Judge Roy Moore for Governor of Alabama

The question C4K is whether God is the supreme law or whether man is(in this case the judge in charge of the case). I've heard this arguement before. We back to should we obey God or man.

But Rbell has already answered that question when he said that Paul and the apostles were still subject to and suffered the consequences of defying the laws that kept them from worshipping God. Unfortunately, martydom does not always mean the maryter would make a good governor!

 

The latest poll I have found shows Riley ahead of Moore by 49 points - 69% to 20% - http://tinyurl.com/lv2gg .

 

By the way, it appears that Governor Riley has no interest in cracking down on employers who hire illegal aliens:

"Riley has secured federal training for state troopers so they can arrest illegal immigrants, but he questions Moore's plan to crack down on business."

- http://tinyurl.com/qghbg

 

GOd of course, but most of the time, like in this case, the choice has nothing to do with obeying God, except that He said to obey civil authorities.

 

I guess my primary concern in the matter are those folks (and dale-c, you're not one of them :thumbsup: ) in our state that consider it blasphemous that someone like me wouldn't vote for Moore, no matter whom the opponent was.

My reason for not voting for Moore (see 2 pages ago) has less to do with his stand on the Ten than my belief that he would make a poor governor because of his personality and skill sets.

Is Moore a one-trick pony? Possibly...but less so than Don Siegelman, the possible democratic nominee, who would likely have to run Alabama from his jail cell anyway. (His one trick is the state lottery--the end all, be all answer to all of Alabama's woes).

 

They are supposed to obey that which has authority over them, be it judge or law. In the example given, Moore should have filed the appeal and then filed another appeal if needed(this would have brought him to the Supreme Court) and then if he still didn't have satisfaction he should have lobbied Congress to make changes in the law so that it becomes more clear what the intent of the law is. That is how things are supposed to work in this country!

Now if you have a circumstance where both Congress and the Judiciary are directly ordering a Christain to do something that God has specifically ordered us not to do, then defiance is in order. But, you better be prepared to suffer the consequences of your choice.

 

Okay from the top, Dale, since I haven't figured out the quote feature yet and don't have time to this morning.

Moore swore to neither the law nor superior judges but to the PEOPLE.

Moore has not suffered anything as his book deals and media coverage have more than covered his salary. (not that he was poor to begin with) Something you may not know about AL is that if you are poor you don't run for office and if you don't have a law degree or sufficient experience with the law you certainly don't run for a judgeship. This $192,000 salary you keep harping about is a drop in the bucket compare to all the free publicity, book money and lecture monies that recieves now(and much less stressful).

What I'm getting at is that Moore and a good many of his follower seem to believe that he should have been exempt from being tossed from office for his actions.

Lawless judges? Isn't that like the pot calling the kettle black? Wasn't it MOORE who blatantly disregarded a court order? Two wrongs don't make a right. And as far as abortion goes, it's Congress that should be tackling that problem either by passing laws that allow for states to make their own laws regarding this or by making the practice illegal. Congress can't do that because the majority of Americans don't agree that abortion is wrong. Congress represent everyone, not just the minority of Christians who do believe that abortion is wrong. (The solution to that is for Christians to get busy preaching the Word and bringing folks to Christ. Then and only then will the Holy Spirit convict of sin and lead to repentence of this awful practice)

No they didn't. The first court said that he had to remove the monument because it crossed the line between church and state. The next court said he had to obey the order and couldn't appeal it to the Supreme Court because he DIDN'T FILE THE STUPID APPEAL when he should have. The courts said nothing about his acknowledgement of God on his own time only in a taxpayer supported public building.

Christians must stop trying to force nonChristians to conform to our way of thinking! We may lead them to it, but it can't be forced. Only the Holy Spirit has the power to actually change the way a person thinks and feels. For us as Christians to think we can force our ideas on people and make 'em like it is pure arrogance.

 

Paul Hubbard runs this State period....

I am voting for someone who I think will stand up to Paul Hubbard and the AEA. Riley has already proven he won't do it. Does anyone remember the Tax increase proposal? We must pass this Tax Increase to save our schools. It was soundly defeated, and now we have a surplus (I guess you could say Riley lied). The Democrats have never put up a candidate who would do it (Although not convicted, Seigelman has been indicted by a grand jury and Lucy Baxley refuses to take a stand on any issue).

That leaves Loretta Nall and Roy Moore. I can't vote for Loretta Nall based on her drug legalization stance. While I might be in favor of legalizing drugs, I would have to hear a great deal more about the plan and how it would affect me as a taxpayer if this person became incapacitated due to his choices.

Then that leaves Roy Moore. As rbell stated, he is not willing to compromise on issues he believes strongly in. I look at that as a positive. Too many times we place people in power who have no backbone or will to do the right thing, no matter how hard that is. I don't know if I will vote for Moore or not, but I have not ruled him out.

If Riley is such a lock as many people think, why is he afraid to debate Roy Moore. He first agreed to debate Moore, then he had a scheduling conflict (convienient). Maybe, it is smart for him not to debate Roy Moore, because he may lose ground. It is still cowardly.

 

I found this incident to be fascinating:

Tuskegee Sheriff Candidates "Nall Right on Drug Policy" ​

On May 21, 2006 I was invited to attend and speak at the Candidates forum hosted by The National Coalition of 100 Black Women in historic Tuskegee, Alabama.

I was the only gubernatorial candidate to show at the event. Lt. Governor Lucy Baxley did not show due to laryngitis. I had a touch of it myself but refuse to let such things stop me from addressing any crowd of Alabama voters who are kind enough, fair enough and interested enough to bother extending an invitation to the Nall for Governor campaign.

There were other candidates there for state and local office. Three of these candidates were law enforcement officers and their presence there worked so heavily in my favor by the end of the day that I am still somewhat speechless....

The incumbent sheriff was up next and some brilliant attendee in the back submitted the following question to him.

"Just how exactly will you completely eradicate drugs from Macon county?"

The whole room giggled at that question and I spoke up and said "I swear I had nothing to do with it."

The sheriff gets to the mic and stands there for a minute looking at everyone, me included, and then he sighs big, shakes his head and says for all to hear, "It can't be done. Drugs cannot be eradicated from Macon county or anywhere else. Even if we put our military on the borders to stop "those Colombians" from bringing their junk in, even if we had missiles that could fly down people's chimneys we would never be able to eradicate drugs from anywhere."

Then he sat down.

His opponent was next up to address the question. Mr. Warren looked at the audience and then at me and he said, "No matter what else you might think of Mrs. Nall's platform she is absolutely RIGHT on drug policy. It has filled our prisons to bursting, and it's YOUR KIDS who are taking the hits and getting sent to prison or shot down in the streets. We need to address drugs with treatment cause it ain't a problem for law enforcement. We got to do this different and I will do it different. If we want our courts to work, our prisons to work and our communities to be safer then we have to address drugs from a different perspective focused on treatment for those who need it. Prison is no place for a drug addict."...

Afterward the veteran of the Narcotics task force made it a point to shake my hand and wish me luck. The two candidates for Sheriff were engaged with other folks, they looked like they were discussing the sudden shift in drug policy and I thought it best to leave them to their constituents, and so I did not get the opportunity to speak with them. I will, however, be publicly endorsing Mr. Warren for Macon County Sheriff and I will be getting LEAP to send both of these gentlemen some literature.

So, yeah, maybe I do live in a trailer and I possess nothing more than a GED but I see the fruits of my labor pay off in a way that makes me richer than any person I know. There is no reward greater than success when your goal is justice for all."

- more about this available at Loretta Nall's website.

 

At what point did Scripture become God? Or, to be precise, when did heavily edited Scripture engraved on a tombstone-like hunk of granite become God?

Back in his just-a-judge days, I heard old Roy say -- firsthand, now -- that
he would not use the Big Ten controversy as a stepping stone to higher office. He lied, and the run for governor makes it twice he's lied.

There's a bumper sticker, all right, and I will get and display it proudly: "No Moore."

 

Nice way of avoiding the question.

Is the Bible equivalent to God? Yes or no?