September 26, 2017 11:14 pm at 11:14 pm #1371564
On a well deserved victory, for him, for Alabama, for the Senate and for America!September 27, 2017 2:01 pm at 2:01 pm #1371961
Are you joking? Roy Moore has stated, on the record, that he believes that Christian law comes before American law when he was a judge. How do you want him in the Senate?September 27, 2017 2:14 pm at 2:14 pm #1371974
Sam, if domestic U.S. law directly contradicted Halacha on a certain matter where American law required you do something that is assur, will you follow American law or Jewish law?September 27, 2017 2:15 pm at 2:15 pm #1371973
Hey Sam…his comment was “God and Country in that order’ and executive branch should nullify any law that violated Christian beliefs….cabinet officers must affirm a belief in “a Christian-Judaic God”, a tzelem in all public buildings, etc….September 27, 2017 2:35 pm at 2:35 pm #1371979
He advocates having the Aseres Hadibros in all public courts, not a tzelem.September 27, 2017 2:35 pm at 2:35 pm #1371977
For the record, what Judge Moore stated was “I want to see virtue and morality returned to our country and God is the only source of our law, liberty and government.” In other words, he advocates enacting Biblical law into American law.September 27, 2017 2:51 pm at 2:51 pm #1371983
I won’t bother commenting further on this jerk….I think the Senate would be better off with Judge JudySeptember 27, 2017 2:52 pm at 2:52 pm #1371984
1. ” a tzelem in all public buildings” would offend Protestants
2. The “Christian Right” has not be our enemy in this country in modern times, if it ever was. Unlike their cousins across the pond, American Christians (go back to Roger Williams in the 17th century) have generally supported Jewish civil rights. Now that Christians are a minority, and sometimes a persecuted minority, we have no reason not be encouraged by their electoral successes.
3. Non-frum Jews, who dream of a universe “free from religion” will be outraged. Frankly, I would prefer a universe free from the secular fanatics who reject those of us who still “cling to religion” as they say. Senator Moore is as deplorable as they come, and its time that the deplorables (which includes us, like it or not) have a representative in the Congress.September 27, 2017 4:01 pm at 4:01 pm #1372115
The Christian 10 commandments are different than the jewish 10 commandmentsSeptember 27, 2017 5:28 pm at 5:28 pm #1372350
He’s running for U.S. Senator, not king. Regardless of his goals, he’s not going to change any laws unless a lot of other Senators and Representatives agree with him.September 27, 2017 5:28 pm at 5:28 pm #1372357
“Senator Moore is as deplorable as they come, and its time that the deplorables (which includes us, like it or not) have a representative in the Congress.”
The last time someone used that argument in relation to a Southern Judge was when an incredibly undistinguished judge (Harold Carlswell) with strong racist and misogynistic credentials was nominated to the Supreme Court to replace Justice Abe Fortas. In defense against charges that Carswell was at best “mediocre”, Senator Roman Hruska, an equally undistinguished Nebraska Republican, passionaltely made the following argument
“…. there are a lot of mediocre people [in the United States] and we are entitled to a little representation too, aren’t we…. We can’t have all Brandeises, Frankfurters and Cardozos [on the Supreme Court}.”September 27, 2017 11:53 pm at 11:53 pm #1372535
Judge Moore is a true American hero. He will be a real asset to the United States Senate and a representative for all traditional Americans. He has proven his mettle with his history of firmly standing up for moral values.September 28, 2017 10:47 am at 10:47 am #1372732
לא תחנם?September 29, 2017 9:04 am at 9:04 am #1373927
It is quite ironic, isn’t it, that President Trump’s biggest antagonists here were suddenly supporters of the President’s endorsed candidate for this primary while more conservative voters supported the candidate, Judge Moore, not endorsed by the President.October 1, 2017 2:06 pm at 2:06 pm #1374327
In other words, he advocates enacting Biblical law into American law.
Allow me to correct that for you.
He advocates enacting Biblical law according to Christian understanding into American law.
Given Judaism’s long and horrific history under states that where Christian religious law was the basis for the law of the land, I find it utterly amazing that any Jew with any sense of Jewish history would favor any step towards basing the law of the land on Christian religious doctrine.
The WolfOctober 1, 2017 2:06 pm at 2:06 pm #1374335
Wasn’t it, and still is, a bit near to the holiday for so many to argue based off of nothing more than heresay and web-blog gossip? I didn’t see anything in his 10 minute speech victory that is aligned with half of these posts. Nor did I see such things when I actually read some of his opinions, which are actually quite good on a religious freedom angle. Although I have not read ALL of his opinions, I’m not sure anyone has, but the ones I have seen were quite sound.October 1, 2017 2:06 pm at 2:06 pm #1374338
Gadolhador: Roman Hruska lived in a different era. Back then the Democratic party’s backbone were the “deplorables”. That was the era when Joseph Lieberman was a well known Democrat (they eventually kicked him out the party). And one should note that while Cardozo was a largely OTD who supported some Orthodox institutions, the other two justices you mention were Reform Jews who were not know for any sympathy for Orthodox Jews. What matter to us is people who will not oppose our existence, and that means conservatives. Secular liberals believe that frum Jews should have the exact same rights as religious Christians – which is no rights at all.October 1, 2017 3:48 pm at 3:48 pm #1375055
Wolfishmusings, no Jew with any sense of Jewish history ever did favor any step towards basing the law of the land on Christian religious doctrine.October 1, 2017 3:49 pm at 3:49 pm #1375331
Wolf, the American Christians today in support of legally enacting religious based morality laws are far better for Jews and for general society than those who support (and have been successful over the last 50 years) in stripping the law in America from morality based law (permitting sodomy, toeiva marriage, public immodesty as even nudity, abortion, women in combat and other traditional male domains, etc.)
The general societal sense of legally supported immorality certainly affects Yidden in this country.October 1, 2017 3:49 pm at 3:49 pm #1375379
Actually the Anglo-American political and legal traditions are based on a Xtian understanding of Tanach. All of the British and American philosophers were lovers of Tanach. John Selden even learned from Rabbi Menashe ben Yisrael. Atthe time ofthe Revolution every American college required students to learn Tanach in the original Hebrew (Madison, BTW, was fluent in the language). The argument over slavery was largely an argument between Protestant missionaries over the Tanach’s attitude towards the peculiar institution in general and black slavery (because of Ham’s curse) in particular.
I personally have no problem with this. A Xtian America would be much better for Israel (as well as Jews in America) than a secular America. Personally though, I am hoping that the interface with Islam will bring both closer to the sheva mitzvot.October 1, 2017 3:49 pm at 3:49 pm #1375441
The same groups of people today opposed to morality laws are by and large politically and ideologically associated with positions opposing the religious rights of Orthodox Jews (and Christians.)October 1, 2017 6:36 pm at 6:36 pm #1375946
P.S. America is a Christian country. Check out the Declaration of Independence. And no Jew should antagonize our temporary hosts by telling them we are their equals or that this isn’t their country more than ours.October 1, 2017 6:36 pm at 6:36 pm #1376133
We’re in golus; not at home.October 1, 2017 6:41 pm at 6:41 pm #1376237
As a judge you have the obligation to enforce the rules of the land.
Separation of powers is what makes America great. Don’t just don’t get to decide to create laws, just to interpret and sometimes reflect on the constitutionality of a law. That’s it.
If he believes he cannot be an American judge because he’s a Christian, he shouldn’t have applied for the jobOctober 1, 2017 6:53 pm at 6:53 pm #1376264
Yitzchok, he doesn’t believe he can’t judge and he doesn’t purport to write or create law in his position as a judge. Indeed, it his ideological opponents on the left that are on the bench that are guilty of doing all that.
And in any event, in his position as U.S. Senator it will, in fact, be his job to create law.October 1, 2017 10:59 pm at 10:59 pm #1376291
Joe….”no Jew should antagonize our temporary hosts by telling them we are their equals or that this isn’t their country more than ours….”
Yes, we should confront our hosts and tell them loudly and forcefully we ARE their equals and this IS as much our country as theirs, and we will push back against anyone who acts to the contrary.October 2, 2017 7:10 am at 7:10 am #1376411
Dor, do you daven for Hashem to return all of Am Yisrael to the USA? Do you think that the Bet HaMikdash will be built in Brooklyn, Monsey or Lakewood?October 2, 2017 12:20 pm at 12:20 pm #1376820
Just a matter of time before this nitwit blames yesterday’s mass murder on the immorality of the residents of Las Vegas and the pritzus the City is known for (like he implied for the Orlando shooting, and other tragedies).October 2, 2017 12:20 pm at 12:20 pm #1376722
Joseph, good point about liberal activist judges. It’s terrible, and that’s why it’s more painful when I so cold conservative does the same thing.
Since you’re a fan of his, I’m sure you know the reason why he was removed from the bench twice.
That’s the definition of an activist judgeOctober 2, 2017 2:01 pm at 2:01 pm #1377417
Yitzchok, it was the federal courts ordering the removal of the Ten Commandments from Judge Moore’s court (remember that SCOTUS has the Ten Commandments in their courtroom) and the court ordered legalization of toeiva marriage that was a matter of the liberal courts acting in an activist capacity by those higher judges, in lieu of the legislature that has the proper constitutional authority to enact laws — not the judges in robes that were creating new laws that they preferred rather than enforcing the actual laws that the Constitution reads. Judge Moore was, in fact, acting in sound recognition that the Constitution permits the Ten Commandments (note the number of religious paraphernalia the founding fathers put in government) and doesn’t require states to legalize toeiva.
It is true that state judges must honor federal court rulings even when the federal court acted outside the law but under the flag of the law in pushing their activist agenda. But as a matter of principle and sound legal judgement, Judge Moore was on solid ground regarding the underlying Constitutional issues.October 2, 2017 2:57 pm at 2:57 pm #1377455
Is “I so cold” supposed to be “a so called”?
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.