September 2009 Archives

Jay, a few thoughts:

The Ten Commandments, as you and Judge DeWeese seem to believe, don't represent an "absolute," any more than the allegedly "relativist" proposals which seem to upset you. It's impossible to claim the Ten Commandments aren't open to interpretation.

For example, would there be an exception to "Thou shall not kill," for those who do so in self defense? What about "Thou shalt not commit adultery?"  Should we give it the Twenty-First Century meaning, or revert to its original meaning: sex with a married woman (single women OK) or by a married woman? Our mutual friend Alan Dershowitz has done some wonderful writing about this over the years.

What the Ten Commandments does is provide us with a generalized sense of right or wrong . But there are many different versions and interpretations of the Decalogue. It's just as morally "absolute" or "relative" as the Humanist Manifesto.

Barry, I want to offer my congratulations to you and your family.  I'm sure your son's wedding was, indeed, a great celebration.

 

I want to take a moment to discuss a topic you and I have debated from time to time - the constitutional role of displaying the Ten Commandments.   As you know, ABC News is focusing on the Ten Commandments - an issue that always seems to be in the legal spotlight thanks to you and your colleagues.  Case in point:  Ohio - where we represent Judge James DeWeese of Richland County, Ohio who has been sued repeatedly by the ACLU - this time for a poster he placed in his courtroom called "Philosophies of Law in Conflict."

 

The poster is divided into two sections.  The first is titled "Moral Absolutes," the second "Moral Relatives."  To illustrate the meaning of these two clashing moral concepts, Judge DeWeese quotes texts which support each one: for moral absolutes, the Ten Commandments; for moral relativism, the Humanist Manifestos and other sources.

Sadly, I had to miss this year's edition of the Religious Right's "family values" festival -- the Values Voters Summit here in Washington.  I was engaging in my own celebration of family values by participating in my son's wedding out in California.  Now that was a great event.

I've been reading many accounts of the Summit and saw a bit of it on C-SPAN.  Last year, the big news was that "pro-family" Sarah Palin had just been nominated as the Republican vice presidential candidate.  She didn't show up then, but she was busy campaigning elsewhere.  Palin didn't show up this year either, but unless she doesn't realize the election is over, she must have decided that she had better places to be even now.  

However, not to forego the Right's newly found feminism, two of this year's most awaited speakers were women.  De-crowned Miss California-USA Carrie Prejean showed up to explain how her whole beauty pageant history was some kind of divine plan.  Apparently, God got in touch with blogger Perez Hilton to convince him to ask her the same-sex marriage question that she claims lost her the Miss USA title. Not to worry, though. She noted she will be getting a "bigger crown" later, presumably in heaven.

The bill  introduced to reform health care by Senator Max Baucus (D-MT) has splintered the Democrats and so far has no support among Republicans.  As reported earlier, Senators Grassley and Enzi, in fact, have expressed concerns about the abortion provisions. 

 

Based on our initial reading, we too have concerns with the abortion provisions in this bill.

 

First, with regards to a minimum benefits package, p. 25 of the bill states that abortion "cannot be a mandated benefit as part of a minimum benefits package except in those cases for which Federal funds appropriated for the Department of Health and Human Services are permitted."  We are concerned that, if the Hyde Amendment is scrapped by the pro-abortion Congress, then abortion on demand could be mandated as a minimum benefit.  Since 1976, the Hyde Amendment has been added each year to the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) appropriations bill.  The amendment prevents federal funding of abortion, except in limited circumstances.  However, Congress could, at some point, fail to add the Hyde Amendment to the HHS appropriations bill, thus eliminating its protections.

Barry, even as another health care plan is being introduced into Congress, there's a continuing - and a very real - concern about the issue of abortion.

Senators Michael Enzi of Wyoming and Charles Grassley of Iowa have expressed their concern to Senate Finance Committee Chairman Max Baucus who is offering his own health care measure.  Senators Enzi and Grassley are correctly concerned about the lack of language in the bill.

According to the New York Times report:

Mr. Enzi and Mr. Grassley also told Mr. Baucus that health legislation must include language affirmatively prohibiting the use of federal money to pay for abortion. The restriction, they said, should apply to any subsidies that help low-income people buy insurance. In addition, they said, health plans should not be obliged to provide abortion. Thus, they said, the bill should "include a conscience clause to protect entities from being required to contract with abortion providers."

On Thursday, I blogged defending the position that the current version of the health care reform bill moving through the House does not cover abortion. I've tried to respond to some of the posted responses already.I'd also like to point...

I don't know which polls you are looking at, but it appears that there was a double digit growth in support of the President's basic approach after he spoke to the joint session of Congress.  He also told the truth...

Barry, unfortunately President Obama squandered a prime-time audience and a Congressional address to do very little to move the ball forward regarding efforts to reform our health care system.    President Obama is losing support with the American people on...

Barry, there's been an important development in the long-standing legal battle to protect the rights of pro-life pharmacists in Illinois.   The circuit court sitting in Springfield, Ill. has issued a preliminary injunction in the case of two pharmacy owners,...

I should begin by noting that I hate beauty pageants. Judging women, in whole or in large part, by appearances is a sexist and anachronistic affront to an entire gender. I must admit, however, that the latest wrinkle in the...