Recently I learned that every member of the Supreme Court save one graduated either Harvard or Yale. This means that the categories of “left” vs. “right” is nonsense. There are no judges sitting on the Supreme Court that are “on the right.” Instead the way this should be understood as is some Supreme Court justices who sit on the “left side of the left spectrum” vs. some Supreme Court justices that sit on the “right side of the left spectrum.” All of these idiots have been trained into basic pagan judiciary principles. The disagreements between someone like Scalia and Kennedy and Sotomayor are the kind of disagreements that would have existed between Stalin, Trotsky and Antonio Gramsci. The differences of conviction between a Thomas and a Ruth Bader Ginsburg and a Souter are the kind of disagreements that existed between the Montagnards vs. the Girondists.
All this is to say that I wonder sometimes how exercised we should get over whoever sits on the Supreme Court since they are all being manufactured by the same pagan legal training. Sure, there may be some that are less objectionable then others but in the end all of them are operating out of the same basic World and life view.
What is ironic is that we bleat and cry about diversity but all of our justices are trained in the same basic mold. Getting all of our Justices from ivy league schools and insisting that we must have diversity is like eating nothing but potatoes yet insisting we are getting a diverse diet if we have some potatoes baked, some boiled, some fried, some scalloped, some grilled, some as chips, some in potato salad, some broiled and some in potato soup. In the end it is potatoes for every meal. And in the end we are getting absolutely no diversity on the Supreme Court when all of these people are educated in the same ivy league schools.
Our real problem on this score is our ivy league institutions of “higher learning.” When is the last time that a Christian view of Law and jurisprudence was taught at an ivy league school? As long as we keep pulling rubes from Harvard and Yale to sit on the Supreme Court we are going to get sociological legal positivism of some sort for legal policy.
Some will miss the point and insist that I am being anti-intellectual. Not true. I am anti pagan trained intellectualism. The large Universities are anti-Christian to the core. The large Universities train people to think autonomously. All I’m asking for is for Christians to realize that if you train a jurist in a pagan legal educational model then what you’re going to get is a pagan Judge. The kind of judicial appointees that Christians should advocate for (if such men exist) are appointees who have been trained to begin and end their thinking with the God of the Bible.
Christians must begin to realize how radical their agenda is. We keep trying to save the day by rallying around men who have been trained to think like pagans at our flagship educational institutions. If it means building new Harvards and new Yales in order to produce men that don’t think like pagans then we should get on with that chore.
If it means building new Harvards and new Yales in order to produce men that don’t think like pagans then we should get on with that chore.
I agree with the call to get on with the task of training Christian lawyers/judges. In the meantime, I can still get behind even a pagan justice who “borrows” from a Christian worldview more consistently than another.
It would be difficult to choose between Gramsci, Trotsky, and Stalin, but I suppose if one were forced to choose …
The Wall Street Journal gets at the same point by a slightly different route.
http://online.wsj.com/article_email/SB124425367341590989-lMyQjAxMDI5NDA0NzIwNTczWj.html