 Cynthia Tucker |
Posted on 04/03/2005 6:42:45 PM PDT by Gondring
Friends of Florida judge George Greer describe him as a low-key conservative Christian, a Republican, a family man, a dog lover. Appellate courts have found over and over again that Greer simply followed the law in deciding a sad and controversial case. But for that sin, the Pinellas County Circuit Court judge was invited out of his Southern Baptist Church.
|
|
Apparently, Greer's critics, including his pastor, didn't like his rulings in the Terri Schiavo case, which landed in his courtroom in 1998. They wanted him to be an activist judge -- a jurist who ignored the law and ruled according to the passions of a group of partisans.
Ultraconservatives want you to believe the term "activist judge" applies to a group of determined liberals whose rulings have overturned historic precedent, undermined morality and defied common sense. But the controversy that erupted around Schiavo, who died on Thursday, ought to remind us once and for all what "activist judge" really means: a jurist whose rulings dissatisfy a right-wing political constituency.
Over the next few months, you'll hear the term "activist judge" often as President Bush nominates justices to the U.S. Supreme Court. The president could end up appointing as many as four. Chief Justice William Rehnquist, 80, is ailing with cancer; John Paul Stevens is also an octogenarian. Sandra Day O'Connor and Ruth Bader Ginsburg are cancer survivors in their 70s.
With so many likely vacancies, ultraconservatives see an opportunity to drive from the bench any semblance of fealty to the law or the U.S. Constitution. They claim that judges have become the tool of an outlandish liberal fringe that has violated the graves of the Founding Fathers. When right-wing talk-show hosts and U.S. senators denounce judicial activism, they conjure up images of jurists who terrorize the God-fearing, coddle criminals and would -- according to one crazed campaign memo passed around during last year's presidential campaign -- outlaw the Bible.
The next time you hear those claims, think of Judge Greer, whose politics tilt to the right. He is among the targets of ultraconservative ire.
For that matter, think of the current Supreme Court -- hardly a bastion of liberalism. Its justices declined to intervene in the Schiavo case because they could find no legitimate reason to do so.
While the rift between Michael Schiavo and his in-laws, Bob and Mary Schindler, is depressing, family conflict is almost a way of life in America. Courts are called upon often to settle family disputes over money, children and property. Florida law makes clear that a spouse has the right to decide end-of-life issues, and, after testimony from several people, Greer upheld Schiavo's claim that his wife didn't want to be kept alive through artificial means.
It is perfectly understandable that the Schindlers were unhappy with his ruling. As grieving parents, they wanted to believe, contrary to the judgment of several physicians, that their daughter might one day be miraculously restored.
But the attacks on the judiciary by the Schindlers' supporters -- including an attempted end-run by an activist Congress -- made it clear that a minority of religious extremists have no respect for the law and no understanding of the separation of powers on which this government was founded.
Among those who missed their high school civics class, apparently, were Congress and the president. In one of many rulings turning down the Schindlers' request for intervention, an Atlanta federal court judge chastised the executive and legislative branches for overreaching.
"Congress chose to overstep constitutional boundaries into the province of the judiciary. Such an act cannot be countenanced," wrote Judge Stanley Birch, who was appointed by former President George H.W. Bush. Hardly a liberal activist.
The current President Bush has already made clear that his idea of a model chief justice is Clarence Thomas, who has no respect for judicial precedent. But even Thomas might not satisfy the extremists who chastise Judge Greer. They will be satisfied with nothing less than a judiciary steeped in the same narrow religious views they want to impose on the nation.
Cynthia Tucker is editorial page editor for The Atlanta Journal-Constitution. She can be reached by e-mail: cynthia@ajc.com.
Exactly, and therein lies the conundrum: How to get "justice" done in the case of Schiavo, but still cling to your conservative "hands-off" philosophy. As I said before, what Cynthia Tucker is pointing out is simply the dichotomy that has apparently shifted usually conservative, states' rights Christians to good old fashioned federal government activist liberals. Strange.
The liberal twist. How was it activist to allow someone to live? How would it be activist to tell a husband that is living with someone eles and has two children by that someone else that he is no longer the husband and no longer has custody control?
Well I disagree. So there you have it.
The ultimate argument. Defeats logic every time.
Wow do you have your thinking on backwards. Let me see if I have this correct. Judges bend, twist, manipulate, misconstrue, invent and rewrite the constitution. Then someone comes along and says judges should follow the original intent of the constitution and you think that is judicial activism.
Congress could Constitutionally disband all of the Federal courts except SCOTUS.
Congress has no power over State courts, however.
Very good point here.
>>physical imperfection.<<
This is where you guys go off the deep end. In your minds you jump from PVS to "physical imperfection". Can't you see the nuttiness of that??? It's like having an arguement with your spouse over not putting the toilet seat down and you accuse him of rippinng out the toilet bowl. .... The other falsely accused realizes talking to you is of NO USE.
When some court starts killing people with *physical imperfections* it's time for violent revolution. I'll bring my gun.
These Schiavo threads have been a hoot. Anyone questioning the ultra-right's handling of this circus is immediately labeled as either a left wing troll, or an uneducated schmuck. Then comes the denial of anything "bad" like threats to innocent women and children. Meanwhile, American flag are defaced, crucifixes desecrated, Terri is routinely compared to Jesus Christ and her death to the Nazi holocaust. Then come demands that the judiciary be disbanded, special laws enacted, that the President and governor use the police and military to take over a private hospice, and on and on.
Of course, after the denials are shown to be ludicrous, then the "justifications" for such actions are thrown about, and finally when some simply don't accept those justifications, "uneducated" posters are insulted, derided and ridiculed, and charged with being faithless and desirous of Terri's death.
And those were just the nice posts that weren't deleted by the mods! So I don't mind being lumped in with the uneducated.
As for those who are willing to "punish those who do not believe as they do," I dislike that too. But Christians know that punishment for unbelief (the unpardonable sin) is left to the One who judges in perfection and righteousness.
Mine is not a blind faith, MF....not a leap into the dark, but a step into the light. If I lose the ability to see His Truth clearly, then I become dangerous to myself and others.
Have fun with the ACLU, Barbara Boxer, youth communists and people who demand that judges legislate from the bench. (Those are the people who have been outspoken about killing Terri.)
I wish you wouldn't go there- but it is a free country after all.
I will be hanging out with people who don't condemn, and mock others for their religious beliefs-straight out of the box.
Is this more from the side of law over emotion- and moderate, non flambaiting, logical Michale S supporters?
Ummm...Ok. !?!?!?
Kettle...Black.
Good things those Christians never got their hands on shaping our founding documents. Those crazies would have ousted everyone from freedom- but themselves. Whew.. close one huh?
And like most lefties, you make gratuitous statements like that without being able to back them up.
Except for the anti-Christian idiot on this thread, I saw few on other side. But then, again, you are justifying, not rationalizing.
Have fun with the ACLU, Barbara Boxer, youth communists and people who demand that judges legislate from the bench. (Those are the people who have been outspoken about killing Terri.)
Well, Diva, you just made my case for me. Because I question some of the actions of those who call themselves conservative, you immediately link me with communists, et al. As I mentioned in my last post, that is one of the tactics of the ultra-right, who refuse to permit rational postings contrary to their world view.
I will be hanging out with people who don't condemn, and mock others for their religious beliefs-straight out of the box.
As will I. I mock no one for their religious beliefs, only their occassional irrational behavior.
Nothing like reading a Leftist screed posted by a moderate coward! You must enjoy flaggellation at the whips of Liberal, Socialist and Communist scum!
I hope you don't let what has gone on over the past few weeks weaken your faith. It seems to be well grounded. Most of them will get over it, and once again, assume more conservative characteristics than those displayed my many here on FR and in Florida.
These people would plunge this nation into a religious civil war if they had control.
Clearly Randall Terry would do that. He has said as much, many times. Again, I don't fault their concerns for Terri Schiavo. I had similar concerns. When they became manifested by seemingly irrational behavior and counter-conservative views, we parted company.
I did not say you were one,BTW.
I have no idea where the Nazis stand on this issue- since i don't think anyone from the Nazis group has made public statements about Terri. (But I could be wrong of course)
The Youth Communist organization, our most left representatives and the ACLU have all made statements this month that the Federal Government should not be involved in Terri's case.
While some of our most respected Conservative representatives and legal minds have said otherwise.
So......
The Religious Right has fanatics? Maybe we should label the fanatics something like the Religious Self-Righteous. So as not to offend the rational thinking members of the Religious Right.
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.