Faith, works and Harriet Miers

Townhall.com ^ | October 13, 2005 | Cal Thomas

[Cautor]

The White House and other supporters of Harriet Miers' nomination to the Supreme Court are using religion when it suits them and not using it when it doesn't.

[Cautor]

Ping

[lexington minuteman 1775]

THAT is called politics!

[FreeRep]

I think it is interesting and important to note the relative proportion of membership in various religious groups on the Supreme Court. I think that would make Harriet Miers the only evangelical on the court.
And that could be why some conservatives, consciously or unconsciously (Bork)oppose her. So, if Harriet Miers is confirmed, she will be the only evangelical on the U.S. Supreme Court. “Faith and Trust alone”
Because I have Faith in the President and that brings me to Trust his choice of Harriet Miers.

[Cautor]

bump

[rbmillerjr]

The thing that amazes me is that if she were really a conservative...do you think we would really here about her being evangelical?

The pander bear is being sent out to conservatives...because they have the Dems agreement on the Miers nomination.

LOL, since when do Repubs start a PR campaign yelling from the tops of their voices "she is evangelical, goes to a pro life churge!"

It's so obviously right in our face that it is almost unbelievable.

This nomination is terrible.

[oblomov]

I don't care if the nominee is a Zoroastrian or Shinto-Hindu eclecticist, as long as they apply a consistently rigorous, originalist judicial philosophy in the mold of Scalia or Thomas.

[jobim]

I think you have indicated an answer to the question I have been asking myself: Are a disproportionate number of Evangelical and Baptist Conservatives supporting the rationale Bush used in selecting Miers?

I am a conservative orthodox Catholic prolifer, so I share most all stances with said group.

I do caution, however, that crystal clear analysis be applied to this selection, which I fear is being subsumed under "hope."

[FreeRep]

Sometimes all we have is Faith, Trust and Hope.

[jobim]

Yes, of course. But just as I would need to bring all my knowledge and perseverance and good judgement to bear on all the big decisions of life, such as career choice, house purchase, college choice for my daughter, counseling of my friend who has just left his wife: in all cases I cannot simply abandon my responsibility to faith, hope, and trust. I need to use the gifts that I have to make the best possible decision, in the light of faith, hope, and trust.

I believe that an acceptance of Miers, and Bush's method of choosing her, without applying the same standards of careful reasoning that the Conservative base has and should apply to other momentous decisions, is fraught with danger.

Trust, but verify.

[FreeRep]

Yes, of course, "Trust, but verify." The first word is trust: meaning "giving one the benefit of the doubt." Therefore one should give President Bush the benefit of the doubt tell the hearing.

[beyond the sea]

"From that answer comes this question: If Harriet Miers can easily set aside her faith on the job, what is the point of nominating someone with such faith? Why not nominate someone of no faith and the question would never come up? Is faith good only for the confirmation process, but not the job?"

****

hmmmm.