Alabama Chief Justice Roy Moore is a religious radical, not a hero. His expulsion from office Thursday made my day.
Moore was not expelled for placing the Ten Commandments monument in the courthouse, but rather for refusing to comply with a federal court order demanding its removal. The federal court, though, found that placing the monument in the court building was unconstitutional.
No one who tries to use the power of their office to force their religious views on others deserves to hold such an office-especially an office based upon fairness and blind justice.
Moore forgot what he learned in his American history classes in college. America was founded so that Christians could escape persecution by other Christians.
The clause in the U.S. Constitution prohibiting the establishment of a state religion is more about one Christian denomination taking power, taxing, persecuting and destroying the others than it is about different religions.
Moore’s actions of helping design the monument, sneaking it into the courthouse in the middle of the night and then refusing to remove it are more like that of a religious radical than that of a fair and balanced judicial officer. He is exactly the type of person the separation of church and state was designed to stop.
Most Alabama citizens say they believe in the Ten Commandments. But the citizens did not vote to put the monument there. Rather, the monument was placed there through the efforts of one man who abused his power.
Many of you may support Moore’s actions. Let’s change the context slightly, and perhaps you’ll change your mind.
What if Moore was part of a Christian group that believed Jesus came to America after his crucifixion and preached to the Native Americans? In this case, Moore may have snuck in a statue of Jesus preaching to Native Americans. Would you have the same feelings about that?
What if Moore believed that the true sign of being a believer was holding a poisonous snake without it biting you? If his monument were dedicated to snake-handling, would you still support it?
What if Moore was a Buddhist and wanted to put in a statue of the Buddha? Or a Muslim with a monument to the Koran instead of the Bible?
This is not an attack on Christianity or Moore’s religious beliefs. The point is that the monument gave the impression to people arriving in the state courthouse that this was a Christian court and other religions may not be tolerated.
It did not give the impression that the court would fairly consider cases that may involve a different religion. It showed religious bias. Moore has a right to his own opinion and religious beliefs. I would not be writing this article if he had the monument in his office. That is his office. The Alabama courthouse is public property.
If this has not brought the issue home enough for you, let me give you one more thought. What if the president of Mississippi State had put the monument in Colvard Union? You probably would not have thought twice about it so long as it was something you believed in. We seldom do.
What if it had not been a Christian monument? What if it praised a Hindu religious book? Would you still have come here? You might have if you were Hindu.
The most important difference between The Union and a state courthouse is that you have a choice to attend some other university for your education.
There is only one state supreme courthouse in Alabama. If it is not your religion being promoted, you do not have a choice to attend elsewhere.
John Summerlot is a graduate student in counseling. He can be reached at [email protected].