Supreme (Court) Frustration

Supreme (Court) Frustration

I have been pretty quiet over the last couple weeks, I just haven’t been inspired to write. It’s not that there haven’t been issues to write about, I just haven’t felt that there was anything that I really needed to say.

I do however feel it is my duty to write something about the decision rendered by the Supreme Court on the HHS mandate. That is not however a very simple task. I’m not a lawyer you see, and neither am I a political man. In honesty, I never really see myself as having an option to be politically minded due to the great evils in our nation that I am required by my conscience to vote against. I can’t really sit back and be thoughtful about the economic recession for example, because I have to vote against the holocaust of abortion. This puts me well out of practice for this kind of task.

I should say right up front that I do not believe the federal government should have this power. I hold to the idea the founding fathers had that no greater power should do what a lessor power can do for itself. I feel the Supreme Court was designed to protect the people from a large federal government, and that it has failed miserably in that duty, especially by allowing so much law to be passed under the commerce clause. In fact I find it shameful they have allowed so much power from the states and counties of this country to be handed to the larger and less trustworthy federal government.

All that baggage aside though, I realize that this Supreme Court decision is a landmark one, and as it directly deal with Catholic issues, I know that I must weigh in with my small voice. I have purposefully not read any other opinions on this matter, so any similarity with other thoughts is not intended.

I think there is no job in this country I would like less that to be on the Supreme Court. It is such a bad job, that I think I would actually prefer even being President to being on the Court. And that is really saying something, because I would never, ever want to be President. Let’s take a serious look at what the Court actually has to do here. Their task is to lay aside any and all personal reservations, and do their absolute best to follow the letter of the law as it relates to the Constitution. I’m not saying that’s what they do, but that is what they are supposed to do.

That is why I’m not disappointed in Roberts here. At first blush, I admit I was really pissed off, I had really hoped that this would just end this problem once and for all. All the other conservatives on the Court voted against it. And then I had the sense of betrayal as I found out that it was Roberts that was the swing vote here. Dangit, I thought this one was going to be on our side, and I felt he flat out left me hanging.

Then I actually took the time to read what he said. Check this out.

“Because the Constitution permits such a tax, it is not our role to forbid it, or to pass upon its wisdom or fairness.”

In other words, “America, this is your idea. It’s not my job to tell you you aren’t allowed to push your car off a cliff if that’s what you really want to do.” So while at first I was downright ticked off that this decision didn’t go my way, I have to admit, he’s right. It isn’t the Court’s job to protect us from our own stupid mistakes.

Now I’m going to pass on whether or not this is an issue against religious liberty, as that was not what was brought to the bench. Neither am I going to get all pissy because the Court decided that since the law called it a “penalty” and not a “tax” that it doesn’t go against the Anti-Injunction Act, yet at the same time the Court held up the power of mandate because it WAS a tax, and Congress has taxation rights. Yes, only a lawyer could get away with such double talk, and I’m sure in their minds that makes perfect sense. (It of course, makes no sense at all.)

The real issue here is we have made our bed, and we have to sleep in it. We can’t really expect to allow this kind of nonsense pass through Congress and expect the courts to save our tush for our stupid mistakes. We have to fight this from the ground, and fight it with all of our might, at the very least, until we are allowed to follow our Catholic consciences within our Catholic institutions.

Personally, I would like to see the whole health care plan go out the window, but that is because I just don’t see health care listed in the constitution as a federal responsibility. (Remember? No greater power should do what a lessor power can do for itself?) If such laws are needed, I just don’t feel it’s the federal government’s responsibility to enact those laws. I do however take great issue with the idea that they can sweepingly violate so deeply the 2000 year old moral conscience of the Catholic Church. I think it is flat out evil. So we must continue to fight this, continue to write letters, continue to make this the main issue. We can’t let this just slide by, as it the first step of many, that must necessarily end with Catholics being martyred in the public square.

Please help more people find this blog, and share!

2 Responses to Supreme (Court) Frustration

  1. Tj Burdick says:

    Is it true that members of the clergy CANT run for public office anyway? I sure hope so because clergymen have bigger responsabilities :) You need to hurry up and become a deacon!

    • No, clerics cannot seek or hold political office. I believe this is true not so much because they have better things to do, as much as the risk of scandal within the Church. It’s far too public and easy for one man to make an error, and have that reflect on the entire Catholic world, especially if that person were clergy. To illustrate, a deacon is allowed to hold secular employment, but as a deacon he cannot hold political office. Clearly the time is not the issue, so that is my guess as to what the issue really is.

      Can. 285 §3. Clerics are forbidden to assume public offices which entail a participation in the exercise of civil power.

Leave a Reply