Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Rutles4Ever
"It's settled as a precedent of the court, entitled to respect under principles of stare decisis," the concept that long-settled decisions should be given extra weight, Roberts told the Senate Judiciary Committee.

The decision to permit the wholesale slaughter of 45 million unborn children is entitled to "respect" because of legal tradition/precedent? This is a disgusting statement!

Roberts dismissed any suggestion that his Catholic faith would influence his decisions if he was confirmed to be the nation's 17th chief justice. The Roman Catholic Church strongly opposes abortion.

This statement is even more appalling since Catholics believe that the Church is "the pillar and foundation of truth" -- the Church that Christ founded. Jesus warned us that "whosoever shall deny me before men, him will I also deny before my Father."

Catholic teaching must enform every aspect of a Catholic's intellectual life. This should not be problematic for non-Catholics, since Catholic teaching regarding the political order follows the natural law, which is knowable to all people. Catholics are obligated not to impose particularly Catholic doctrines on non-Catholics.

Roberts is either woefully ignorant of Catholic teaching or a coward. Neither characteristic testifies to good judgement or character.

23 posted on 09/13/2005 8:44:03 AM PDT by Aquinasfan (Isaiah 22:22, Rev 3:7, Mat 16:19)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


To: Aquinasfan

There is also a gray area here, in that, theologically speaking, it could be argued that this panel is not "entitled to the truth" regarding Roberts' pos. on abortion. Like having a Nazi show up on your doorstep and asking for the Jews in your attic during WWII. In that case, the Nazi soldier would not be entitled to the truth, which would render unsinful the subsequent lie that "there are no Jews in my attack".

That said, it gets a little dicey because he took an oath to testify truthfully. Does the unentitlement to truth trump the oath? If the Nazi pulled out a Bible and told you to take an oath before God that you're not hiding Jews, is the oath immediately null and void under duress?

I'm looking for a silver lining, I admit. But there is a case to be made where there is an absence of justice, certain parties are not entitled to the truth...


26 posted on 09/13/2005 8:56:41 AM PDT by Rutles4Ever
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies ]

To: Aquinasfan

Excellent comments. Fortunately, there are those among us who answer to an even higher Judge.


53 posted on 09/13/2005 12:04:12 PM PDT by steve86 (@)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies ]

To: Aquinasfan
Roberts is either woefully ignorant of Catholic teaching or a coward. Neither characteristic testifies to good judgement or character.

No Catholic, indeed no Christian, could ever be approved for the Supreme Court under your stringencies.

Roberts will be guided by his own conscience. Unspoken is that his conscience will be informed by his Catholic Faith.

He would doom his nomination if he invoked the Catholic Church, in any way.

96 posted on 09/14/2005 8:40:30 AM PDT by sinkspur (It is time for those of us who have much to share with those who have nothing.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson