For Fucks Sake...

[AWK]

SPLC files ethics complaint against Alabama Chief Justice Roy Moore over pledge to defy federal law and enforce same-sex marriage ban

The SPLC today filed a judicial ethics complaint against Alabama Chief Justice Roy Moore over his public statements urging the governor and Alabama judges to defy federal law and enforce Alabama’s ban on same-sex marriages.

The complaint was filed with the Judicial Inquiry Commission of Alabama, which could recommend that Moore face ethics charges in the Alabama Court of the Judiciary. That court removed Moore from the office of chief justice 12 years ago after he refused to comply with a federal court order to remove a Ten Commandments monument from the state judicial building.

“Moore is once again wrapping himself in the Bible and thumbing his nose at the federal courts and federal law,” said SPLC President Richard Cohen. “As a private citizen, Moore is entitled to his views. But as the chief justice of Alabama, he has a responsibility to recognize the supremacy of federal law and to conform his conduct to the canons of judicial ethics.”

Moore vowed in the letter to stand with Gov. Robert Bentley to “stop judicial tyranny” following a federal judge’s ruling in Mobile last week that overturned the ban. The order is on hold until Feb. 9, but Moore’s letter encouraged probate judges to disobey it once it is in effect. The letter, which was written on state Supreme Court letterhead, was sent to the governor Tuesday and released to the media. In an interview with WSFA following the letter’s release, Moore threatened “a confrontation” with the federal courts.

The SPLC complaint describes how Moore has committed numerous ethics violations, noting that he is encouraging lawlessness by attempting to assemble a virtual army of state officials and judges to oppose the federal judiciary and its “tyranny” – the opposite of what is expected from the state’s chief judge.

The SPLC complaint also outlines other violations by Moore, including publicly commenting on a pending case – the federal case that overturned the ban – as well as impending cases: the same-sex marriage cases likely to come before state judges, including Moore, if same-sex marriage is legalized in Alabama.

“We have gone down this road before during the civil rights movement,” Cohen said. “The chief justice is trotting out the same tired – and disproven – states’ rights arguments that were used to disenfranchise African Americans. Even if Moore isn’t a student of history, you would think he would be a student of his own history. The opinion that removed him from the bench in disgrace more than a decade ago clearly explained why he can’t ignore the federal courts.”

That opinion stated that the oath of chief justice commands Moore “to support both the United States and Alabama Constitutions.” It also states that if there is a conflict between the documents, “the Constitution of the United States must prevail.”

The 2003 opinion followed a successful SPLC lawsuit to remove the judge’s Ten Commandments monument from the state judicial building.

http://www.splcenter.org/get-informed/news/splc-files-ethics-complaint-against-alabama-chief-justice-roy-moore-over-pledge-to







 

[Kaos]

SPLC

Is that Stupid People, Liberals and Cocksuckers?

[AWK]

SPLC

Is that Stupid People, Liberals and Cocksuckers?

Close, Southern Poverty Law Center. 

Seriously though, Roy Moore...

[Kaos]

Close, Southern Poverty Law Center. 

Seriously though, Roy Moore...

Don't have a problem with Roy. 

[Snaggletiger]

He must be thinking about another run for Gov.

[AWK]

Don't have a problem with Roy.

So, you as a business owner would hire someone that was fired from the same position?  A guy, who was fired for ethical reasons, and you know would not listen or follow important guidelines? 

[Kaos]

So, you as a business owner would hire someone that was fired from the same position?  A guy, who was fired for ethical reasons, and you know would not listen or follow important guidelines?

Ummm, what are we talking about?

[GH2001]

SPLC is no angel.

[AWK]

Ummm, what are we talking about?

Do you want to hire Roy Moore?  He may be looking for a job soon.  Just think of the free entertainment.

[Kaos]

Do you want to hire Roy Moore?  He may be looking for a job soon.  Just think of the free entertainment.

I would if he wasn't going to be hounded into oblivion by the loud ass critics. 

[War Eagle!!!]

I would if he wasn't going to be hounded into oblivion by the loud ass critics.

The critics that say that he can't impartially do his job like he is supposed to because the only thing he can think about is driving his morals down every one else's throat?

Would you hire him if he was morally against sex outside of marriage and he constantly made his decisions based on the fact that you may or may not like to have sex to a woman you are not married to.

Because ultimately that is what is going on. It's just with his current topic, you agree with him. It still doesn't make it right for a judge or other impartial government figure try to cram whatever his beliefs are to others.

[smooth_operator]

FWIW, I have it from a reliable source that the honorable judge doesn't and didn't care about any of this shit. Gay marriage and the commandment debacle were straight up pandering. On the commandments he kinda got locked into an untenable position and rode it on into its inevitable conclusion strictly so he would be a "martyr" for the Bible folk. And it worked.

[War Eagle!!!]

FWIW, I have it from a reliable source that the honorable judge doesn't and didn't care about any of this shit. Gay marriage and the commandment debacle were straight up pandering. On the commandments he kinda got locked into an untenable position and rode it on into its inevitable conclusion strictly so he would be a "martyr" for the Bible folk. And it worked.

Politicians gonna politic

[AWK]

FWIW, I have it from a reliable source that the honorable judge doesn't and didn't care about any of this shit. Gay marriage and the commandment debacle were straight up pandering. On the commandments he kinda got locked into an untenable position and rode it on into its inevitable conclusion strictly so he would be a "martyr" for the Bible folk. And it worked.

Um, not trying to call you out...but...I personally know this is not true.  They guy is a blabbering gasbag. 

[WiregrassTiger]

FWIW, I have it from a reliable source that the honorable judge doesn't and didn't care about any of this shit. Gay marriage and the commandment debacle were straight up pandering. On the commandments he kinda got locked into an untenable position and rode it on into its inevitable conclusion strictly so he would be a "martyr" for the Bible folk. And it worked.

I don't know. But, I'll just say that if he doesn't mostly believe in the causes that he takes a stance against/for then he certainly has me fooled. And he's made some terrible miscalculations of risk. The guy is no dummy, imo, regardless of how people feel about his stances and/or pandering.

Even if he was garnering attention by refusing to adhere to a ruling from a higher court, he risked a lot by doing so. I don't think he would've done this if he didn't really feel like it was the right thing to do. In other words, I don't think he is only playing politics.

He is pretty good at playing politics, mind you.

Personally, I'm a state's rights man and I appreciate his stance on the Ten Commandments. At the same time, I'm not all the way with him on the gays hitching up. Regardless of their fast descent down a one way slope to hell, they have just as much right to be miserable as I do. I think they should be able to become legally married or civil unioned or whatever in the hell they want to call it.

I don't, however, think that churches, bakeries, wedding planners, etc. should have to participate if they choose not to. But, the courthouse people should give them their certificate if they pay the $10 just like they would any other tax paying citizen.

They should be able to have the same legal rights and misery as heteros.

That's how WT sees it.

[Snaggletiger]

I normally don't agree with, much less read anything WT has to say.  But there were a couple of points he made where we might be on the same page.  Except the gheys going to hell part. 

With regards to the 10 Commandments monument issue, I was 100% behind his stance.  It was the way he went about it that did him in as much as anything else.  I wholeheartedly believe that monument belongs in there but he had to sneak it in and take such a gung-ho defiant position that he had no chance of winning.  He should have instead, made a rational argument as to why it belonged, but he had to grandstand, which made the opposition fight even harder.

[AWK]

I don't know. But, I'll just say that if he doesn't mostly believe in the causes that he takes a stance against/for then he certainly has me fooled. And he's made some terrible miscalculations of risk. The guy is no dummy, imo, regardless of how people feel about his stances and/or pandering.

Even if he was garnering attention by refusing to adhere to a ruling from a higher court, he risked a lot by doing so. I don't think he would've done this if he didn't really feel like it was the right thing to do. In other words, I don't think he is only playing politics.

He is pretty good at playing politics, mind you.

Personally, I'm a state's rights man and I appreciate his stance on the Ten Commandments. At the same time, I'm not all the way with him on the gays hitching up. Regardless of their fast descent down a one way slope to hell, they have just as much right to be miserable as I do. I think they should be able to become legally married or civil unioned or whatever in the hell they want to call it.

I don't, however, think that churches, bakeries, wedding planners, etc. should have to participate if they choose not to. But, the courthouse people should give them their certificate if they pay the $10 just like they would any other tax paying citizen.

They should be able to have the same legal rights and misery as heteros.

That's how WT sees it.

Dude, trust me, he is a moron.   He stood in a room full of professionals, adults, mostly 30 - 60 years old, and read them a poem he wrote.   It was the most imbecile thing I've ever heard.  This guy is Shakespeare in comparison to Roy Moore:

[Saniflush]

Dude, trust me, he is a moron.   He stood in a room full of professionals, adults, mostly 30 - 60 years old, and read them a poem he wrote.   It was the most imbecile thing I've ever heard.  This guy is Shakespeare in comparison to Roy Moore:

Yea but more importantly does he have a sister that looks like Kellie Martin?

[CCTAU]

I don't, however, think that churches, bakeries, wedding planners, etc. should have to participate if they choose not to. But, the courthouse people should give them their certificate if they pay the $10 just like they would any other tax paying citizen.

They should be able to have the same legal rights and misery as heteros.

That's how WT sees it.

Like I said, I don't mind a civil union, just don't call it marriage and force those of us who do not believe its right to acknowledge that you are normal and I must participate. Once you call it marriage, you deny the religious meaning of it and then no person with beliefs opposite of that will be able to legally practice what they believe in relation to marriage. And at that point you will be denying our religious freedom rights.

Don't say it cannot or won't happen. It has already begun.

Not to mention, once you allow the constitution to be reinterpreted for a group of people who choose a different lifestyle, where does it end?

[WiregrassTiger]

Dude, trust me, he is a moron.   He stood in a room full of professionals, adults, mostly 30 - 60 years old, and read them a poem he wrote.   It was the most imbecile thing I've ever heard.  This guy is Shakespeare in comparison to Roy Moore:

This moron had a legit shot at becoming governor. And he still may. A rather peculiar fellow, yes. But, I think calculating and sincere.

I do not like Jesse Jackson or Rev Al Sharpton. Neither is a moron.