The American Spectator

Reader Mail

(Page 5 of 16)

: /p>

Patrick O'Hannigan hit the nail on the head concerning to role of the Church, and that of a Judge. Many people today are so used to judges legislating from the bench that they confuse the moral obligations of a legislator to those of an impartial judge who must review a law or statute. States Legislatures may make immoral laws, and if those laws are constitutionally sound, a Judge or Justice would be remiss to overrule that them based on his own church's convictions. The moral onus falls on the legislators who write the laws as well as the people who vote them in. If, someday Roe is overturned, and a state votes overwhelmingly to allow abortion on demand of all types, and if the law is constitutionally sound, an orthodox Catholic judge would have to let it stand. As a private citizen, the judge has exactly the same votes as his fellow citizens: 1. Since, the judge did not craft the law, and as a private citizen he voted for a legislator who opposed it, the Catholic judge will not be held responsible for that immoral law. He could say as much in his legal opinion.

p>If our Senators want to query Roberts about his opinions of St. Thomas of Aquinas, St. Augustine, or the value of Tridentine Mass they should do it in private. It has no more relevance than Roberts's knowledge of Kant's Categorical Imperative. br> -- J.P. Koch br> Indiana /p> p> BATTLING MOONBATS br> Re: Lisa Fabrizio's Hurricane Roberts : /p>

Her article was very accurate, particularly the following: "Women's reproductive rights, end-of-life rights; it's enough to inspire the belief that the Founding Fathers risked their lives to build a nation dedicated to the proposition that the government should guarantee the right to exterminate its oldest and youngest citizens in order to fulfill the personhood of others."

topics:
Education, Joe Biden, Abortion, Environment, Global Warming, Constitution, Law, Founding Fathers, Military, NATO, Oil