Alpine Summit

Monday, July 25, 2005

One God, Under Nation...

The Anchoress talks about the left's view of religion in America from a column by Jonathan Turley; specifically, Christianity. Because, that's the religion we all have to watch out for- oh wait. Nevermind.

The exchange occurred during one of Roberts' informal discussions with senators last week. According to two people who attended the meeting, Roberts was asked by Sen. Richard Durbin (D-Ill.) what he would do if the law required a ruling that his church considers immoral. Roberts is a devout Catholic and is married to an ardent pro-life activist. The Catholic Church considers abortion to be a sin, and various church leaders have stated that government officials supporting abortion should be denied religious rites such as communion. (Pope Benedict XVI is often cited as holding this strict view of the merging of a person's faith and public duties).

Renowned for his unflappable style in oral argument, Roberts appeared nonplused and, according to sources in the meeting, answered after a long pause that he would probably have to recuse himself.

It was the first unscripted answer in the most carefully scripted nomination in history. It was also the wrong answer. In taking office, a justice takes an oath to uphold the Constitution and the laws of the United States. A judge's personal religious views should have no role in the interpretation of the laws. (To his credit, Roberts did not say that his faith would control in such a case).

Turley goes on to talk about how Roberts' recusing himself would lead to an evenly split court on many important issues and worries about that. First of all, the left, as an inherently (with exceptions) anti-religious ideology, has no concept of personal values and moral absolutism and how religion shapes those values and morals. They think it's just some practice that can be turned on and off at the "appropriate" times. I recall people questioned Kennedy's Catholocism before being elected President and wondering if he would make the U.S. a de-facto "Vatican City 2" the argument was stupid then and it's stupid now.

Religion should not be a disqualifier for any job- including the supreme court. That's exactly what the left would love, though. "No Christians allowed." Their crying is getting louder, too. Any time a conservative is picked/nominated/voted into an office of substantial power, all these liberals come out of the woodwork "concerned" about their religious views (if they're Christian) and if they will conflict with their policy-making. The second someone says they aren't going to be doing something because "God says so" I'll stand with these liberals on the issue. Until that time, leave them alone! Just because they get their moral compass from a certain faith does not mean they won't apply law in an ethical way. Anchoress has this to say:

Seems to me if a judge has a moral or ethical conflict regarding a case before him or her, recusing oneself is the right option - but then, I am no expert on this stuff. Nevertheless, Turley is “troubled.”

He's "troubled" because he hates Christianity and Christians. He hates their moral stance on issues and especially hates that he can't come up with anything better to attack Roberts than his religious beliefs. Another quick thought: if Roberts was being an activist for his faith, it would surely have shown by now.

Anchoress also links to Villainous Company who has some really great comments, too.

|