Posted on 10/03/2005 6:51:30 PM PDT by nwrep
In nominating a fundamentalist, literalist, evangelical Christian without a judicial trail, President Bush may have pulled off what could well be conservative response to Earl Warren.
In Harriet Miers, an avowed born-again Christian and faithful member of a Dallas conservative congregation for 25 years, social conservatives have the ultimate prize - namely, a Christian activist on the nation's highest court.
In reaching this conclusion, one need not look beyond the socio-political makeup of the contemporary protestant evangelical denominations. On issue after issue, their value system and belief structure is completely and irreconcilably at odds with the prevailing liberal dogma.
From the literalist interpretation of Biblical events like creation, to the young earth theory, to Intelligent Design, to absolutist positions on sodomy and homosexuality, to strongly patriotic and originalist beliefs, to the belief in "American exceptionalism", to the love of guns, and so on, you could, with very high certainty, establish the conservative credentials of someone who is a fundamentalist Christian today.
That is not to say that exceptions exist even within such congregations, and not everyone agrees with these views with equal fervor. But there can be no doubt that someone who has felt comfortable within such a denomination for 25 years would be very comfortable with this set of values.
With Harriet Miers, the President has delivered a double whammy to the left - a conservative evangelical, and an individual without a judicial paper trail.
I believe that if you are a social conservative who wants decades of liberal judicial influences peeled back, Harriet Miers is a great start, and President Bush deserves praise.
That's why I say TRULY born again. Many American's say they are Christians, but do the really follow Christ?
Two things:
What's the difference between a Christian and a Christian activist?
No, I don't want a justice who plans to go to DC to 'roll back' the lib influence. I want a justice whose goal is to uphold the Constitution.
Jimmy Carter said he was a born again Christian!
ping
Strong religious belief without a brain is a dangerous thing as with Jimmah. Not the case with Bush.
boy, a lot of "I think miers is peachy keen if bush says she's peachy keen" vanities going on today.
The meaning they have now, or in 1789? Does she know what they meant in 1789? Does 'well-regulated' mean now what it meant in 1789?
Wasn't Bill Clinton a member of a conservative born-again baptist congregation?
Are you sure you are on the right Forum site? FR has been freaking out all day. LOL I agree with you, I think there is a purpose here. I may not agree with the President 100% on everything, but he has shown a good reliable record of judicial nominations. My personal thoughts are he picked someone he knew that would uphold the constitution, and someone that could survive the cowardly RINO's in the Senate if there was a challange.
No. She has never been married.
I notice this woman was a math major as an undergrad. That's something you have to like; it takes her out of the normal inbred fraternity of lawyers and guarantees she's significantly brighter than most of them.
From the New Republic:
http://www.tnr.com/etc.mhtml?pid=2832
For instance economic conservatives pleased by her corporate law background may find it distressing that in 1990 Miers voted for a 7 percent property tax increase during her short tenure on the Dallas City Council. And Miers's long affiliation with the ABA will serve up lots of interesting tidbits that are unlikely to please social and legal conservatives. For instance, she apparently submitted the following report to the ABA's House of Delegates. Here are two of the report's recommendations:
Supports the enactment of laws and public policy which provide that sexual orientation shall not be a bar to adoption when the adoption is determined to be in the best interest of the child. ...
Recommends the development and establishment of an International Criminal Court.
The Donner Party folks are not going to like this......
NO, no, no! We're having too much fun bashing the President for not fulfilling our judicial smackdown fantasies. Harriet Mier has spent the last 25 years defending George W. Bush to the death, just so she could sneak on the high court and turn into Ruth Bader Ginsburg. As the woman who led the vetting committee that gave us Estrada, Rogers Brown, Owens and Roberts, she has no idea how to formulate conservative legal opinions. Her main qualification is that she has been a loyal Bush supporter, which is normally a good thing, but not any more.
"How many times on FR have Freepers with a lay background made more sense than the highly qualified judges issuing rulings?"
How many times on free republic who freepers who call themselves 'christians' utter socialist drivel because they say that's what is in the bible?
A supreme court judge is being appointed to protect and defended the integrity of the constitution, not the bible. THAT should be the standard - their demonstrated and proven views on the correct interpretation of the constitution. Not any other things people wish to gin up.
"No, I don't want a justice who plans to go to DC to 'roll back' the lib influence. I want a justice whose goal is to uphold the Constitution."
Where do those two things differ?
Not sure about Jimmah....but his sister, Ruth Carter Stapleton, is the genuine article. I have been to Christian retreat camps where she was a featured minister. She is awesome and a true disciple of our Lord.
This plus what Jay Sekulow said and what Dr.Dobson said has lifted my spirits immensly. I hope the characterization in this post is accurate.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.