Constitutional "Reform" a Wolf in Sheep's Clothing

Constitutional "Reform" a Wolf in Sheep's Clothing: "Constitutional 'Reform' a Wolf in Sheep's Clothing
Want to live in a neo-Christian theocracy? If your elected officials have their say, you may just get your wish.
By Matt Hutaff Oct 25, 2004

I have no problem with faith. In fact, I find it inspiring when people can dedicate their life so completely to a belief or an intangible. After all, when such dedication reaps a dividend of compassion, tolerance and understanding, we all win. However, as we've seen of late, faith seems to be more of a crutch for hatred, misunderstanding and a fundamental lack of awareness of the origins of said beliefs.

But you know what? As much as it pains me to admit, people are entitled to live in the dark, and there isn't a law on the books that says someone can't be a miserable hypocrite. Some people just don't want their eyes opened, and as long as their misguided beliefs don't intrude with mine, I have no quarrel with them.

But as you saw with last week's microcosm of ignorance, I do have issues with those who would choose to force their morality on another, particularly when the onus of debate isn't even correct. There are hundreds of different faiths co-existing (sometimes tenuously) in the United States of America; what makes one any better than the other? As far as the federal government should be concerned, nothing.

All of this could change this year, though. A bill that has been quietly brewing in the minds of the religious right for the better part of two decades has made it to the floor of both the House and the Senate. If passed into law, America is one Pentagon Prayer Meeting from a theocracy.

The bill is the Constitutional Reform Act of 2004 (H.R. 3799 and S 2082). Supported by the likes of Senator Sam Brownback and disgraced Justice Roy Moore (the wingnuts who are trying to shut down Howard Stern and position the Ten Commandments in federal courthouses, respectively), it takes its cues from Article III, Section 1 of the Constitution by empowering Congress to decide what cases the Supreme Court can and cannot hear.

Sounds fairly innocuous, right? Wrong. Read on:

'Notwithstanding any other provision of this chapter,' it reads, 'the Supreme Court shall not have jurisdiction to review ... any matter to the extent that relief is sought against an element of Federal, State, or local government, or against an officer of Federal, State, or local government (whether or not acting in official personal capacity), by reason of that element's or officer's acknowledgment of God as the sovereign source of law, liberty, or government.' (emphasis mine)"


Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home