Posted on 09/15/2005 9:49:14 PM PDT by Coleus
The JFK Question
Sens. Specter and Feinstein impose an unconstitutional religious test.
BY MANUEL MIRANDA
Thursday, September 15, 2005 12:01 a.m. EDT
They should be ashamed. We should be ashamed. We have not progressed much in 45 years it seems, and we appear to be traveling in the wrong direction.
Article VI of the Constitution prohibits a religious test from being imposed on nominees to public office. The clause was motivated by the experience of Catholics in the Maryland colony and Baptists in Virginia who had been the targets of Great Britain's two Test Acts. These infamous laws of intolerance sought to prevent anyone who did not belong to the Church of England from holding public office. The Test Acts did not say that Catholics could not hold office; the bigotry was more subtle. Officials questioned would-be public servants to determine whether they believed in particular tenets of the Catholic faith.
While questioning John Roberts on Tuesday, Judiciary Committee chairman Arlen Specter asked: "Would you say that your views are the same as those expressed by John Kennedy when he was a candidate, and he spoke to the Greater Houston Ministerial Association in September of 1960: 'I do not speak for my church on public matters, and the church does not speak for me.' "
Hours later, Sen. Dianne Feinstein of California made it worse: "In 1960, there was much debate about President John F. Kennedy's faith and what role Catholicism would play in his administration. At that time, he pledged to address the issues of conscience out of a focus on the national interests, not out of adherence to the dictates of one's religion. . . . My question is: Do you?"
(Excerpt) Read more at opinionjournal.com ...
I prefer to spell Alan's name "SPECTRE"!
More importantly though what is being missed is that somehow in this country the law seems to take precedent over one's faith in regards of being able to come to sound decisions.
These senators seem to imply that if a man is devout in a faith that is steeped in a Judeo-Christian heritage, he can't make sound judgments based on things that are right and wrong.
How is absurd is that?
Why is it with some senators and congressman in this country that nothing trumps the almighty government? We all know how the law and govt. has failed us over the centuries. Rulings lately like the pledge of allegiance by some District Judge, and the ruling of eminent domain come to mind.
I'd rather have a judge who has a devout belief in something higher than the government when it comes to making decisions that will affect this country.
I've seen the Honorable John Roberts during the past few days and know that he has a solid grasp of the law. I also feel secure in knowing that this man of faith will draw on that faith when making decisions in years to come.
We have plenty of senators and congressman who profess a belief in a Catholic faith, but don't really seem to subscribe to it. I at least believe that Roberts will use the wisdom of solomon when it comes to matters of legality.
Atheists would get a pass.
Leni
Jay, they give more respect to a bible-carrying pervert. Disgusting.
Their reply? ... I don't live in their states.
In their warped confusion over this issue, secular humanist wacko liberals target Catholics for abuse. But many non-Catholics support the right to life and oppose abortion. It is not an issue limited to Catholics although the Church has the most coherent and comprehensive ethical teaching on the subject.
Specter used to be a Democrat. When he began calling himself a "Republican" the only thing that changed was what he called himself.
I actually think he acts as a mole.
Gee, would ultra-secularist Diane Feinstein be worried that Judge Roberts might be "too Catholic" if a case of wife beating comes before the court?
Feinstein's questions/remarks overreached her authority and blatantly attacked Catholics and religious people in general. Shouldn't she have asked the nominee questions pertaining to the U.S. Constitution, justice, liberty, compromise even, but faith? One's innermost private reflections? Isn't that an invasion of Judge Robert's privacy? Representatives like Feinstein have an agenda to protect: the "anything goes" mentality with morality as an afterthought if at all. If Judge Robert's was a Catholic who supported abortion rights, the question wouldn't have come up at all.
How is absurd is that?
Wasn't very absurd around 1960 when the democrat John Kennedy was around. My how things have changed. /s
Why is it with some senators and congressman in this country that nothing trumps the almighty government?
Communism is alive and well in these "senators and congressmen." No other explanation.
Good point, Karen.
Yes, I sure wish someone here who got to see that part would answer your question about what he replied. If it were me there woulda been steam comin outa my ears.
No wonder the libs today like to trash Joe McCarthy. He saw this coming.
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.