I propose that this monument must be destroyed, turned to gravel and to dust, just as was done to the original Ten Commandments by Moses. "And it came to pass, as soon as he came nigh unto the camp, that he saw the calf, and the dancing: and Moses' anger waxed hot, and he cast the tables out of his hands, and brake them beneath the mount." (KJV of 1611 Exodus 32:19)

Unless the Ten Commandments monument is removed from the rotunda of the State Judicial Building and destroyed, Roy Moore will continue to use his office as Chief Justice to profit from this chunk of rock.

It is illegal and immoral for Roy Moore as Chief Justice to use his public position for personal profit. If you will take note of the fact that on the back pedestal of the Ten Commandments monument Roy Moore's copyright notice is inscribed, this indicates private ownership of the monument. Does not private ownership imply usage for private profit? This would appear to be the case unless this monument and all copyrights associated with it were donated to the State of Alabama, a church or other charity. To my knowledge this has not been done.

Therefore I would like to see the Ten Commandments monument removed and pulverized, the gravel applied to building new roads and streets. At least then the public would benefit from this chunk of rock and Chief Justice Roy Moore would be prevented from continuing to use his public office to make personal profit from this graven image.

Jim Earnhardt, Montgomery Advertiser editor took issue with the above letter in his July 9, 2002 column of "Talk Back." Earnhardt wrote: "Unlike Moses, and apparently unlike Reader Lynch as well, my anger doesn't wax hot, at least not at the chief justice. In his case, it doesn't wax at all. I don't see any reason to destroy the monument. If Moore wants to put it in his front yard or his living room or give it to a church or make any other private-sector use of it that is agreeable to the parties involved, it's fine by me. Just get it out of the Judicial Building."

Of course this is exactly the opinion one would expect from an editor of a newspaper which calls itself the Advertiser and caters to a very conservative business cliental. The idea of turning the Ten Commandments monument to gravel and paving public highways is just a bit to speedy and progressive for this editor who happens to be a relative of the late Dale Earnhardt, a legend both on and off the race track.

Of course Jim Earnhardt was careful not to mention the fact that I had suggested this usage for gravel made from the Ten Commandments monument. Certainly any such mention of gravel and highways would have brought to mind Dale Earnhardt and the Advertiser would have received a flood of speedy replies from readers racing to discount this idea.

It should perhaps be noted that the idea of putting the Ten Commandments monument in Judge Moore's front yard was one originally expressed to me and reported when I interviewed Southern Poverty Law Center founder, Morris Dees, on November 19, 2002, immediately after the Federal Court ruled that the Ten Commandments monument should be removed from the state Judicial Building.

I encountered Morris Dees standing beside the Civil Rights Memorial after he had given an interview to other members of the press. I was curious to know exactly what Dees thought about other lawyers citing the Decalogue in court. Dees said this was quite a common practice. Then when I asked Dees what he thought should be done with the Decalogue monument he said that he didn't really care, as long as it was removed from the Judicial Building. Then he added, as if in jest, that he didn't care if Moore put the lump of rock in his living room or front yard. I wonder if one of the reporters listening to this conversation was dear Jim Earnhardt?

It will be interesting to see how this story plays itself out. Given Chief Justice Roy Moore has said that he will appeal the Ten Commandments monument issue all the way to the US Supreme Court, and has not yet acted to remove the washing machine chunk of granite from the Judicial Building, this is anything but a mute issue.

Yet I can not leave the reader thinking I am, as Moses, waxed hot with regard to this issue. When I originally wrote the above letter it contained no reference to Exodus. I had to go on the Internet and search at length to find this passage from the Holy Bible. Given the King James version of the Bible is widly published upon the Internet, I quoted from that source. However, when I contemplate this issue it is from a logical and rational, rather than an emotional point of view.

Certainly to destroy the Decalogue monument and use it to pave streets and roads may be an idea which angers Moore supporters. Perhaps they would feel better in the crumbled bits and pieces of this monument were placed in an ark which then toured the country along with Roy Moore to raise money to build him a temple or church.

To prevent exactly that sort of private profiting is why I suggest pulverizing the damn rock and using it to pave roads and streets. When you get right down to it there is no more significance to this piece of granite and those use in any other construction project. A rock is a rock and a chunk of granite remains a stone by any other name or usage!

Sincerely,
Terry Lynch
Date: 4 July 2003

Do you have a beef? Send your comments, opinions, letters or other remarks to Byteland. In doing so, you agree that all submissions may be reprinted, edited and/or published without compensation or restriction whatsoever. Warning: If you send hate mail or other trash we may publish it and you agree to release Byteland.org, its agents and representative, from all liability, whatsoever, and to be totally responsible for your own statements and/or actions, including but not limited to slanderous or libelous remarks! You also agree to release Byteland.org, its agents and representatives, from any claims of slander, libel or other damages whatsoever, in regard to reprint, publication or editorial comments or usage with respect to any material you submit for publication.