ACLU Loses Fight To Remove Ten Commandments Display

In 2006, Dixie County, Florida passed an ordinance that allowed citizens to erect a display on the county courthouse’s steps. So, a Christian man paid to have a 12,000-lb stone display of the Ten Commandments set up. Not surprisingly, some atheist or otherwise anti-Christian member of the ACLU who allegedly lived all the way in North Carolina whined and complained about the display and filed a federal lawsuit against the county for breaking that “wall of separation” between Church and State. And of course, the ACLU helped this anonymous person out by representing him (or her).

However, under Article III of the Constitution, in order to file a lawsuit challenging the Constitutionality of a law, the plaintiff has to show that he has standing; that is, he has to show that whatever law he is contesting harms him in some way. So, this North Carolinian concocted a story about how he was planning to buy some property in the Dixie County area, and it pained him to see the Ten Commandments on display when he went to the courthouse.

That was his standing. And thanks to a liberal Supreme Court decision back in 1968, a precedent was established allowing a plaintiff’s standing to be justified by some religious concern. So, in this case, the plaintiff’s standing was on religious grounds. (Get it?)

This was all back in 2006 and the years in between then and now. Last week, the unnamed plaintiff finally admitted that he wasn’t really trying to buy some property, and that it was all just a story to get the courthouse to remove the Ten Commandments display. The federal Judge then dismissed the case since the plaintiff showed that he had no standing.

The organization that represented the county in the lawsuit was Liberty Counsel. Harry Mihet of Liberty Counsel had this to say:

 “The ACLU got caught with its hands in the constitutional cookie jar. Its prolonged campaign against the good citizens of Dixie County has come to a screeching halt. In getting kicked out of court, the ACLU has learned that it cannot impose its San Francisco values upon a small town in Florida, using a phantom member from North Carolina.”

 Thanks to this frivolous lawsuit, the ACLU had to pay $1,300 in court costs to Liberty Counsel in addition to the $2,300 it had to pay after the appeal. And the Ten Commandments display remains where it is.


  • CARLjr

    Only 3 of the commandments are against the law.

    • Steven

      How is this relevant? NO ONE claimed the 10 Commandments were US law. Even the claim they are God's law was only implied, not expressed. This is about the right of a small Florida town to decide for itself what they wish to display in public without outside interference.

      • CARLjr

        How is this relevant? It's on display at the court house. It gives the impression that these rules have some meaning to the proceedings going on inside. Does this court give preferential treatment to believers? Why put it there? Why not display the Bill of Rights?

        • Steven

          NO, it DOES NOT give the impression that they have some meaning to the proceedings going on inside. There are THOUSANDS of things posted on the door of just about every public building you have ever heard of and MOST of them you wouldn't claim have ANYTHING to do with what goes on inside. Did you miss the part of the article that sated Florida law allows CITIZENS to erect displays on the steps? A PRIVATE citizen, at his own expense, chose to eject a display of HIS choice under the law. NO ONE in the county has complained. Someone for another state LIED about their intent to buy property in the county in an attempt to DENY him his rights under the 1st amendment. If someone from Dixie County, Fl complained, there would be something to argue about. As things stand, this is issue of OUTSIDERS attempting to tell the locals what they can and can't display.

        • Patriot

          If testifying in open court, why do we swear upon the Bible? Just saying...

        • CARLjr

          You don't.

          You are asked "You do solemnly state, under penalty of perjury, that the testimony you may give in the cause now pending before this court shall be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth."

          Do only Christians go to court? Of course not. The judicial system needs to be inclusive to ALL Americans.

          just saying...

        • Patriot

          Sorry Carljr, somehow you ended up on my "do not respond list".

        • CARLjr

          Because I keep pointing out where you are completely incorrect?

        • Steven

          Just proving you haven't seen an actual trial. You DON'T swear on the Bible. That has NEVER been required, and hasn't been OFFERED in your lifetime.

        • Patriot

          Hey Steven, what's with the attitude? Let me ask you this, when was the last time you were at trial in the UK may I ask? I was in one only a decade ago and it was required. As far as I know it still is.

          Don't be so presumptuous there Steven.

          You are wrong. The use of a Bible is at the discretion of the presiding judge over the Court. There are thousands of courts across the United States and there is no way to poll them all to ascertain how many still require it. They cannot however force anyone to swear on the Bible because it's unconstitutional to do so. If they do so voluntarily, that's another story.

          The last time I testified in a US Federal Court there Steve was a couple of years ago and I wasn't required or asked to swear on the Bible since my testimony was given telephonically. As a matter of respect, I did raise my right hand even though there was no one present who could see me.

          Capito Steve?

        • Steven

          This ENTIRE discussion is about the US. What UK courts do, or don't do, couldn't be LESS relevant. YOU have the attitude. I am just discussing th actual topic. US judges have NEVER had the authority to require use of a Bible.

          You say "There are thousands of courts across the United States and there is no
          way to poll them all to ascertain how many still require it. They cannot
          however force anyone to swear on the Bible because it's
          unconstitutional to do so."

          It is not POSSIBLE for both of those statements to be true. Therefore YOU have just declared yourself a liar.

        • Patriot

          You obviously have a problem with comprehension and I'm not playing your game. You just declared yourself an argumentative contrarian a-hole! Bad form there stevie boy.

        • Deborah G

          Both should be displayed.

        • Patriot

          That's a good idea Deborah.

        • Ole SC

          Hey, most of the laws on the books are based on the 10 commandments!!! Read the Commandments!!!!

        • CARLjr

          Most of the laws? That is a ridiculous claim. There are thousands and thousands of laws. Even if you could say there are dozens of different murder laws and hundreds of laws dealing with theft, there are still thousands left over that have no relation whatsoever.

        • Patriot

          Our laws are based on the bible, old English Common law, & laws going all the way back to Hammurabi, the Sixth King of Babylon.

        • Daisysue

          Get a grip..The only relevancy to your comment is stupidity..

        • CARLjr

          Leviticus law is no more desirable than Sharia law. I want neither anywhere near a courtroom. You can enforce your ancient tablet laws within your own congregation - but they have no place in today's legal system.

        • Daisysue

          You still have not answered my question as to where any of these LAWS are ENFORCED on you?????

        • Patriot

          CARLjr is apparently an ill man who has obviously lost contact with reality. He appears to now be a resident of the Twilight Zone! Can you believe the mindless dribble being put forth from this dolt? No place in today's legal system? Were the hell does he think they come from?

        • Daisysue

          It is to bad they did not allow all of my comment to be printed so that people could understand the why of your reference to Sharia Law came into play...

        • Daisysue

          CARLjr, I do not begrudge you the right to your opinion or your faith or lack of....What I have issue with is your reasoning that because you don't seem to care for mine it should be abolished to appease you...I also cannot find where those ancient tablet laws affect your constitutional rights.. And if they do not, why are you so bothered by them..Why no give and take???

        • CARLjr

          I do not want to abolish your faith - I just do not want to be ruled by it.

          You can display your graven images on your own property - why have them here? You can have them at home, on display at your business, at your church, etc. With your superior numbers you must have hundreds of places in every city where you can display these tablets where everyone can see. Why MUST they go on government property?

          Having these tablets here - where people actually DO rule - sends the message that YOUR faith is sponsored by the county and MY faith is not. If I were unlucky enough to be arrested and have to go to court here - I would be afraid that my religious beliefs could be used against me. If I was in a civil dispute against a Christian - I would feel they had an unfair advantage because the Court itself was biased.

          Fair and impartial. This courthouse probably isn't.

        • Daisysue

          CARLjr, That is stretching it a bit, but that is your opinion...However it does not end at the Courthouse. That same type of opinion (maybe not yours personally ) goes on to DEMAND that a cross on a hill in the middle of nowhere, that was erected by men and women who died for this country and for your right to have your own opinion, must come down. The reasoning given is that Symbols of Christianity offends them..What about other peoples feeling, rights and religious freedoms guaranteed by the constitution, are they of no consequence.
          Their fragile sensitivities are again offended not by just a solitary cross on a hill, but also a Nativity scene setting under a Christmas tree in the town/neighborhood park, and on and on it goes. Until EVEN the seasonal greeting of Merry Christmas is found to be offensive. Until one begins to wonder if anything but the total eradication of Christianity will satisfy the religion of Atheism (Atheism is a religion, look up the definition of religion)... . Again, I can't seem to grasp, why the fragile nature of the Atheist appears not to have a problem with any other religion in the world except Christianity, can you tell me why that is??

        • CARLjr

          It is not symbols of Christianity that offend me. It is religious symbols on Government/Public property that offends me. I would feel the same if it were passages from the Book of Mormon posted outside City Hall or a giant crescent moon and star in a National Park. I would object to the Star of David as part of a city's logo or on the state flag. The government cannot establish a religion - or give it any preference over another. The first freedom we were granted as Americans gives us ALL the right to believe whatever we want. The government MUST remain neutral. If it does not pass muster without looking through the lens of your religion - then it is unconstitutional.

          You have your right to your religion. You can worship however you like. WHY MUST IT BE ON GOVERNMENT PROPERTY? Because of the tax-exempt nature of churches - 1/3 of the real estate in many cities is owned by religious organizations. Why cant you put your tablets, nativity scenes, and bloody crucifixes there? There are PLENTY of non-government places for your displays. You can line the streets with businesses that have baby Jesus in their windows, it is their right. You can erect a towering Cross that puts the entire town in shadows as long as it's on the lawn of your cathedral. I do not want to eradicate Christianity, Islam, Scientology, or VooDoo. I believe in the freedom of religion. Including the freedom to think it is all nonsense.

          I believe that EVERY American deserves to have the SAME opportunities and the SAME system of justice and laws apply to them EQUALLY. It is the true nature of freedom. Whenever I see someone who says that another American does not deserve the same rights THEY have - it makes my skin crawl.

        • Daisysue

          Well CARLjr, I hope I make your skin crawl. If the Atheist only whined about religious symbols being on GOVERNMENT PROPERTY, I might go along with that ..HOWEVER, the Atheist have whined so long and hard about CHRISTIAN SYMBOLS anywhere their searching eyes can see, that Public Places of Businesses(NOT JUST GOVERNMENT) are not ALLOWED to line the Streets or their Windows with Christian Symbolism.

          VooDooism, Satanism, Scientologyism,Hinduism, Islamism, Buddhism, Occultism, Wiccaism, Reincarnationism, YOU NAME IT, any RELIGION with the exception of Christianity is OK...You never hear a peep out of an Atheist...So I say Atheist have targeted my religion and in so doing have stated that I do not deserve the same rights as they have.......Now I hope they also make your skin crawl......

        • CARLjr

          I cannot speak for your fictional Atheist who thinks Satanism and Islam is OK but Christians are not.

          I can only speak for myself. You are not being targeted by me. I simply believe that government should be neutral on the supernatural. What you do in the private sector is your business.

          http://cafewitteveen.files.wordpress.com/2010/01/christianhelp.gif

        • Daisysue

          Now, now, CARLjr, If I admit to spelling errors, you have to admit to being snide..So lets not go there..
          The constant and persistent number of Lawsuits filed by the Atheist Community against anything remotely connected to Christianity tells it's own story of truth or fiction.
          That story also speaks of either a deep hatred or of a conviction felt on the part most Atheists by the very G-d they continually deny exist ..
          Their actions also express that they do not believe I deserve the same rights they do..For if they did, they would simply ignore Christianity and get on with their lives..
          So I still hope they make your skin crawl....
          I do believe you are speaking strictly for yourself, nor do I feel targeted by you personally....

        • CARLjr

          The lawsuits I have seen have been directly related to government property, facilities, etc. Or fighting discrimination against non-believers. Maybe I have missed the lawsuits against private businesses, but I cannot recall any.

          As an Atheist myself, I do not have any feelings toward God. I have the same lack of feelings toward Allah, Xenu, and Bigfoot. I simply do not believe they exist. I am not frightened, not angry, not anything. I guess you could call me an Apthiest - I have complete apathy toward religion.

        • Patriot

          It would appear someone has an authority problem as typified by most left wing morons. They DO NOT like being judged! Just too bad!

        • Daisysue

          There is nothing in The Constitution that says you have to be a Christian or Buddhist or anything else....Our Constitution allows you the Religious Freedom to be any religious faith you want or of no religious faith if you so choose...That's What Freedom of Religion Means..So if you are not of any faith why would those Christian Commandments bother you?.

          Nothing in the Constitution restricts your freedom to take the Lords name in vain or make graven images.. So how do you figure the Biblical Commandments of Christianity affect your constitutional rights??

        • Patriot

          I think he's afraid he will be put into stocks and have his feet whipped. Real backward thinker! :)

        • Patriot

          They are all based on common legal concepts. See my post above.
          CARLjr surely needs to get a grip and a handle on reality.

    • http://www.facebook.com/daniel.w.cote.1 Daniel W. Cote

      None of the Commandments are against the Constitution. Not one of the Commandments mentions any particular Religion. In fact none of the Commandments even mentions christianity. If you remember the Ten Commandments were given to Moses who was a Jew not a Christian. There isn't one restriction in the Constitution on anyone or any group other the the United States Congress. There is no such thing as separation of church in state. Those words aren't found in the Constitution. You also need to check out the 10 Commandment Display at the United States Supreme Court. You will also find Displays of the Ten Commandments in many Courthouses across the country. Most Atheists say the Government can't hold services in government buildings. Most people don't know while Thomas Jefferson was vice-president and then when he was President held Church services every Sunday in Congress. Since the term Separation of Church and State comes from Thomas Jefferson you'd think he would know what was meant by the Constitution. Let's also look at swearing oaths on the bible and saying a prayer at the start of session in congress. These customs date back to the Founding Fathers if there was such a thing as separation of church and state don't you think those things would have been forbidden. The Constitution is quite specific the only restriction is on the government naming a particular religion as the state religion. Why has so many things been attached to it I'll never know. The 10 Commandments at Court Houses, Teaching the Bible in School, Prayer in school, Prayer before start of Congress Session, taking the oath with hand on bible, Swearing an oath to God. All these things date back to the founding of our nation. SInce the founders made the rules and it was alright with them then it should be alright with us. We need tort reform in this country to stop some of these nuisance law suits the left uses to push their agenda. The reason people don't fight lawsuits like forcing to stop saying a prayer before a football game or removing 10 commandments from some public area is the cost of defending against a lawsuit. We need tort reform so if someone brings a lawsuit and they loose that they must cover all the defendants cost not only the legal and court costs but all the cost. That would put an end to all but legitimate lawsuits. That will stop these anonymous out of staters from having their name used by the ACLU to file a lawsuit. They won't be so anxious to put their name of a lawsuit when it could cost them if they loose. It's time we fight back against the 5% of the population that doesn't believe in God. Why should we have to bow down to their wishes. Our Founding Fathers came to this country to escape religious persecution and now we are doing the same thing except instead of requiring one to belong to a specific religion we require people to not mention religion at all. If someone doesn't believe in God that's their business but they have no right to tell me I can't show my faith in public. A cross doesn't support any particular Religion since Christianity isn't a religion. Manger scenes have been set up in town squares since the beginning of our Country don't you think if they were against the constitution that they would have been forbidden a long time ago. The Liberal Courts have read things into the Constitution that aren't really there. They justified decisions they made by stretching the truth to fit their agenda. There is no reason for the separation of church and state all that's need is that Government can't force people to belong to a certain church or any church.

      • http://www.facebook.com/Raidenko Michael Mayers

        Our Founding Fathers created the seperation of Church and State to prevent the Government from creating a religion like the King of England did after the Church denied his Divorce request.
        It was not created to remove God from this nation and the people who feel offended by God should leave the country or Shut the Hell up... they have the right to their ideaology, but they do not have the right to restrict ours!

      • CARLjr

        "The Constitution is quite specific the only restriction is on the government naming a particular religion as the state religion"

        First off - the ten commandments are not on display at the Supreme Court. The depiction of Moses holding tablets only shows 6-10 and he is featured just as prominently as Hammurabi, Confucius, and Muhammad. (yes that one) who is holding the Qur'an. These images are representing ancient law, and the history of law, not giving any implied preference to any of them. There are Roman, Greek, and Egyptian Gods represented also. The Supreme Court gives as much weight to the Magna Carta and Aesop's Fables as it does to the law of the bible.

        Religious displays on public property, prayer in public schools and in Congress is all a promotion of Christianity as a state religion. So what happens if a non-christian wanted to attend a public school? or had to go to court? or got elected to office? Would they swear on their holy book? Would you have a politician say "so help me Allah" or "so help me Xenu" when he/she was sworn in? You ask why should we listen to just 5% of people that are non-believers? What if in a particular county it is 85% Mormon? or 65% Muslim? Would it be OK to have a different religion taught in schools? or had THEIR
        religious symbols at the court house instead? What percentage of the population do you think deserves to be listened to? The Bill of Rights say just ONE PERSON has the right. These are INDIVIDUAL liberties we have been given. Everyone deserves equal and impartial justice under the law.

      • CARLjr

        You start off by saying that "None of the Commandments are against the Constitution." That is not correct.

        The first commandment - "thou shalt have no other gods before me" is a violation of the First Amendment. It completely defies the American concept of religious liberty

        The second commandment - "thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image..." is violating the First Amendment freedoms of religion and speech.

        The third commandment - "thou shalt not take the name of the Lord in vain" again violates our free speech rights guaranteed by the Constitution.

  • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100001251894913 John T. Valentine

    Three cheers for the Christian man, for his Ten Commandments display, the Federal Judge, Dixie County and Liberty Counsel. As for the anti-Christian member of the aclu, "Like satan, MASTER OF ALL LIES AND DECEIT." He should get down on his knees, each and every day and thank God in Heaven, for America's gift from God, America's Constitution.

  • Screeminmeeme

    Hallelujah!

    • Virginia Cavalier

      Praise Providence!

      • Tim

        Praise God!

        • Patriot

          Looks like a troll doesn't believe that God should be praised. Go figure!

      • Patriot

        Looks like a troll doesn't believe in Providence! Go figure!

  • James White, M.D.

    So a shred of righteousness remains in America. Let us celebrate it, in the name of the Lord!! I regard the ACLU as a "beacon of wrong." If a mentally challenged person desired to live a righteous, and virtuous life, but was not capable of understanding the issues, all he would need is the "beacon of wrong"; he could then navigate in the opposite direction from the ACLU on every front, and his life would be a virtuous one. Pax vobiscum.

  • GRAMPA

    I love my country but fear my government.
    God bless America.
    Amen
    Grampa

  • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=1357090716 Jerry Morgan

    A victory is still a victory no matter how small. We have to continue to fight in order to turn small victories into large ones.

  • JJM123

    Where are the charges for 'perjury', false representation, etc??? The fines are an extremely limp slap to the wrist.

  • gfsomsel

    While there is nothing particularly advantageous about having the Ten Commandments displayed publicly simply for the sake of having them displayed, it is likely that if you oppose their public display carved in stone you also will not display them in your life which is where it counts.

    • Patriot

      I would think the advantage of having them displayed is meant to give inspiration and spiritual guidance. We need to remember, there are many religious artifacts that grace the Supreme Court as well. Why are they there? I don't think it's because there is nothing particularly advantageous about having them displayed.

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Steve-Harper/1006354778 Steve Harper

    they should of had to pay a really big fine for filing a frivolous law suit

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Will-Akerman/1273745063 Will Akerman

    "GOD BLESS AMERICA" AND "GOD BLESS" THESE FINE "AMERICANS" OUR GOD WILL PREVAIL...........>>>>>>>>>>>>>

  • KittyKittyKit

    I always wondered why there are people who, when asked, thought it was a GOOD THING if children obeyed their parents and a BAD THING to be a rebelious and beligerent child, and that stealing something from others was a BAD THING, and NOT stealing from others was a GOOD THING, and if they, or their children, were to someday get married, that it would be a GOOD THING for the couple to be faithful to each other and that it would be a BAD THING to enter into a physical relationship with someone you weren't married to after you were married; and it was a BAD THING to go around telling lies and fairy tales about your neighbors and a GOOD THING to speak well of them, and finally that it was a GOOD THING, if you wanted a new car or boat or lawn mower, to go BUY your own, and not envy your neighbors new car, boat, or lawn mower and dwell on how you could get them to let you use theirs, and then when they did, NOT return the items, because that was a BAD THING to do......................yet these very same people ABHOR the idea that the 10 COMMANDMENTS should be displayed anywhere in public..............???????????

    The above list includes the last 6 of the 10 Commandments, which simply informs folks of agreed upon, acceptable behavior, that makes for a good community. NO ONE disputes these are a GOOD THING....................they are simply IGNORANT of what the 10 commandents are.

    Then again, who is it that DOESN'T WANT the 10 Commandments displayed? Most of the time it is THOSE who work behind the walls of LOCAL, STATE, and FEDERAL GOVERNMENTS............because that's where the ANTITHESIS of the 10 Commandments runs RAMPANT. It is POLITICIANS who encourage the BAD BEHAVIOR of children, and will not allow them to be corrected, and POLITICIANS who love to LIE, CHEAT, and STEAL from the coffers of the TAX PAYERS, and it is the POLITICIANS who are most often caught in MARITAL INFIDELITIES and SCANDALS and it is POLITICIANS who always want to take away that which belongs to the TAX PAYING CITIZENS and give it to those who do nothing to deserve it, expecting the FREE LOADER will turn around and VOTE them into office again.
    It is the POLITICIAN (both secular and religous) that BANDIES ABOUT a LIE and CONCEPT that was NEVER in the Constitution..............the SEPARATION of CHURCH and STATE.
    It is the POLITICIAN who does NOT WANT there to be any MORAL standard to have to operate within, because he/she is a THEIF and has PLANS for getting HUGE SUMS of TAX PAYER FUNDS shuffled into his/her district and thereby their own pockets, and to accomplish their goals, they have to LIE, CHEAT, and STEAL to get it.

  • Americanpride

    Screw the ACLU ! BACK STABBING IDIOTS !

  • http://www.facebook.com/deedee.matthews.16 Dee Dee Matthews

    THERE IS NO SUCH THING AS "SEPARATION OF CHURCH AND STATE". only in the minds of trouble makers. I don't understand why this phrase is never challenged in court. With reference to God in almost all documents and on courthouses and our money...does anyone honestly think that the framers would think "separation of church and state"? Only a demoncrat would think so...the rest of us logical/common sense thinkers wouldn't.

    • http://www.facebook.com/Raidenko Michael Mayers

      Our Founding Fathers created the seperation of Church and State to prevent the Government from creating a religion like the King of England did after the Church denied his Divorce request.
      It was not created to remove God from this nation and the people who feel offended by God should leave the country or Shut the Hell up... they have the right to their ideaology, but they do not have the right to restrict ours!

      • /.murphy

        Whose God are you talking about? That's the problem.

        • http://www.facebook.com/Raidenko Michael Mayers

          Whatever God you believe in... it's you right to do so, but not your right to restrict others.

        • Deborah G

          There is ONLY One God

        • http://www.facebook.com/people/Sharon-Brooks/100000663925607 Sharon Brooks

          See Deborah, this is where the libtards win, to you there is only one "God" to others there is whatever they believe or don't believe....forcing your belief on others is as bad as the libtards view point. Cool it girl!

      • Deborah G

        It was only meant that the Government had no right to make is a National religion by using one over another, NOT that all religion or mention of God was to be silnced wquite the opposite. We were to have freedom in expressing our religious beliefs not the war on Christianity the Atheists and Liberals are now waging. We need the Ten Commandments in our schools.

        • Guest

          You are correct Deborah, we do need the Ten Commandments in our schools however,

        • Doodlebug

          You are so right Deborah, we do need the Ten Commandments in our schools. However, don't hold your breath until that happens! I'm glad the ACLU lost this case. I wonder if they have ever tried to get all the references to God taken off of the bldgs. in Washington. If you haven't seen it, try and get a copy of "Rediscovering God in America," a commentary by Newt and Callista Gingrich. It tells of all the ingravings in and on our bldgs. in Washington. God was NOT SILENCED at the time those bldgs were built. Put the Ten Commandments back in the court houses the ACLU had won their fight to get them removed.

        • CARLjr

          Newt Gingrich is an adulterer. (and a deadbeat dad) He does not care about the commandments.

        • smartgranny55

          Do you know for certain that Newt has not repented from his sin? Do you know if he has rejected or accepted forgiveness from God, because of Jesus Christ's death on cross?

        • CARLjr

          I could care less if he tried to redeem himself with god - he never did with his ex-wives or children. I do know he asked the Catholic church to annul his 18 year marriage - (but I don't think they did)

          I know his kids grew up without a dad because he wanted to screw someone besides his wife. I know he refused to pay alimony or child support. I know he left his second wife because he was hot for his young intern Callista. I know at the end of both of his marriages, he proposed to the new wife BEFORE he asked his current wife for a divorce. He led the charge to impeach President Clinton while he was carrying out an affair with his current wife.

          This slimy jerk has some real hutzpah trying to promote any type of "family values" or to make any comment on morality.

        • Tasha22

          And HOW do YOU KNOW this? Were you there?

        • CARLjr

          He has been interviewed and admits it. He admits it on his own website.

          How could you not know this? It is common knowledge that Newt is a terrible human being.

        • Ann Rand

          How about the ovomits ??? Care to expound on their (vitrues)??? The wookie woman 's license to practice law was revoked for fraud and he has more secrets than PANDORA'S Box.. .... If the truth be known about them and their actions before the W.H. and since. they would probably be in jail... At least, Newt loves his country... More than we can say about the ovomits....

        • CARLjr

          Newt said it was the love of his country that drove him to cheat on his wives.
          "There's no question at times of my life, partially driven by how passionately I felt about this country, that I worked far too hard and things happened in my life that were not appropriate," Gingrich said.

        • WASP

          Wow, You Know all that. Did you move in with him for 30 years or what?

        • CARLjr

          "What I can tell you is that when I did things that were wrong, I wasn't
          trapped in situation ethics, I was doing things that were wrong, and
          yet, I was doing them," Gingrich said.

          Do you people ever pay attention to actual news?

        • 1Clara2

          Be careful, Carl, judge not lest ye be judged. The Bible says you should rid yourself of the log in your eye before you do anything about the splinter in someone else's eye. Your list of Newt's transgressions may be true, but remember, God can overlook ALL of that and forgive Newt if Newt was truly repentant...and God is the ONLY one who could ever know. We are not to judge others as we are also quite sinful. Jesus said, "He who is without sin may cast the first stone."

        • Patriot

          It's my understand that Newt embraced Christianity long ago and was in fact baptized and had apologized for his actions.

        • http://www.facebook.com/john.nicoletti.54 John Nicoletti

          Believing in god, is not a religion. If the ACLU, had its way, there would be no American history taught in our schools. It is bad enough, that they have watered it down. Look at you childs present history book, you would not recognize the text material.

        • Tasha22

          How about trying it in our legislatures and executive departments?

        • Patriot

          And Boy, do they need them!

      • PhilByler

        Not exactly. Read the text of the First Amendment: "Congress shall make no law respecting the establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof. . . ." What the Founding Fathers did in the First Amendment was to provide that Congress could not establish a religion and could not prevent the free exercise of a person's religion. The words "separation of Church and State" come from Jefferson in a letter written a decade after the enactment of the First Amendment and sent to a Connecticut Baptist congregation assuring them of the Baptists' freedon of religion, the establishment of the Congregational Church in Connecticut as a matter of state law. (The First Amendment did not reach the states until the Fourteenth Amendment became law in 1868 and was not so interpreted untiul 1947.) The Baptists actually did not like the letter because of the phrase "wall of separation of Church and State" carried connotations that they did not agree with; to them and many Americans, religion should influence law and public policy, just that there should not be an established Church.
        The problem is that Jefferson's words have been given a meaning to remove God from the country, which Jefferson cannot be assumed to mean, as he when President sent the Marine Band to play at Church services then held in the Capitol building.

        • http://www.facebook.com/TPTuffy Terrence Tuffy

          Well done.

        • Rattlerjake

          This wouldn't even have been an issue if government hadn't taken over the education system. Education should be run by the private sector as is was done during the time of the founding fathers. The only thing that government should possibly be responsible for in education is providing minimum standards.

        • Patriot

          Dittos Rattlerjake. Education is actually the providence of each individual State. The federal government needs to remove itself and it's influence and needs to stop its propaganda!

      • buzz131950

        The separation of church and state was enshrined in the 1st amendment to insure that the government would not set up an "official" church, such as the Church of England, and so that the churches would not have influence or control over the government. The constitution established the government as a secular government and wanted to make sure that it would never become a theocracy.

        • http://www.facebook.com/don.rasher.7 Don Rasher

          Yo Buzz, show me in the first amendment those words, "Separation of church and state"?? I'll go ya one better there Buzz old chap, ... show me ANYWHERE, in the constitution, or ANY of the amendments to the original document, those words, "Separation of church and state", and I will kiss your backside on the courthouse steps of ANY venue of your choice, and I'll give you a week to draw a crowd. Now, why do I feel so confident, making this offer to you, ?.......... Because those 5 words are not ANYWHERE in the constitution, and the constitution is the controlling document for our government, ... not anywhere to be found in that document. If I am wrong, ..... show me! It's a liberal myth! Those words are just not there!

        • buzz131950

          I never said it was, learn how to read with comprehension and you will then understand what I said.

        • sandman

          we all have a different take on "enshrined" than you then, and Don is right, NO WHERE in our Constitution, or Bill Of Rights does it say anything about separation of Church and state, just in the letter from Jefferson to the Church in Conn.

        • sandman

          I guess it is right there next to the right to abortion?

      • rocky63

        The liberals seem to see only 1/2 of the religion provision of the 1st Amendment. It says Congress may not establish a religion - that't the part they know about. But it also says, the government man not "prohibit the free exercise thereof". The liberals don't care a bit about the freedom of Americans to practice their religious beliefs. And we conservatives are not nearly aggressive enough in reminding them of this part of the First Amendment.

        • http://www.facebook.com/people/Stephen-Smith/664886615 Stephen Smith

          The liberals want to remove your God and replace Him with themselves. It's very simple, really.

      • http://www.facebook.com/daniel.w.cote.1 Daniel W. Cote

        There's no such thing as the Separation of Church and State. The Constitution Simply states Congress cannot establish a national religion but the liberal courts have expanded it to prevent any mention of God in public. They've removed prayer from school. They are trying to remove God from our money. They are trying to remove the bible from the inauguration. They forbid saying a prayer in a public forum. None of these things are forbidden by the Constitution. As far as the term Separation of Church and State it appears in a letter written to the Danbury Baptist Church. It was only meant to assure them that no matter what religion the president belongs to he can't proclaim it the national religion. The liberals claim using God or Jesus in a speech is a violation of church and state that's nonsense what religion are we talking about those terms don't point to any individual religion. Atheist complain about the 10 commandments which one religion does the 10 commandments represent it doesn't push any one religion. The Cross is a symbol of Christianity. Christianity isn't a religion it's a type of religion. Atheist claim the government can't give a voucher to someone who wants their children to go to a religious run school. That voucher is Tax dollars and the taxpayer wants their money to go to the school of their choice. The government isn't paying the school it's paying the taxpayers and the taxpayers are paying the school they want their children to go to. The taxpayer is the one that is promoting that school not the government. The liberal atheist don't want anyone to practice a religion because they don't like because they don't like to be told they are wrong. We need to take our country back from the liberals and fix all these problems. We need to make God a important part of life again before God Punishes us for it.

        • http://www.facebook.com/felipe.burgos.355 Felipe Burgos

          Dan is very interesting that the so call atheist only go after the people that mention GOD. However, when a muslim mention allah nothing is said or law suit file against them. Is there something going on here?

        • Tasha22

          They are both worshipping the devil, the one indirectly and the other directly under one of his many names. Allah was the chief god of the polytheistic pagan meccans.

        • sandman

          the liberals are all coward, and only go after "soft" targets, if Christians were known for violence to get their way, there would be no problems from the liberals, that is why the muslims have no problems with the liberals!

        • Patriot

          It would appear they don't want their head chopped off! :)

        • Iamacitizen2

          On the news here they found heads and "hands" chopped off 2 Egyptians living in NJ by a Muslim and he apparently buried them in someone's back yard recently. UGH here we go....so is O going to go after the swords and the knives too??? How about the forks?

        • Patriot

          I heard that report but I guess it just wasn't picked-up by the mainstream media sympathizers. Now, this atrocity was done by followers of Mohammad? Oh, a religion of love and peace I see.-not! Did they catch the slime that perpetrated these evil deeds?

          Let's not forget pencils. One could poke someone's eye out with one of those dangerous weapons. :)

        • Patriot

          Interesting. A bit off-topic but has anyone noticed the liberals attempt at imposing a new religion upon us? Notice all the photos and drawings of Obama with a halo? Have you heard the comments from black racist referring to the fraud Obama as the messiah or referring to him as our father? Oops!

        • Iamacitizen2

          next time you hear an atheist say they don't believe there is a God/Creator ask them where they think they came from?

          After their response no matter what it is, just simply and kindly say: wow you know that nothing from nothing makes nothing? But we believers say: God is our creator and I am something. LOLOL

      • http://www.facebook.com/ckendsr C Ken Davis Sr

        The founding fathers did not create a separation of church and state. They created a freedom of religion. Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting prohibiting the free exercise thereof. The supreme fools (court) ruled seperation based on their wrong personal opinions and a letter by Jefferson. Has been lies ever since. You are right about the reason for the first amendment.

      • WASP

        A century of progressive and liberal gummint has the effect of corrupting the interpretation of something(the constitution) that says precisely what it means. When the left can't twist the interpretation, they try the "living document" B.S. When that fails they lobby for constitutional amendments to revoke what they don't like. They're a psychotic bunch of low-lives, but generations of brainwashing in our gummint operated and commie union staffed "public schools" produces that kind of lunatic--en masse.

      • http://www.facebook.com/john.nicoletti.54 John Nicoletti

        Same for you,Michael. We have twisted, and turned this phrase, Separation of church and State, that it has little meaning.

      • 1Clara2

        Sorry to puncture your balloon, Michael, but the phrase 'separation of church and state' only appeared in a letter written by Jefferson to a Baptist minister who was asking if there was anything in any of the documents that were being written that would curtail freedom of religion. It does not appear in the Constitution anywhere. That's why it is specifically spelled out in the Bill of Rights, i.e., Freedom of Religion, which pretty much says it all. As to the reason for all of this, you're absolutely right. Our FF wanted to make sure nothing like the Church of England happened here. However, our government today is violating this Right by forcing companies and individuals, through Obamacare, to provide various types of abortion to their employees. In essence, they have instituted an alternate 'religion' of sorts, which they are not allowed to do. Then there are all those ridiculous people and groups that use that phrase in order to gain their own selfish, thoughtless, and dangerous ends. They want everything their way without allowing the rest of us to pursue our happiness in our own way. I think the term is Tolerance, of which there is very little nowadays.

    • Ole SC

      Dee Dee, liberals don't have the ability to be logical. In order to believe what they say they believe it would require mental contortion. Only a twisted mind could find logic in the illogical. They defend the indefensible, excuse the inexcusable, deny the undeniable, etc. Liberalism is a Mental Disorder and generally it is a narcissistic sociopath (IMO). There is not much help for them!!

    • DougIndeap

      Separation of church and state is a bedrock principle of our Constitution much like the principles of separation of powers and checks and balances. In the Constitution, the founders did not simply say in so many words that there should be separation of powers and checks and balances; rather, they actually separated the powers of government among three branches and established checks and balances. Similarly, they did not merely say there should be separation of church and state; rather, they actually separated them by (1) establishing a secular government on the power of "We the people" (not a deity), (2) saying nothing to connect that government to god(s) or religion, (3) saying nothing to give that government power over matters of god(s) or religion, and (4), indeed, saying nothing substantive about god(s) or religion at all except in a provision precluding any religious test for public office. Given the norms of the day, the founders' avoidance of any expression in the Constitution suggesting that the government is somehow based on any religious belief was quite a remarkable and plainly intentional choice. They later buttressed this separation of government and religion with the First Amendment, which constrains the government from undertaking to establish religion or prohibit individuals from freely exercising their religions.

      That the phrase "separation of church and state" does not appear in the text of the Constitution assumes much importance, it seems, to some who may have once labored under the misimpression it was there and, upon learning they were mistaken, reckon they’ve discovered a smoking gun solving a Constitutional mystery. To those familiar with the Constitution, the absence of the metaphor commonly used to name one of its principles is no more consequential than the absence of other phrases (e.g., Bill of Rights, separation of powers, checks and balances, fair trial, religious liberty) used to describe other undoubted Constitutional principles.

      To the extent that some nonetheless would like confirmation--in those very words--of the founders' intent to separate government and religion, Madison and Jefferson supplied it. Some try to pass off the Supreme Court’s decision in Everson v. Board of Education as simply a misreading of Jefferson’s letter to the Danbury Baptists–as if that were the only basis of the Court’s decision. Instructive as that letter is, it played but a small part in the Court’s decision. Perhaps even more than Jefferson, James Madison influenced the Court’s view. Madison, who had a central role in drafting the Constitution and the First Amendment, confirmed that he understood them to “[s]trongly guard[] . . . the separation between Religion and Government.” Madison, Detached Memoranda (~1820). He made plain, too, that they guarded against more than just laws creating state sponsored churches or imposing a state religion. Mindful that even as new principles are proclaimed, old habits die hard and citizens and politicians could tend to entangle government and religion (e.g., “the appointment of chaplains to the two houses of Congress” and “for the army and navy” and “[r]eligious proclamations by the Executive recommending thanksgivings and fasts”), he considered the question whether these actions were “consistent with the Constitution, and with the pure principle of religious freedom” and responded: “In strictness the answer on both points must be in the negative. The Constitution of the United States forbids everything like an establishment of a national religion.”

    • Shermer

      How long has God been on your banknotes?

    • Patriot

      Isn't it, "SEPARATION OF CHURCH FROM STATE?" That has always been my understanding anyway. It was meant to deny Government from creating it's own religion such as the Church of England, or the Unholy Church of Obama Zombies!

    • http://www.facebook.com/john.nicoletti.54 John Nicoletti

      Excellent walk back in history,Dee DEE.

  • tomyj1

    YEAH !!!

  • Ithamar

    I'll bet US dollars that this complaining miscreant is not a North Carolinian. Northern undesirables have invaded North Carolina just like they have Florida, all whining and complaining about Southern religion and culture and bent upon destroying what little remains from the South's failed attempt to gain its independence from apostate yankee religion and culture.

    • doctorbob

      I'm a "Yankee," but I have always thought that the WRONG side won the Civil War!

  • Wigglypoff

    How about perjury charges; where are those. This guy filed court papers stAting his/her standing; its a false claim. Court documents such as a claim to standing are filed under the tenet of perjury; he/she should be seeing some prison time!!

    • Patriot

      Someone with standing has to file a formal complaint with the State's Attorney's office to initiate action. If a jury comes back with a writ of attainment, it would then go to trial.
      This is a criminal proceedings, not a civil matter.

  • Wigglypoff

    ACLU: Anti Christian Liberal Union; that's the real meaning.

    • Iamacitizen2

      VERY GOOD THERE Wigglypoff very good. Sort reminds me of the red letters "GMC" on the front of our car grill...I say now that means its a "God Made Car" my hubby usually chuckles at that one.

  • rridgsr

    The ACLU trash lost their AZZ.

    • Patriot

      Gee, isn't that refreshing for a change? :)

  • http://profile.yahoo.com/MBAK4TYXWM6FIPEJKO7Q54QPBA TIGERPAW

    GO GOD!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

  • The Old Man

    It's about time the courts begin to act like they actually do follow the constitution's lead.

  • Oldchopper

    Thank You Lord!

  • doctorbob

    Nice to see the Good Guys win one for a change! There is no Constitutional "separation of Church and State." The First Amendment mandates that the Government cannot regulate religion (no establishment of an official Government religion, such as the Church of England that the Colonists had to tolerate), and the government may not interfere in the practice of religion, but there is NO prohibition of religion participating in Government. NO "separation of Church and State." Contrary to Obama's ridiculous assertions, this IS a Judeo-Christian country, NOT a Muslim country. We can practice our Judeo-Christian faiths openly and WITHOUT government interference in ANY way. Only demented Liberals would try to assert otherwise. And I've about had a belly full of demented Liberals!

    • technicallysane

      Well said doctorbob...... I too have had a belly full of demented Liberals as well as evil communists. And I'm amazed at the numbers of ignorant people who do not know that there is no Constitutional 'separation of Church and State'. The Liberals and atheists made it up and use it over and over again and have managed to convince enough people that's what the Constitution says.

  • iwojimafan

    The ACLU aka American Communist League of Unfits should have been charged at least $10,000.00 in court costs and another $100,000.00 to Liberty Counsel along with $1,000,000.oo to the town itself. This kind of high monetary rewards against the ACLU will help stop these ANTI-AMERICAN COMMUNISTS by hitting them in there Wallet

    • Patriot

      Under the circumstances it sure sounded like a frivolous lawsuit to me!
      Another judge who just couldn't pull the trigger twice :)

  • /.murphy

    I'm just wondering... would you commenters also be in support of a similar monument that had quotations from the Qu'ran? If not, why not? And do we or do we not have freedom of religion (or conscience, as some people say) in this country?

    • http://www.facebook.com/gene.r.swank Gene R Swank

      It would be there legal right to post from the quran, but most of the quran is evil and it would let the people know it was evil by posting some of the evil in the quran.

      • CARLjr

        All the same rules are in the Qur'an.

        1. There is no God except one God (47:19)

        2. There is nothing whatsoever like unto Him (42:11)

        3. Make not God's name an excuse to your oaths (2:224)

        4. Be kind to your parents if one or both of them attain old age in thy life, say not a word of contempt nor repel them but address them in terms of honor. (17:23)

        5. As for the thief, male or female, cut off his or her hands, but those who repent after a crime and reform shall be forgiven by god for god is forgiving and kind ( 5:38-39)

        6. They invoke a curse of God if they lie. (24:7) Hide not the testimony (2:283)

        7. If anyone has killed one person it is if he had killed the whole mankind. (5:32)

        8. Do not come near adultery. It is an indecent deed and a way for other evils. (17:32)

        9. Do good to your parents, relatives, and neighbors. (4:36) Saying of the Prophet Muhammad "One of the greatest sins is to have illicit sex with your neighbor's wife".

        10. When the call for the Friday prayer is made, hasten to the remembrance of God and leave off your business. (62:9)

        Almost identical.
        You worship the same God, but through a different prophet.

      • Patriot

        Also, I'm positive that the quran does not reflect the communities values for sure!

        To the misinformed, we are a Judeo-Christian country. Sorry if your offended. It's just TFB! Go start your own country.

  • American ex-Pat

    Ohhhhh, it burns, it burns!

  • Deborah G

    We have a National Cathedral not a mosque or an atheist meeting hall. Get over it US Christians are here to stay and getting madder by the day.

    • Patriot

      Dittos! Let's not forget, paybacks are a bit@c!

  • PierceArrowV12

    The ACLU only had to pay $1300 in court costs to the Liberty Council? That is chump change! Why is the ACLU able to extort hundreds of thousands of dollars from the people that they win against?

  • http://www.facebook.com/paul.leslie.3998 Paul Leslie

    It's good to see the ACLU get a smack down. They're phonies posing as patriots while undermining America. They remind me of the mob in S. Philly who would hand out turkeys at Thanksgiving to do a "good deed" once in awhile to manufacture cover for their subversive actions.

  • TheSunDidIt

    This separation garbage is NOT found in the Constitution.

    • Patriot

      No it 's not!

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Sharon-Brooks/100000663925607 Sharon Brooks

    To this 67 year old---errr wise person, this so called separation of church and state means that no state church, such as the "Church Of England" or "Church of America" shall be established, it does not say or mean what the Libtards want it to mean , so, yes speak up and speak out and over shout the libtards people!

  • firemanfred

    Ahh, the ACLU, there is a special place in Hell reserved just for them and all their card carrying members.

    • Patriot

      Whose the troll that has gone down these post and given them down votes?
      We need to purge these ignorant clowns from this site!

  • pcsrocky

    It is about time! Now what about all of the lies under oath? Why not counter sue the ACLU and the original plaintiff? I don't like our sue happy society but in this case, make an example of the person and the ACLU!!!! Make them think long and hard about future lawsuits BEFORE they file the suit. Make the penalties hurt for being ridiculous!

    The "separation of Church and State" means that State can't specify a religion, collect "donations", etc; NOT that God and all references must be removed from the public eye. Make these ridiculous lawyers read the Constitution of the United States and ALL of the Constitutions for the 50 States and don't allow them any money with any reference to God on it. Oops, they don't get ANY MONEY then do they?

  • Bart

    ACLU = All Communists and Liberals United

  • rocky63

    But in the case of a woman employee of a university who said she supported marriage between a man and a woman in a letter to a newspaper editor -- and who did not mention her affiliation with the university where she worked -- the ACLU didn't get involved in protecting her free speech rights. The ACLU only springs into action in issues that are against religion or traditional morality.

  • ICOYAR

    May the ACLU go bankrupt

    • funkeyooo

      It's too bad, but they won't. Sorros finances them along with the owner of Progressive Insurance Co.

  • KingofThings

    Amen!

  • Beautut

    God for the Florida Court...Looks like the ACLU is finally getting the boot.....

  • Beautut

    Message to the ACLU...Go Boink! your self.

    • daves

      You shouldn't just accept the point of view of this author. The ACLU has filed many lawsuits protecting the rights of Christians.

      A display of the 10 commandments at a courthouse can intimidate people of other faiths and give them reason to believe they will not be treated fairly by the court.

      Do you think the 10 commandments should be law? Do you think it should be illegal to work on the Sabbath?

      • truth74

        In about 99% of instances, the ACLU is on the wrong side of the issue, doing everything in its power to tear down all that is good in America. I would bet that the ratio of anti-Christian to pro-Christian actions is also about 99-1. I think that the decision about whether a state or other legislative body wants to prohibit working on the Sabbath is to be decided by its elected representatives. It has nothing to do with whether or not the Ten Commandments are displayed.

        • daves

          Everything the ACLU does protects religious freedom. Prayer in school? Suppose the teacher thinks the kids should say a Muslim prayer?

          Why display the 10 commandments if Christians don't follow them anymore? There are still a few who keep the 4th commandment but not many.

        • Patriot

          I was once told by an attorney that the ACLU will on occasion take on cases for their PR value just so they could use that as a defense.

          I once had a case against a couple of municipalities and they offered to take them on. We said thanks, but no thanks!

      • Ann Rand

        Do you think you look good in your sister's dress???Aren't her pantyhose too tight for you??/ Been playing with the hamsters again, huh daves??? Does PETA know what you do with those poor little animals???You worry about your own fetishes and we will worry about the 10 Commandments...

        • CARLjr

          You know all about it, don't you "Ann"?

          (by the way, you just broke the 9th commandment)

        • Ann Rand

          Funny how you trolls always show up together... Afraid of going out by your little selfie , are you??/ How many of you creeps does Capt. P.J. have in his little shop of horrors?

        • Patriot

          Keep in mind Ann they may actually be one in the same. Just an observance.

        • Ann Rand

          Yes, that has happened before....

        • Patriot

          Good for you Ann!!! He does have that queen look about him doesn't he? :)

        • Ann Rand

          Yes he does..daves has been spreading his foolishness around for quite a while.. We usually refer to him as the turd in the punchbowl...

    • Patriot

      Dittos!!! :) :) :) or better yet, each other. They have been doing it to the USA from day 1.

  • http://twitter.com/DustyFae StarDust Dolittle

    Thank God, l would love to see more of these around where l will travel, it is a sign to me that most people in the area are good people.

  • http://www.facebook.com/jf1us Jessy Folmar

    Can I sue the ACLU for bringing suits against thing I like? They bring the suit and then I have to stand by and watch something I believe in be dismantled because of their liberal stupidity. I am so tired of these idiots. I think we all need to bring a suit against they and let them feel whats it like to be targeted for no real reason. but yet we would have a reason. Were tired of their crap.

  • SamH II

    Hallelujah! You go, God!

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Brenda-Cibelli/100000687513153 Brenda Cibelli

    atheists have no soul

  • Davy2010

    Look up who are the founders of ACLU and why they are so adamant in wanting to remove anything Christian & their subtle black over white incitement.

    • Patriot

      They are all commies or commie sympathizers right from the beginning!

  • Ann Rand

    Yipee !!! Chalk one up for the GOOD GUYS !!

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Don-Smith/100000918340811 Don Smith

    i am ashame of this being from north carolina born and raised. this guy must be some yankee that moved here from one of those hell bound states. i wish u yankees would stop coming here,we do not want you here and if the laws were different we would stop u at the border and turn u back to hell where u came from

  • Huapakechi

    Fine 'em ten million more!

  • http://www.facebook.com/charlesbigtruck Charles Durham

    God is on our money and you must swear on the bible when you go to court.

    • CARLjr

      No you don't. There is no bible. There is no swear.

      You are asked "You do solemnly state, under penalty of perjury, that the testimony you may give in the cause now pending before this court shall be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth."

      • Ann Rand

        Troll

        • Patriot

          Very astute and observant Ann! :)

  • CARLjr

    The ironic part about all this is the 12,000-lb stone tablets are violations of the 2nd commandment against making any "graven images".

  • Kent2012

    Would it not be wonderful if, from now on, every time those clown communists take a case to court they lose, big time......what sweet revenge to their years of "hate American values"..

  • celticwaryor

    Halleluiah!!

  • The Brigadier

    That's all? Thirty six hundred bucks for a case that probably cost several million dollars in attorney fees and court costs? The Dixie County frivolous lawsuit penalties definitely need a revamping. The ACLU got away with it almost scot free.

    • Patriot

      The ACLU Perpetrated a fraud upon the Court and engaged in perjury. I would have the ACLU attorneys thrown into jail for the above blatant acts against the Courts!

  • violater1

    Glory to Jehovah God in the highest and praise Jesus Holy Name! God is alive and his glory never ceases!

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/David-Peacock/100001241183282 David Peacock

    the ACLU is a major component of the communist, socialist attempt to destroy the nation's founding principles, something great built by great people is always the target of destruction by idiots and wimps [lefties].

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/David-Peacock/100001241183282 David Peacock

    the socialist progressive have a self esteem problem; they fear the strength of the individual;; obama is their example; if it is white he wants it to be black; if it is right he wants it to be left; if it is up he wants it down,;if it works he wants it broken; if we want freedom he wants tyranny; if we want small government he wants big government;;;;;;time for the un American Kenyan educated Indonesian to get the hell out of OUR NATION;; HE DOES NOT BELONG HERE.

    • Patriot

      Dittos! They are also self loathing, godless heathens. They have an overblown sense of themselves and yet give no respect to others. And you are right David, they always take the contrarian position on everything. You can read many of their posts on this sight for proof.

      • CARLjr

        How can you be self loathing and have an overblown sense of yourself?

  • cmjay

    Go DIXIE COUNTY. DAVID against GOLIATH. Thank you LIBERTY COUNSEL

  • Jude O'Connor

    I have a handy copy of the Constitution I keep in my truck and it settles a bunch of know it all authorities when this BS starts

  • Alondra

    People, please go to the link I provide and sign the petition to Congress to investigate of the Criminal-in-chief’s use of forged IDs. 34,952 Americans already signed it. Clock is ticking. Act now!

    Please pass on to all your e-mail contacts. Thanks.

    http://www.petition2congress.com/9026/start-immediate-investigation-barack-obamas-use-forged-ids-ct-ssn/?src=widget

    P.S. The Supreme Court of the United States does not state whether the Orly Taitz case
    was granted or denied, no answer yet, NO TREASON YET by the justices of the
    Supreme Court. So let’s pray for their WISDOM.

    Go to the Orly’s website and look for her Reports.

    Orly Taitz' Website is: http://www.orlytaitzesq.com/

    “Fiat justitia ruat caelum” – “Let justice be done though the heavens fall”

  • http://www.facebook.com/jesop.ash Jesop Ash

    Separation of church and state is a functional myth unless you only want to let the religion-of-denial atheists run for office and receive government jobs/appointments...oh ,wait.

  • Betty4440

    And that is where it should remain for all times. this is getting old leave things alone or leave the country and go to the country of your choice. love it or leave it. true AMERICANS are sick of these nut jobs. get a life and get a job and you want have tome to whine about every thing. we free loving AMERICAN just want jerks like this one out of our lives. and be left alone. and by the way I am from North Carolina. make no difference. this is my country must not be yours or you wouldn't be whining about the TEN COMMENTS THIS IS THE AMERICAN WAY AND IN GOD WE TRUST. got it? if not get out and make it quick.