Today during our Wild at Heart study group, we watched a clip from the movie Les Miserables.
The scene: Fantine (played by Uma Thurman) has just been sentenced to 6 months in prison for some incident by Inspector Javert (portrayed by Geoffrey Rush). Jean Valjean (played by Liam Neeson) comes to her defense with new evidence. Inspector Javert cites the letter of the law without any grace or compassion or leniency (these three traits were pointed out by the leader of our study group) contrary to what evidence has been provided by Jean Valjean. Jean Valjean, therefore, by letter of the law has Inspector Javert released of duty and frees Fantine.
When I see Judge Roy Moore and the Ten Commandments, I see the same evil as portrayed by Inspector Javert. There are all types of arguments that are given for both sides, but none of them have the same argument that I present as follows:
When a person walks into the Court House and sees the Ten Commandments, they lose all hope for seeing any leniency or compassion in judging. The see the representation of a "hanging judge" in that marble slab. They see as we saw in the Les Miserables only the desire and ability to give the maximum sentence for the crime regardless of evidence and circumstance....
It may or may not be what Roy Moore intended to be provoked. But that is what I think most defendents feel....
Article comments
— go to most recent comments1 - John Bambenek
This has got to be the silliest excuse of a point I've seen yet against Roy Moore.
You do know we are a majority of this country, and crap like that is only encouraging us to put you aside and let you whine like babies.
2 - Margaret Romao Toigo
Mr. Bambenek, while your opinions and insights are just as valid as anybody else's, you are not a part of any majority that I know of.
3 - Eric Olsen
I think it's an interesting conceptual conflation, although it might be helpful to give a bit of background on Moore for the uninitiated reader - thanks Mojoala
4 - Dr. Tristan, M.D.
Why are so many people focussed on vengeance and retribution;
why are more people not following thei "supposed" christian "Mentor" Jesus Christ and practicing the Love that he tried to teach...
simply amazing that all these who profess to be "christians" and scream about what a crime abortion is--
yet also scream for the death penalty...
a truly loving and merciful compassion as taught by Jesus, eh...???
5 - Margaret Romao Toigo
Dr. Tristan, M.D. asked: "why are more people not following thei "supposed" christian "Mentor" Jesus Christ and practicing the Love that he tried to teach..."
Most Christians do and are getting mighty annoyed at being lumped in with a small fringe group of people who call themselves "Christians" while preaching the "virtues" of bigotry, intolerance and hate.
6 - Johnny Davis
Actually, by ackowledging the ultimate
spiritual orgin of law one does not
make the law heartless. The opposite
is true law is no longer an empty
unpersonal thing. Law comes form
authority given by a personal and
compassionate God. The same God that
gives law gives mercy. The law
therefore does not only want to punish.
The law wants ultimate justice.
Justice wants to bring back into society
those who can be saved.
The sad truth of the matter is many
who attack Moore are simply motivated
by ignorant anti-Christian bigorty.
I do admit that there are bad types
in the leadership of the religious
right. I can understand why they would
give non-Christians or even liberal
Christians a bad view of Christians.
However, I ask you not to judge
all Christians based on a Pat Robertson.
You may think that Roy Moore and Pat
Robertson seem the same because you
have heard them take some similar
stands both being against abortion etc...
However, there is a world of difference
between them. I challenge you to read
Moore's book with an open mind. You
may still disagree with him but if you
are open minded I think you will see
the difference. Moore is an earnest
humble man. Moore does not condemn
anyone for having a different viewpoint
than him and he does not wish to impose
anything on anyone.
The reality is America is controlled
by a corrupt elite that is destroying
our liberties and bringing this nation
to ruin. The elites of both parties
are on the same page and serve the same
interests.
The earnest figures of the relgious
right like Roy Moore oppose this elite
like the earnest figures on the left.
The elite wants the earnest left and
earnest right to fight one another
while they make slaves of us all.
We need to stop yelling at each other
and listen to one another. The Bushes
and the Clintones of this nations
are the true enemies of all those
who love freedom regardless if they
be left, center or right.
7 - gonzo marx
Johnny sez...
*Law comes form
authority given by a personal and
compassionate God.*
you lost me right there...
in the US, the Rule of Law comes from the social contract of our Constitution..
it is completely fallacious to believe that the 10 commandments have anything but a historical significance when it comes to our judicial system...
out of the 10, only 3 have made it into US law...murder, perjury and theft..and every civilization in recorded history has laws against those 3
if for no other reason than the content of the first Commandment, it shows they have no place in a secular government based upon the Rule of Law that is founded on the concept of religious plurality, including the Right to have no religion whatsoever
until and unless the "religious right" can understand this simple Thought, there is not much that can be discussed rationally
your mileage may vary
Excelsior!
8 - Kristy Smith
I totally support Judge Moore. Why fear someone who is willing to stand up for the Constitution. Liberals beware! There might not be a "majority" but there is a "movement" for values. Join the supporters of Judge Moore at www.weneedmoore.com
9 - gonzo marx
Kristy,
what Moore did was the exact opposite of standing up for the Constitution..it was in clear violation of it
add to that , the criminal action of defying a higher Court's order
he got what he deserved
Excelsior!
10 - Margaret Romao Toigo
Only the liberals need beware? What about the rest of us who do not subscribe to the sort of "values" being forwarded by this "movement" that thinks our First Amendment applies only to Christianity?
It was not anti-Christian bigotry that got Roy Moore into trouble, it was Roy Moore who got Roy Moore into trouble, whether he is politically ambitious or an earnest man of faith or a little of both.
The fringes on both ends are extremists because they are authoritarians and authoritarianism of any flavor is an anathema to most Americans.
But there might just be a little something to the notion that it behooves our politicians of every stripe when the extremists on both sides of the spectrum are battling it out over "values" -- be they putting the Decalogue on courthouses and oppressing women and homosexuals or taking our guns away and telling us what sorts of food we may or may not eat and what type of personal transportation we should be allowed to own -- because it provides a distraction from matters such as foreign and economic policy as well as the rather large amount of pork being consumed on a bipartisan basis.
11 - andy marsh
Here we are getting all worked up over a rock in a building...a piece of art...if it was a crucifix soaking in a glass of urine it would've been alright...but a peice of art...depicting a setting down of some laws...in a building where people are judged somehow infringes on somebody's rights....I don't know how...but apparently it does...I've said it before...what difference does it make...it's the rock sitting behind the bench that needs worrying about...
12 - Margaret Romao Toigo
Indeed, it is rather silly to get all worked up about a rock because a rock is nothing more than a symbol. Some might even call it a graven image because a rock is not the Decalogue, its just a rock with the Decalogue chiseled into it.
If the 10 Commandments are written upon the heart, then no one can ever take those principles away, even when rocks must be removed to a Constitutionally appropriate venue.
The Decalogue posted on a courthouse infringes upon the rights of all non-Christians because of the suggestion that only Christians will find justice in such a courthouse.
Whose rights are infringed upon when the 10 Commandments are not posted on courthouses?
13 - andy marsh
the ten commandments are not strictly a christian symbol...and the rock only makes the suggestion you say it does because YOU say it does...doesn't suggest a thing to me...and I talk back to the TV!
14 - gonzo marx
and the buddhist, or the atheist, or the hindu..or even we followers of JuJu...
how do you think that first commandment sound to tyhopse kind of folks andy?
you keep bringin g up that "crucifix" bit..that was in a gallery...NOT a Courthouse
one if for exhibiting art...the other a governmental institution for dispensing justice
i know ya ain't that dim, try laying the dittohead bullshit aside for just a second...k?
Excelsior!
15 - andy marsh
it was in a gallery art show funded by the govt...come on gonzo...you tell me not to play stupid...you're not allowed either...I mean...do you really walk into the courthouse and look around on the walls to see if there's something that might tell you how the judge is gonna rule??? I don't even go to church anymore...haven't for years!!! and I could give two shits about the religious right...it just seems so utterly ridiculous to worry about this petty secular vs religious bullshit!
I really think it's a ridiculous argument! I'm way more worried about the assholes making the judgements than the bullshit on the front lawn!
16 - gonzo marx
remember the case involving Moore?..his placement of this monument, the timing, his defiance of a Court order?
that DOES show a lot about the man on the bench, doesn't it?
i guess i just don't want to be prosecuted/persecuted for the 7 out of 10 commandments that have not made into our Rule of Law
and those, like Moore, that want to try and tell me that our nation's Laws derive from those 7 scare the liberty loving shit out of me
those that are trying to say that the "rocks" are "traditional" are also engaginog in lies and deceit...well over 90% of them were placed during the 50s by the film company that produced the movie, "the Ten Commandments" as part of an advertising campaign
yeah...don't ever believe me...look it up
so i say to you, that assholes behidn the bench that put those rocks out front are the ones i worry about...especially because i don't have to go to that gallery, but i would have to (as in compelled by Law) to show up in Court
once agani..i am forced to consider, why do i even bother typing here
Excelsior!
17 - Margaret Romao Toigo
The Ten Commandments are of Judeo-Christian origin, to be specific. While they are not "strictly a Christian symbol," they are most decidedly not inclusive of all faiths.
The very first of the 10 Holy Commandments is "Thou shalt have no other gods before me" (Exodus 20:3, KJV), so how could anybody who has gods other than the Judeo-Christian God (or no god(s) at all) ever hope to receive equal justice in a courthouse that bears such a message?
The people who think/feel that the removal of 10 Commandments displays from courthouses and other government buildings is somehow a violation of their First Amendment rights are not really concerned about the values the Decalogue represents (those are supposed to be written upon hearts from which they can never be removed), but rather having their religion recognized as being superior to other religions.
18 - andy marsh
you know...I've been in a court room once or twice...yeah..imagine that...I never remember worrying if the right monument was outside the building or not...I worried that I was dressed right...that my tie was straight...yeah...I wore a tie...that my shoes were shined...yeah...wore leather shoes too...that I took the earrings out of my ear...shit like that...I didn't wear a cross around my neck or a star of david...or anything...I said yes sir or yes ma'am...been there more than once...those are the things I did to make sure I was getting a fair shake...not look to see if there was a fucking monument outside the building!
Yeah Moore is an asshole...I believe he's unemployed now too...
and for the record...I never said they were traditional...I said they don't matter...so I guess the word I'd use for them is trivial.
19 - gonzo marx
nice that it doesn't matter to you, andy
but i guess it is too much to ask you to read and comprehend the points made in the two comments above yours
Symbols, especially those used and sanctioned by a governmental agency...are NOT trivial...
hwo would you feel if the judge you had to go in front of had a Koran opened and was looking up the punishment there?
a faceitious bit, i know..but very similar...my Question is, how woudl you have felt about the impartiality, fairness, and adherance to the Rule of Law had such been the case?
now could that possibly be how a sizable percentage of americans have felt about that "rock" on the way into the courtroom?
put one in your yard..that's your Right...but NOT on Courthouse grounds
Excelsior!
20 - andy marsh
but see that's the thing gonzo...even if there's a monument out in front of the building...the judge STILL has to ues our rule of law...and I would think...if I came from a country that was used to stonings and beheadings and the like...that rock might even be a comfort as opposed to seeing a copy of the qu'ran there...just a thought...
I get your drift...I understand the separation issue...but like I said...do you really look around the building to see if you're going to be judged fairly? Or do you look in the eyes of the person judging you?
and I really don't want one of those on my front lawn...maybe a big Giants emblem or a Yankee emblem...but no ten commandments...I've broken so many of them...I think I've broken most of them...except maybe #5...now PETA would argue that one...but back in the day...I could go to confession and be absolved...
and gonzo...don't hurt my feelings...I can read...and even comprehend sometimes...just because I don't see things your way...I guess to you...that means I'm not paying attention?
I've read alot of what you've written on here and I can honestly say I've learned a thing or two from you...but I've got my own ideas on a lot of shit...and I really really think this issue is blown way out of proportion...
21 - gonzo marx
fair enough andy...
i can Respect your viewpoint, even when i don't agree with it
the thing is, i DO see this as a very important issue, exactly due to the separation of church and state...i perceive a deliberate, systematic attempt to tear the "wall" of that separation down
and while i do not adhere to any kind of slippery slope argument...in the realm of legalities, there does exist the concept of "precedent" which is applicable in these cases
your statement that you have learned somethings from my mad typings does hearten me a bit...so much lately i feel as if this ephemeral medium is just a waste fo my time and effort, those that understand what i am trying to get across don't need me to say it, and those that disagree aren't ever going to "hear" the points i raise, or bother thinking about it clearly....much for me to contemplate on the Topic
as for this particular Issue being "blown way out of proportion"...no, i don't think so...i personally think it is being shoved aside, and made so that it is NOT in the realm of public discourse, because those that are promoting the Agenda of putting the church in our government don't want folks to know what they are doing...
example right here on BC...take a look at the "Middle Ages" thread...revisionism or rational Thought?
as for looking into the eyes of the Judge..yes, that is important...but when that Judge is the one who put the "rock" there, it does give some indication of how he is going to Rule, yes?
in this particular case, check out Moore's record, and the text of some of the admonitions he spoke when giving his Rulings from the bench...much of it was spoken like a preacher rather than a Judge
and THAT is a greater danger to our secular Rule of Law than you might care to contemplate
silly me...i am bothered by shit like that, not well meaning folks such as yourself...but i DO consider the cavalier attitude shown by yourself with the statement *and I really really think this issue is blown way out of proportion...* is part of the problem...
anytime the populace remains indifferent to the erosion of their Rights, you can almost guarantee that those Rights will deteriorate, taken by those that have their own Agenda...when this comes in the guise of "religion" it happens more quickly, and hits with the force of the so-called "will of God"
silly heretic that i am, i don't like it
hope that helps explain it, please forgive my bout of depression when it comes to the blogosphere at the moment..i meant nothing personal towards you, andy
Excelsior!
22 - andy marsh
but Moore is gone...isn't he? maybe the issue is that my personal rights haven't been infringed upon...at least not where I can see it or feel it...
but you know...there is a slippery slope...I remember growing up and seeing a christmas tree on the fire house lawn and thought it was pretty...I know it's a symbol...on public ground...I guess now that I'm older...I won't say grown up...that'd be lying...I'm supposed to look at it differently? because somebody else doesn't celebrate the same holiday?
and gonzo...the place wouldn't be the same without you...even when you're wrong....hehehehe
23 - gonzo marx
i am aware of no case where a tree is not alolowed, a nativity , yes..but the tree is non-sectarian, and i don't know of a single case where it's been argued against...
i just have a problem with those that assert the U.S. is a "christian" nation, and whose political agenda is to make it so
yes, Moore is gone...defying a Court Order ain't smart...but there IS a justice on the upreme Court, who..in open court, when sitting ona case involving the ten Commandments stated...on the record..."our Laws come from God"
that scares the shit out of me
but this discussion just illuminates the difficulties i spoke of earlier...i can understand your viewpoint, and where you are coming from...and when your thoughts on't infringe on my Rights, i have no problem...hell, i'll defend your Right to say it, wrong as you may be (heh)
i don't see the same civility, manners, or Courtesy extended from the vast majority on the GOP, religious right et al, side
instead i see "blogbursts", talking points , distraction and a constant erosion of Individuals rights and protections in favor of corporate interests, pork barrel spending from those that had always advocated "fiscal restraint" and "smaller government"
on and on ad nauseum
just me , i guess
Excelsior?
24 - Kristy Smith
Gonzo, your long posts are freedom. Your thoughts are free. Your desire to work overtime to prove that things are moving in the wrong way is an additional freemdom. What are you sayiny? Is the process of objection to rule something you want or something you want to remove from our government? The actions Judge Moore took to stand up for his values seem a lot like your effort to push your ideas! I am fond of all who are willing to stand up and act on their disires to improve our world. If that is what you want, I respect you. Would you please tell me who some of your favorite "leaders" are? Marx?
25 - gonzo marx
Franklin, Jefferson, Groucho...
there is a huge difference between my own feeble rantings and the actions of a Judge on the bench, wouldn't you say?
my words cannot incarcerate an individual
my action cannot be used as legal precedent
i can Respect the fact that Moore stood up for what he believed in...and i do
but i also reserve the right to speak out in the fact that what he was attempting to do is wrong, in my own opinion
i also see that there should be a complete separation fo church and state...as did Franklin and Jefferson...
hope that helps
Excelsior!