Judge Roy Moore’s Wyoming attorney, Stephen Melchior, is reported in The Star as saying we should not really believe what the Judge said about “confinement and even execution” of homosexuals. Your Honor just wrote that into his official legal opinion for effect, right? Mr. Melchior would have us believe instead that the Judge was only quoting the laws on the books.
Mr. Melchior, even though I live in Alabama and don’t have a law degree, I can read.
Your client, the Judge, clearly said that the state must use the power of the sword, such as confinement and even execution, to protect children from subversion and a criminal lifestyle.
In his 35-page fanatical ranting, he forgot that he should not have said that, however much he believes it.
In publishing his prejudices, Judge Moore has effectively legitimized hatred and crimes against a minority in our society — whose rights he has sworn to defend.
Better hope that none of your friends or relatives with a different sexual orientation ever has to go to court in Alabama.
We go to great lengths in this country to exclude prospective jurors who might be the least bit biased about a defendant.
Yet in Judge Moore we have blatant discrimination at the highest judicial level in the state, and his poison influences all our justice system.
This situation is evil, and makes a mockery of true justice.
Bob Lawrence
Anniston
Moment of silence
I personally think that Judge Moore is a decent and honest man. Some say that he is an Old Testament Christian (whatever that is). That he just can’t separate biblical law from biblical grace. Had he posted the Great or New Commandment in the courthouse nobody would probably have noticed. You know, where Jesus was asked about the Mosaic commandments and he said “a new commandment I give you... you shall love your God with all your heart, and your neighbor as yourself.”
Jesus also said something about putting new wine into old skins (bottles). He said to put new wine into new skins and both would be preserved. Hey! That might apply to writing a new state Constitution.
I don’t believe any doctrine should be supported by taxpayer’s money. I can still remember when public school teachers had to sign the monthly register certifying that they had read a prayer written by someone in Montgomery.
The Supreme Court did not take prayer out of school, only mandated prayer. Some teachers were already having a moment of silence before the courts ruled and they were afraid they might get fired.
Don Walker
Jacksonville
Moore admiration
In response to so much being written about Judge Roy Moore’s ideas, I will say I admire him greatly. And in The Star on March 3, I read with delight a letter from a writer. And I hope others caught a glimpse of truth in it.
If God be for us who can be against us? Sin is a reproach to any people. Right living upholdeth a nation.
People may think God’s words are out of date but they are the way to life everlasting. The King James version of the Bible is what I was brought up with; and I don’t think there is any good in making a new version.
I don’t know much about gays’ acts. To me the word gay is happy. I don’t think one should be killed or beaten for being gay. But I do believe woman was created for man. And I wouldn’t want a perverted person for a teacher or preacher. And a judge must be able to discern between right and wrong. Of course if a person is both man and woman I guess they can be a mate to either one.
God is a God of love. But also a God of wrath. And he holds our lives in his hands. So it is best to seek his favor. If everyone read the Bible and lived right, it would be heaven on earth.
Lorene Thrower
Ashland
Using IQ
Long overdue! The Alabama Senate Judiciary Committee 8-5 vote on Feb. 28 in favor of exempting the mentally retarded from execution is an outstanding precedent for using IQ to establish public policy. The article, “Execution Ban Could Spur Many Appeals” (Associated Press, March 3) shows that the issue is controversial in many states.Sen. Hank Sanders’ bill provides that an IQ of 70 or below is presumptive evidence of mental retardation! If an IQ of 70 is the cutoff for mental retardation, then the following might emerge.
If ethnic populations “A” and “B” have average IQs of 95 and 105 respectively, then the rate of exemption from execution in population “A” is 30 times greater than in population “B.” Is that discriminatory?
What if an IQ of 120 or higher is required to enter medical college? The rate of eligibility of population “B” is 10 times greater than in population “A.” Is that discriminatory?
Sanders’ bill is correct. Government policy can be made more effective and efficient if it incorporates IQ. An execution policy using IQ to “take life” should be the same as the policy to prepare a person to “save life.”
It is a blatant act of discrimination if the policies are not the same for both cases and all other public policies that should incorporate IQ. Sanders has entered a target rich environment — it would be cowardly and hypocritical if he stopped with the execution policy!
Joe Boyett
Montgomery
