So Help Me God: The Ten Commandments, Judicial Tyranny, And The Battle For Religious Freedom 
asked by megafan on November 4, 2006 9:17 AM
Chief Justice Roy Moore believes the state must acknowledge the moral principles on which America was founded and that it is not illegal to do so. While the separation of church and state may be a credible and legitimate tenet, it has been largely misconstrued and abused during the last forty years.
Moore was sworn to uphold the Constitution of the United States. His critics, both within conservative circles and without, have maintained that he violated the law by disobeying the order of a federal judge to remove a monument of the Ten Commandments. But Moore brilliantly argues that those who have ordered him to violate his oath have, in fact, broken the law.
So Help Me God will articulate why he believes elected and appointed government officials have the right and the obligation to acknowledge God as the foundation of American government and jurisprudence.
Reviews
0%
0%
In Alabama Judge Moore was not allowed to acknowledge the Judeo-Christian God and His ten commandments as being the foundation for our laws, something that is easily demonstrable and clearly our heritage. Judge Moore simply exposed the hypocrisy of a judicial system that acknowledges the Judeo-Christian God by opening in prayer and swearing oaths on a Bible, but prohibits acknowledging God in our historical foundation for law as he did. Judge Moore further demonstrated their logically fallacious reasoning in that they would not allow him to display the commandments, citing the establishment clause, but they refused to define the key word "religion" in this clause. So in effect, they decided that he violated a clause that they were unwilling to define. In doing so Judge Thompson actually stated that he found what Judge Moore did "religiously offensive." How ironic considering Thompson would not even define the word.
Simply put, every law and liberty upon which this country was founded is based on the Judeo-Christian ethic. The secular humanist liberal progressives do not want the American public to recognize that. They point to a few secular oriented statements, but fail to point out that the great preponderance of the evidence points toward biblical foundations for our laws and liberties. Facts like, 1/3 of the quotes in the books and papers written by founding fathers are Bible verses, that 52 of the 55 were regular in church attendance, and that the prolific use of references to God in official documents points to the fact that their view of the establishment clause was far different than the secularist of today that wishes to ban all such reference. Even the Declaration of Independence that established our liberty to be an independent nation states that our rights come from the Creator and because of that they are unalienable (absolute, not awarded by human power, not transferable to another power, and incapable of repudiation). This knowledge interferes with the humanist agenda to change laws and liberties as we humans progress to a so-called higher form of liberal society by casting off the shackles of these Creator endowed rights. But of course this is anarchy, for there are no humanistic standards for right and wrong that can be agreed upon by millions of discordant people each serving their own self-interest. Outside of the words of a revelatory God such as we find in the Bible nothing can be said to be inherently right or wrong. Furthermore, concepts like separation of church and state, freedom of speech, rule of law, juvenile restrictions, bearing false witness, sanctity of life, and marriage, are in and of themselves biblical concepts. They flow from and through that particular belief system.
The secular humanistic viewpoint is also hypocritical since it is itself a religious belief system. As it has been aptly said, there can be no separation of church and state for the secular humanist, for the state is their church. The establishment clause prohibits government interference with the free exercise of religion. By banning all acknowledgement of God by government officials, even when it is based on clear historical reference, the government is interfering. Even a world famous atheist that recently converted to theism because of the powerful argument to design from the plethora of discoveries in genetics and molecular cell biology says the liberal activist judges in the U.S. have interpreted the constitution the wrong way. Antony Flew said "the Supreme Court has utterly misinterpreted the clause in the Constitution about not establishing a religion: misunderstanding it as imposing a ban on all official reference to religion." Although a theist, he is only barely so. This guy hopes there is not an afterlife and does not like any organized religions (including Christianity), which makes him an especially credible witness to what is going on in this country.
The facts are clear, there is a faction that is currently trying to establish secular humanism as our national religion, and they are using state agency to do so. Will the American populace tolerate the complete secularization of society through government supported, communistic social policy dependency and its associated philosophical indoctrination into the state sponsored religion of secular humanism? Liberals don't want you to know that behind all the smoke and mirrors of political rhetoric and banter, this is the true battle raging in 21st century America.
Are our laws and liberties going to be subject to the whims of secular humanist progressives, or shall they remain in the domain of the constitution and its amendments as set forth with the original intent of the framers? We stand at a crossroads as we begin the 21st century. Is America going to become the brave new world of the liberal with all the moral norms of the jungle, or are we going to be a constitutional republic founded upon biblical principles, the same principles that made this nation great for its first 200 years. This is the generation that must choose. Read Roy's book, it is an eye opener, but don't expect those of the secular humanist persuasion to give it a good review.
Simply put, every law and liberty upon which this country was founded is based on the Judeo-Christian ethic. The secular humanist liberal progressives do not want the American public to recognize that. They point to a few secular oriented statements, but fail to point out that the great preponderance of the evidence points toward biblical foundations for our laws and liberties. Facts like, 1/3 of the quotes in the books and papers written by founding fathers are Bible verses, that 52 of the 55 were regular in church attendance, and that the prolific use of references to God in official documents points to the fact that their view of the establishment clause was far different than the secularist of today that wishes to ban all such reference. Even the Declaration of Independence that established our liberty to be an independent nation states that our rights come from the Creator and because of that they are unalienable (absolute, not awarded by human power, not transferable to another power, and incapable of repudiation). This knowledge interferes with the humanist agenda to change laws and liberties as we humans progress to a so-called higher form of liberal society by casting off the shackles of these Creator endowed rights. But of course this is anarchy, for there are no humanistic standards for right and wrong that can be agreed upon by millions of discordant people each serving their own self-interest. Outside of the words of a revelatory God such as we find in the Bible nothing can be said to be inherently right or wrong. Furthermore, concepts like separation of church and state, freedom of speech, rule of law, juvenile restrictions, bearing false witness, sanctity of life, and marriage, are in and of themselves biblical concepts. They flow from and through that particular belief system.
The secular humanistic viewpoint is also hypocritical since it is itself a religious belief system. As it has been aptly said, there can be no separation of church and state for the secular humanist, for the state is their church. The establishment clause prohibits government interference with the free exercise of religion. By banning all acknowledgement of God by government officials, even when it is based on clear historical reference, the government is interfering. Even a world famous atheist that recently converted to theism because of the powerful argument to design from the plethora of discoveries in genetics and molecular cell biology says the liberal activist judges in the U.S. have interpreted the constitution the wrong way. Antony Flew said "the Supreme Court has utterly misinterpreted the clause in the Constitution about not establishing a religion: misunderstanding it as imposing a ban on all official reference to religion." Although a theist, he is only barely so. This guy hopes there is not an afterlife and does not like any organized religions (including Christianity), which makes him an especially credible witness to what is going on in this country.
The facts are clear, there is a faction that is currently trying to establish secular humanism as our national religion, and they are using state agency to do so. Will the American populace tolerate the complete secularization of society through government supported, communistic social policy dependency and its associated philosophical indoctrination into the state sponsored religion of secular humanism? Liberals don't want you to know that behind all the smoke and mirrors of political rhetoric and banter, this is the true battle raging in 21st century America.
Are our laws and liberties going to be subject to the whims of secular humanist progressives, or shall they remain in the domain of the constitution and its amendments as set forth with the original intent of the framers? We stand at a crossroads as we begin the 21st century. Is America going to become the brave new world of the liberal with all the moral norms of the jungle, or are we going to be a constitutional republic founded upon biblical principles, the same principles that made this nation great for its first 200 years. This is the generation that must choose. Read Roy's book, it is an eye opener, but don't expect those of the secular humanist persuasion to give it a good review.
reviewed by goonball on November 12, 2006 8:35 PM
0%
0%
god help us from people (and writers) like this....
reviewed by caramel on November 16, 2006 2:12 AM
0%
0%
Wow, finally the whole story. It is hard to believe that men with as much courage, backbone, and strong morality still exist in America. This, folks, is the story of a modern American HERO. Nowadays, true heroes are ignored, blacklisted, put in jail, harassed, made fun of, and purposely misunderstood. Moore is no exception, as this story points out. In the meantime, I will be helping this man become the next governor of Alabama.
reviewed by janmueller on November 22, 2006 12:22 AM