Judge Moore, Correcting the Record
Judge Roy Moore is the last senator the establishment wanted, the last senator the left wanted, the last senator the libertarians wanted. Obviously, Judge Roy Moore is even the last senator many fair-minded, Alabama conservatives wanted, confused by all they heard. This column is for those fair-minded conservatives among us who have been misinformed, disinformed and confused by the media coverage of Judge Moore. You should know the truth. So let’s look at what you were told.
Moore’s detractors and the media claim he was thrown off the high bench for refusing to respect the US Constitution by disregarding a federal order to remove a replica of the Ten Commandments from the Alabama Supreme Court Building. But there is another side to that story. Judge Moore knows the federal Courts derive powers from Article III of the US Constitution. He also knows those powers only extend to matters of federal law subject to those tendered under the Constitution, including disputes over the Bill of Rights. Yet the 1st Amendment does not authorize government to act on matters of religion, it restricts it, requiring that, “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion or prohibiting the free exercise thereof.” And if the Article I Congress, the legislative body solely empowered to legislate under the US Constitution, is not authorized to make law prohibiting the free exercise of religion, then where might the Article III federal courts derive authority to require Judge Moore to remove the Ten Commandments from the Alabama Supreme Court Building? You see, it's not there. Moore was right. Moreover, the Alabama Constitution defines God as the Source of all human rights. That Judge Moore cites God as the Source of human rights, from which government drives authority, simply means that the Alabama Chief Justice did his job.
Similarly, Moore’s detractors and the media claim he was again thrown off the bench for refusing to respect the constitutional rights of gay Americans, not true again. Anyone who believes that, please find in the US Constitution where the states handed the United States government authority to define marriage. It’s not there. Understanding that the states never gave the United States authority to decide the issue, and understanding that Alabama law defines that marriage is between a man and a woman, how could Judge Moore have refused to respect certain federally-guaranteed constitutional rights that don’t exist? How could he uphold the Alabama laws, which do define marriage, and the US Constitution simultaneously, without resisting an unauthoritative federal court order that would require him to violate his oath of office? Again, Moore did his job.
According to the media, Judge Moore claims the 1st Amendment only protects Christians. Not true. Moore has said many times that God of the Bible is the Source of Authority for American government and American Law. But that’s what our founding documents say. Judge Moore has never claimed that the 1st Amendment doesn't apply to all peaceful religions. What he has said is simply that the term, "God," invoked in various manners in America’s founding documents, as well as the Alabama Constitution, refers to God of the Bible. He has said, justifiably, that those documents do not refer to any god of the Koran, Mohammed, Buddha, no generic god or any other religious figure. The Alabama Constitution defines all rights as coming from God. And in the next breath it protects the peaceful practice of all religions. Why is that so difficult to reconcile? A primary tenant of Scripture is that God gives men free will, but that men will live the consequences of their choices. Any law truly under the authority of God of the Bible therefore cannot restrict religious freedom. Judge Moore has never indicated a belief otherwise.
And just last week, in a final effort that helped derail Moore’s senate bid, CNN and other outlets reported him saying that America was at its greatest during the times of slavery. Now do we really believe any candidate for national office would mean what they purport? Was America great on July 4th 1776? Had slavery. Was America great during the revolutionary War? Had slavery. Was America great when they signed the Constitution? Had slavery. Was George Washington a great man, great Patriot and great president? Had slaves. How about Thomas Jefferson, a great man, great American, great president? Had slaves. How about during reconstruction, America great then? Jim Crow times? How about during the 60's and Civil rights violence, great then? How about the last few decades of constant war and strife at home?
Regardless which period one may choose as great, any of us might shoot holes through it. So if America has not been great at any time during its past because of the inherent human failures of each generation, how can we as Americans say we live in a great country? Better yet, how might we make America great again? Moore was cleverly set up with a no-win question. And what Judge Moore actually answered is that during those years, America had direction. I would propose that a measure of greatness for any people is not where they are at any particular time, but the direction they are headed.
Whither America tends today will be the question for the next generations.