The current discussion between conservative vs. liberal judges really misses the point. The discussion should really be about the Old Testament vs. The New Testament, a vengeful and punitive God vs. a compassionate and accepting God.
Once Amy Coney Barrett is confirmed and becomes a Supreme Court Justice, religious freedom, in the form of evangelical Christian religious belief, will become the law of the land in much of the country. This is because the separation of church and state will be established on a state-by-state basis.
Just to review, the U.S. Constitution is not very long and not very detail-oriented.
The Constitution lays out a very basic structure of our government. The passage of time and the needs of the people have enriched this basic structure into the complex system that it is today, the influences of bureaucracy and special interests not withstanding.
The U.S. Constitution consists of 7 Articles that lay out the basic structure of our government – the establishment of three branches and the responsibilities of each branch, and discusses the balance between the Federal and State governments.
The U.S. Constitution also includes 27 Amendments that primarily serve to expand upon the rights of the people.
That’s it.
The U.S. Constitution does not specifically address the following:
- The rights of women to control their own reproductive condition;
- The rights of gay, lesbian and transsexual people to be protected from discrimination or prosecution;
- The rights of older workers to be protected from discrimination;
- The rights of workers to unionize and negotiate for a fair wage and safe working conditions;
- The rights of followers of non-Christian religions to have their beliefs acknowledged and respected on an equal basis to Christianity;
- The rights of the economically disadvantaged, the unlucky, and the unfortunate to have any protection from becoming destitute.
- The rights of the people to breathe clean air and drink clean water, and not be poisoned by contaminated soil;
- The rights of the people to protect public lands from being ravaged by industry for profit;
- The rights of the people to have access to affordable health care;
- The rights of the people to establish control over the type and quantity of arms that can be owned by private citizens, or to control when or where arms can be taken or when they can be used;
- The rights of the people to choose their own leaders instead of having the very rich and corporate interests determine who will establish the laws that define our society.
What is going to happen once Amy Coney Barrett is confirmed is that the Supreme Court will favor state’s rights over federal rights in a strict, literal reading of the U.S. Constitution, in accordance with the concept of judicial restraint.
When it comes to questions concerning individual behavior, the beliefs of the evangelical Christian movement will become the law of the land in many states where evangelical Christians exert influence beyond their numbers. The concept of freedom of religion will be used to justify discrimination against anyone who does not believe in, and live in accordance with evangelical Christian dogma.
Unfortunately, evangelical Christians may preach the New Testament teachings of love and acceptance of others, but they follow the Old Testament teachings of vengeance and punishment of any who do not conform.
The Supreme Court majority will righteously feel that they have done their duty in adhering to a literal reading of the U.S. Constitution, and they will accept no responsibility for the further division of our country that they will have caused.
This is what the confirmation of Amy Coney Barrett will mean.
This is why adding seats to the Supreme Court may ultimately be necessary. There has to be a healthy balance between judicial restraint, where laws and acts of the legislative branch are upheld unless obviously unconstitutional, and a more enlightened approach – unfortunately referred to as judicial activism – where laws and acts of the legislative branch must also be judged on the basis of their effect on society, whether or not they are in the best interests of the people.
Some may argue that this is nothing more than legislation from the bench, but is this not simply judgement performed at a higher level, and a recognition that the U.S. has evolved in 230 years in ways that our founding fathers could never have anticipated.?