, asking his reaction. He pointed out (or maybe I'm thinking of a different interview) that the commandments on Roy's Rock are the Christian version, and not the Old Testament original. The CNN interviewer then asked, "Would it be better if there was a Torah there, too?"

Talk about missing the point.

[Mullibok]

An interview on CNN's site:

O'BRIEN (Interviewer): A new poll from CNN and USA Today, and Gallup as well, 77 percent, in a nutshell, are against the federal court order to remove the monument. Do you feel that this is a strong vote from the American public, and that might actually pressure the Supreme Court into hearing your case?

TITUS (Moore's attorney): Well, the American people understand what the Constitution means better than federal judges do...

Riiiiiiiiiight. :banghead:

[Toto]

Supporters don't give up (http://worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=34311)

Seeking to head off any eruption of violent protest to the move, security guards sifted through the throngs of dismayed and angered Moore defenders gathered on the steps outside the building.

While many demonstrators knelt on the ground and prayed, others began chanting, "Put it back!"

"Get your hands off our God!" one man shouted as fellow protesters urged him to stay calm.



His god is a piece of rock?

[Alonzo Fyfe]

Originally posted by cheetah
I agree, but aren't you basically saying, in that other thread, that we should silently suffer these injustices in order not to cause more hatred and solidifying against our position? And that meanwhile, we might try to change public opinion, which could take ages, all the while suffering these injustices? It seems sad to give up that point.

Silently suffer injustices . . . ?

No. I'm against that. My message in that other thread is that if one focuses solely on forcing the issue through law, without explaining to the people why this is good, then eventually the law will be changed, and victories will turn into defeat.

I am, for example, an advocate of civil disobedience -- where civil disobedience is used as a tool for explaining the injustice in the existing laws. Ghandi's march and civil disobedience protecting British laws against the manufacture of salt was pure genius. Martin Luthar King's acts of civil disobedience were also very educational and, in the end, served their purpose well.

But, in the case of separation of church and state, we have enforcement of the laws without explaining their merit. The only 'merit' that anybody ever hears is that "my interpretation of the constitution says it has to be this way." We sometimes hear why that interpretation is correct. But we never hear why a society governed by such a rule is better than one that is not.

The result is to make the First Amendment itself, or at least that particular interpretation of it, increasingly hated, and it will not take long at this rate until it is rejected. The people will not stand for it unless somebody starts taking the time to explain to them how justice requires equal treatment under the law.

Ultimately, the goal of both tactics -- enforcing the law and changing public opinion -- should be the same. It goal shouldn't be to get the monument moved. The goal should be to get the people to understand why it should not have been put there to start with.

People are not doing that. They need to be.

[xorbie]

And that is certainly the problem here. These fundie idiots are being made out to be the poor opressed people by the media when you see pictures of them being dragged out by police men. They are staging a "peaceful" opposition and making it seem like civil disobedience a la MLK.

What we need is someone in the media to just say "Good thing that statue is finally out of there, it was horridly unconstitutional." They are still treating the supreme court decision so tentatively, too afraid of losing ratings to actually come and support the people who actually know wtf is going on.