Christian fundamentalists are not qualified for judgeships

[Rex_Goodheart]

We learn from Harriet Meirs's church members that she considers herself an "originalist" in interpreting both the Constitution and the Bible. That is, those documents are to be understood literally according to the words as written, i.e. without symbolism, allegory, metaphor, or abstract of some basic purpose.

The problem when interpreting the Constitution in that fashion is obvious. The Bill of Rights, in particular, is not a document of statutes but of principles, and because the document could never be exhaustive enough to cover every real world circumstance the Supreme Court must necessarily view it as an abstract. "Necessarily", that is, only if one is an honest justice.

But such a literal posture is even more telling of a person's ingenuousness when considering the Biblical realm. The problem there is that the book is blatantly contradictory and unscientific and can not be reconciled to any sense except by resorting to hideous contortions and suspensions of logic.

Ms. Meirs ostensibly believes that both the first and second chapters of Genesis are literally true despite the patency of two conflicting accounts of creation. In order to "believe" such a thing she must first accept a position as dogmatic truth then shoehorn the text in comical fashion back to it.

Ms. Meirs ostensibly believes that the story of Noah's Ark and a worldwide flood is true, despite mountains of evidence which say otherwise. Again, Mrs. Meirs, as do all fundamentalists, accepts the truth of a proposition then ignores or twists the evidence to fit. That habit is exactly the reverse of how a qualified judge would reach a legitimate decision.

Now, one might say that Ms. Meirs is capable of applying different mechanisms when making faith-based decisions versus legal ones. I would agree, but I see no reason at all to trust her to do it. If a person is willing to lock even herself into some faith-based presupposition despite available evidence then it's foolish for the rest of us to expect that she'd be honest about anything else.

[leftofthedial]

1. fundies are mentally ill

which disqualifies them

[Rex_Goodheart]

2. Well, I was trying to be nice. LOL

[leftofthedial]

7. thankfully, I am free of that restriction

:-)

[bryant69]

3. I gather I wouldn't be qualified to be a judge either?

I do go to church every week.

I do believe in a Creating God (although I do not think he created th earth in literally 7 days). I do believer that the story of Noah's arc refers to a real event.

'course I don't have any presidential buddies who are likely to nominate me, so I guess it's a moot point.

Bryant
Check it out --> http://politicalcomment.blogspot.com

[LiberalVoice]

4. Read The Epic of Gilgamesh.

Its an ancient mesopotamian story of a half man half god. In the story is an almost literally identical story to that of Noahs. Written well before the Bible suggests.

[bryant69]

6. I'm aware of the epic of Gilgimish

I'm not sure what you are trying to argue with that reference, and of course, you avoided answering the question.

Bryant

[LiberalVoice]

16. Thats because I wasnt trying to answer your question.

In fact my post was in reference to your comment on Noahs Ark. I was just pointing out that one of the most famous stories from the Bible didn't actually come from the Bible. Or at least looks alot like plagiarism to me. IMHO.

[BurtWorm]

10. If "by real event" you mean a flood, that's one thing.

If by "real event" you mean some guy named Noah built an ark to preserve specimens of critters, that really is another thing. The question I would have for anyone who believed the latter is, if you believe in what common sense tells you cannot have happened, how will we know you will be able to turn on common sense in other instances where life and death might be at stake?

[bryant69]

15. OK.

Simple and direct. You wouldn't support any Christian who believes in the story of noah's arc to be on the bench.

What of the miracles of Jesus - say the raising of Lazarus or the turning of water into wine? Can someone believe that they happened and still be qualified to be a judge?

[leftofthedial]

11. seek professional help

seriously

[bryant69]

12. Thank you for that Trenchent and meaningful comment

that really puts things in perspective.

[hogwyld]

5. She isn't fit to judge

Anyone of such religious convictions should be barred from such a post now and in the future. There isn't a doubt in my mind that her beliefs will influence her decisions. I don't want her to oulaw certain rights because the bible say it's so.

[WilmywoodNCparalegal]

8. I think that by the nature of the 'fundamentalism'

be it religious, political or otherwise, one cannot be an impartial judge. I believe the law requires one to be mentally flexible, precisely because circumstances change. Who could have envisioned computers when the Constitution was written or the Bill of Rights adopted? Yet, judges must be flexible to adapt the wording of yesteryear to today's technology. If a judge is incapable of doing that, then the judge is, in my opinion, incapable of rendering a fair decision.

If Ms. Miers is inflexible in her interpretation of laws, then how can she be relied upon to render a fair decision? Obviously, her decision would not be any different than what is already in the books and established. Therefore, how could one fairly argue a case involving biotechnology, for instance, if she would use an inflexible interpretation of the commercial code or other laws written for older technology?

Part of what I find exciting and challenging about what I do (I am an immigration paralegal for people seeking lawful employment based on education or extraordinary ability) is that things are always in flux, never static, and you are required to be mentally flexible to see how each regulation may or may not apply to your specific case. If I were to strictly interpret immigration law, many of the professions I deal with (creative directors, artists, movie people, etc.) would not be able to lawfully work in the U.S.

[Rowdyboy]

9. May I presume you would exclude all Roman Catholics too....And Mormons

and Orthodox Jews?

[DemocratSinceBirth]

14. Some Of The Posts Here Are Absurd

eom

[CornField]

13. By your own standards

No one is then fit to be a judge. We all -- in some way or another -- hold to the tentaments of our youth and experiences, despite evidence to the contrary.

Be very careful, this an extremely dangerous slope you are scaling.

[The Magistrate]

17. Locking

This is an unacceptable broad-brush attack.