Terror in London

The senseless bombing of innocent civilians in London last week reminds us all that the war against terrorism is not going to be limited to the streets of Baghdad and Kabul. Once again, the terrorists have shown their willingness to use any means necessary to scare people into submission. There should be no sympathy for these murderers, and their indiscriminant targeting of civilians is absolutely inexcusable.

We should listen to commentary from the Arab world regarding their problems with increasing Western intervention in their business, but violent attacks by extremists will not lead to anything but more bloodshed and hatred. A moderate voice needs to rise up and truly show that the actions of terrorists do not have the support of the Islamic world. Islam is not a religion of hatred, but it is being hijacked by fringe elements, and being used to justify atrocious acts that no religion would ever support.

I pray that the people of London will be able to recover from these attacks and get on with their lives. I also hope that this will only strengthen the resolve of all civilized people in the world to denounce and destroy those who use terror as a means to advance their own distorted vision of the world.

This is a good website started after the attacks

http://www.werenotafraid.com/

Supreme Court Vacancy

The retirement of Justice Sandra Day O’Connor has left the Supreme Court with its first vacancy in 11 years. Justice O’Connor has for years been considered one of the “moderate” justices, whose vote is often the critical 5th vote on a court that regularly divides 5-4. Groups on both sides of the political spectrum had already firmly entrenched themselves for the nomination/confirmation process, anticipating the retirement of conservative Chief Justice Rehnquist. Now the battle will be even fiercer, because the President will not simply be replacing one “solid” conservative with another, but he can actually change the entire balance of power on the nation’s highest court.

I know it is entirely naïve, but I would like to see appointments based upon the qualifications and history of a candidate rather than his or her adherence to a certain political position. President Bush has commented that the court lacks a “Judicial Giant”, someone in the mold of Oliver Wendell Holmes, or Benjamin Cardozo. For example, Richard Posner of the University of Chicago was a judge on the 7th Circuit for nearly 20 years, and is one of the best known legal minds in America. It would be nice to see Bush nominate someone such as Posner for the vacancy, rather than picking an administration insider. (Here is a link to Posner’s blog: http://www.becker-posner-blog.com/)

Unfortunately, now might not be the time to appoint a true “moderate” to the court. The recent eminent domain decision is the most recent example that leads me to believe the next appointment(s) to the court need to be judges who have a more strict interpretation of the Constitution. As much as we like to consider that there is a “living” Constitution, the fact of the matter is that the Constitution is a document that has a discoverable meaning as it was written. The fact that five justices were able to “read in” that almost any incidental benefit to the public qualifies as a “public use” under the Constitution is very disturbing. Whoever is appointed to replace Justice O’Connor needs to be someone who is not going to change the meaning of the Constitution to fit with their own vision of how society should be ordered. Congress is our legislative body, and such a change should originate with them.

The new justice needs to make sure that the court knows its role in our democracy, and doesn’t try to usurp the powers of the legislature. If that means that we have to appoint a more conservative justice, than so be it.

Religious Freedom

• “On my arrival in the United States, the religious aspect of the country was the first thing that struck my attention; and the longer I stayed there, the more I perceived the great political consequences resulting from this new state of things. In France I had almost always seen the spirit of religion and the spirit of freedom marching in opposite directions. But in America I found they were intimately united and that they reigned in common over the same country.”

- Alexis de Tocqueville Democracy in America (1830s)

Freedom “of and from” religion is one of the most basic tenets underlying our entire system of government. Without the freedom to worship according to the dictates of our own conscience, our freedom would be a mockery.

The two decisions handed down last week by the Supreme Court are perfect examples of how difficult it is to adequately delineate the proper boundaries between church and state. When de Tocqueville traveled through America he was struck by how closely Americans associated religion and freedom. The opposite seems to be true today. If you believe much of what you hear from political commentators, religion and freedom are now at odds with one another.

For the most part, it seems that people have a negative reaction to “religious” politicians. Religion is now seen as something that complicates, rather than clarifies, a person’s political beliefs. A politician who makes reference to religion in a speech about abortion would surely be labeled a “zealot”. However, look at the following passage:

“If God wills that (the war) continue, until all the wealth piled by the bond-man’s two hundred and fifty years of unrequited toil shall be sunk, and until every drop of blood drawn by the lash shall be paid for by another drawn with the sword, as was said three thousand years ago, so still it must be said ‘the judgments of the Lord, are true and righteous altogether.’”

This passage was taken from Lincoln’s 2nd Inaugural Address. How is it that our nation can look at Abraham Lincoln and say that his uncompromising moral stance (based in huge part upon his religious beliefs) against slavery was so admirable, and at the same time decry modern politicians with strong religious beliefs?

I agree with the decisions made by the Supreme Court last week, but I think that as a nation we need to take a step back and realize that our very existence is inextricably linked to the strong religious beliefs of our Founding Fathers. Perhaps if more people on both sides looked back at the writings of our past leaders, they would be better able to deal with this issue.