Writing with faith, hope, and love
Express your letters to the Editor

April 2003
FEB-MAR 2003
JAN 2003

Dec 2002
Nov 2002
Sept- Oct 2002
April-May 2002

March 2002

February 2002

January 2002

December 2001

November 2001

October 2001

September 2001

Commandments controversy is so commie and not constitutional!!!

By Ramesh C. Reddy
Pittsburgh Standard

Rebuttal to a U-wire column called, “Commandments controversy displays lack of objective” which appeared in the Pitt News on August 29, 2003.

Picture received by http://www.tencommandmentsdefense.org/

A column called, “Commandments controversy displays lack of objective” written by Christopher Harrop, of the Kansas State Collegian was picked up from the U-wire on August 29, 2003 by the Pitt News.

In that column, Harrop writes, ‘Alabama Chief Justice Roy Moore stuck true to his faith and ignored the law by refusing to remove a monument dedicated to the Ten Commandments from state grounds.’

To state that ‘Moore stuck true to his faith and ignored the law’ is a contradiction in itself. Since Moore stuck true to his faith, he was actually following the law. Moore reminds me of the Apostles Peter and John who were forbidden to speak or teach in the Name of Jesus but continued to do so.

Were they breaking the law?

Harrop would think so and so did the Sanhedrin, ‘the supreme judicial and administrative council of the Jews. As the highest court of judicature, "in all causes and over all persons, ecclesiastical, civil, & supreme," its decrees were binding, not only on the Jews in Palestine, but on all Jews wherever scattered abroad.’ (Eastons Dictionary)

Yet, for Peter and John their allegiance was not to the Sanhedrin to whom they make the statement, “Whether it be right in the sight of God to hearken unto you more than unto God, judge ye.” (Acts 4:19, KJV)

They wanted the Sanhedrin to know that it was more important for them to obey God than man and were willing to be judged by them. They were following God’s law.

Moore is sticking true to his faith and hanging on for the right to display the Ten Commandments following God’s law. The Commandments were given by God to be displayed and not hid. They are still applicable today.

Peter and John defied their highest court consisting of 70 members. They did it because of their convictions and belief in the Lord Jesus Christ stating, “For we cannot but speak the things which we have seen and heard.” (Acts 4:20, KJV)

By defying a federal judge’s ruling, Moore has stood on the principle that it is better to obey God than man. In that essence, he has not broken the law. Just as Peter and John asked the Sanhedrin to judge whether they should obey them or God, Moore now asks the same question of all citizens and a court that plans to judge him.

You all need to judge whether it is right to obey man’s laws when they go against God’s laws.

“The fear of man bringeth a snare: but whoso putteth his trust in the Lord shall be safe. Many seek the ruler's favour; but every man's judgment cometh from the Lord.” (Proverbs 29:25-26, KJV)

Harrop goes on to state, ‘Moore is now the hero of the day for the Fox News crowd.”

Moore may not only be the hero of the day for the Fox News crowd but every Constitution believing citizen. These days we have trigger happy judges and justices who like to legislate instead of interpreting the Constitution. It should be interpreted by taking it as a whole and remembering who wrote it and for what purpose they wrote it. It is for the protection of the citizens in their private dwellings and also in their public establishments.

Harrop mentions Ayesha Khan, an attorney for Americans United for Separation of Church and State who believes Moore is perseverant to “proclaim the sovereignty of the Christian God”

It maybe so but this is irrelevant to the issue at hand which is the display of the Ten Commandments. The Ten Commandments did not originate with the Christian faith but with the Jewish faith.

They were given to the Israelites after their exodus from Egypt and are recorded in Exodus 20:1-17. They were given to Moses by God who stated, “I am the Lord thy God, which have brought thee out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of bondage.” (Exodus 20:1, KJV)

After stating that point the Ten Commandments are given to the Israelites. These are the Ten Commandments that Moore wants to keep in the courthouse. There is no better law than God’s law.

I can understand Harrop mentioning Khan’s statement provided if Moore decided to keep a monument with two greatest commandments given that are of Christian origin. This question was asked by a lawyer.

“Then one of them, which was a lawyer, asked him a question, tempting him, and saying, Master, which is the great commandment in the law? Jesus said unto him, Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind. This is the first and great commandment. And the second is like unto it, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself. On these two commandments hang all the law and the prophets.” (Matthew 22:35-40)

There is nothing wrong for a Chief Justice of Alabama to have as a monument the Ten Commandments he believes in because it is his courtroom. If people have a problem with it, they do not have to look at the monument.

What will be next?

If waiting rooms in courts have a T.V and the channel happens to be on ABC where the Ten Commandments movie comes on, will someone ask for the channel to be changed. Knowing the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) and its origins beginning with Communist values, I would not be surprised.

The sad thing is if Moore were Jewish, I don’t think it would have even been an issue for the ACLU. The ACLU loves to attack Evangelical Christians and what they believe in.

Harrop also states that ‘his [Moore’s] conviction to the Constitution is questionable, as any judge worthy of a robe should not be confused by the two standing legal traditions established in the First Amendment to the Constitution..’

By making this statement Harrop makes the presupposition that he knows more about the Constitution than a Chief Justice of the Alabama Supreme Court.

If you wanted advice on Constitutional law would you feel more comfortable asking Harrop or a Chief Justice?

Moore did not just wake up and become a Chief Justice of Alabama’s Supreme Court. We can believe since he became a Chief Justice, it is possible that he is very versed in law including Constitutional law. It is a good thing that he has taken a stubborn stance. Somebody has to do it and it is good and about time that a Chief Justice of Alabama Supreme Court has taken that stand.

Harrop states those who believe, “a return to the ‘good ole days” of God-fearing disciplined […..] will turn around our failing schools, invigorate the work force and stimulate society---or so they say.”

For me ‘so they say’ is based on opinion but it is a fact that ever since prayer was taken out of public schools, things got worse in our schools giving us tragedies such as Columbine High School. After God was taken out of the schools, SAT scores started to plummet too!

Ask yourself honestly whether there has been a correlation of good things happening with prayer in school as opposed to not having prayer.

Harrop also makes the point, ‘the only thing standing in the way is that pesky little Constitution, which guarantees free exercise of religion while barring the government from promoting an establishment of religion.’

The Constitution does not mention ‘separation of church and state’ but people use that phrase so loosely as if the Constitution had those words. The point of the First Amendment dealing with religion is to protect the citizens from being persecuted for exercising their religion or being forced to practice a particular religion. Hence the phrase ‘establishment of religion’ is used! The framers of the Constitution did not want a theocratic state such as many Islamic countries have where people are forced to follow the states religion.

Having the Ten Commandments displayed is not equivalent to a state forcing people to follow the Ten Commandments. People do not have to look at them if they are so frightened. Moore is freely exercising his religion in the court building he was elected to serve!

Harrop goes on to state, ‘the desire to publicly proclaim the word of God is a tempting one for many Christians who wish to spread their faith.’

Harrop makes it sound like it is wrong to do that by using the word ‘tempting’ and following that with Matthew 6:6 to make people think it is wrong to have that desire to publicly proclaim the word of God.

Matthew 6:6 which states, “But thou, when thou prayest, enter into thy closet, and when thou hast shut thy door, pray to thy Father which is in secret; and thy Father which seeth in secret shall reward thee openly” has nothing to do with discouraging people from proclaiming the word of God.

It has to do with people who want to show off their prayer life as evidenced by,"And when thou prayest, thou shalt not be as the hypocrites are: for they love to pray standing in the synagogues and in the corners of the streets, that they may be seen of men. Verily I say unto you, they have their reward.” (Matthew 6:5, KJV)

It is a question of attitude and motive and does not even address corporately praying aloud together.

If proclaiming the Word of God and spreading the faith is wrong there is no necessity for Jesus to have given the Great Commission which states, “Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost: Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you: and, lo, I am with you always, even unto the end of the world. Amen.” (Matthew 28:19-20, KJV)

In closing for Harrop to state, “there is no war being fought against Christianity today in America” is so untrue and misinformed.

Christians are in a war defending their faith in schools against some administrators who refuse to recognize Christian organizations and clubs who refuse to have nomination of leaders for elections who are practicing homosexuals,etc. This happened in Tufts School and other places.

They are in a war against some employers who fire people for not smoking and drinking because of their religious faith.

They are in a war against groups like the American Way and ACLU who love to bash Evangelical Christians’ issues to the pulp. I wonder if the ACLU wants to invigorate its founders’ communist views.

They are in a war against activist courts and judges who are so activists that they want their law to be the law of the land over the Lord’s law!

So please don’t tell us that there is no war being fought against Christianity today in America.

I want to leave you all with the prayer of Peter and John after the Sanhedrin threatened them if they spoke about Jesus.

“And when they heard that, they lifted up their voice to God with one accord, and said, Lord, thou art God, which hast made heaven, and earth, and the sea, and all that in them is: who by the mouth of thy servant David hast said, Why did the heathen rage, and the people imagine vain things? The kings of the earth stood up, and the rulers were gathered together against the Lord, and against his Christ...... And now, Lord, behold their threatenings: and grant unto thy servants, that with all boldness they may speak thy word, by stretching forth thine hand to heal; and that signs and wonders may be done by the name of thy holy child Jesus.” (Acts 4:24-26, 29-30)

Ramesh C. Reddy does not mind having a one-one chat with Christopher Harrop of the Kansas State Collegian.

September 2003

Weather

Poll

Question of Day
Do you believe a practicing homosexual should be elected as a bishop?

View current results

Writing with faith, hope, and love Express your letters to the Editor

HOTPRESSIONS

IMPRESSIONS

A patriotic war is just to protect people (1)

EXPRESSIONS

HOTPRESSIONS

PHOTOGALLERY

FEATURE

Writing with faith, hope, and love
Express your letters to the Editor