Alabama battleground

By Phil Lawler ( bio - articles - email ) | Aug 26, 2003

The poll on our home page shows that a solid majority of our readers back Judge Moore in his argument with a federal court order. I agree with his argument, too. But I question whether this is the time or the place for a battle.

Sooner or later, we're going to have to settle the question of church-state relations in the US. The court decisions over the past few decades have been seriously skewed against Christianity-- and, for that matter, against the sense of the Constitution.

But this case in Alabama strikes me as a strange place to draw the line. Judge Moore clearly set up this confrontation; he has been spoiling for a fight. That's OK with me; I think my own track record will show that I'm generally ready for a good fight.

However, the case law weighs heavily against Judge Moore. If you go by the established precedents-- and that is what courts go by-- this doesn't even look like a close call. Judge Moore and his supporters are going to lose this case in the courts.

Again, you might say that the courts have decided those prior cases wrongly. And I'd agree with you. But that suggests to me that we should fight harder to get more solid judges on the courts, to reverse the judicial trend and undo those adverse precedents.

Christian activists are headed for Alabama, to show their support for Judge Moore. They may defy the courts; they may go to jail. Again, I have nothing in principle against civil disobedience; I've been in jail myself. But in this case I don't see what will be gained. I suggest that the time and energy would be better spent putting more judges like Moore on the courts, rather than more Christians behind bars.