Show off your holiday lights and you could win an iPad! Enter your photo by December 13. Winner will be selected by popular vote.
Friday, August 16, 2013
My conservative friends will probably want to disown me when I say I agree with Leonard Pitts and his liberal friends (“I, too, am Trayvon Martin,” July 25 commentary).
They are correct when they state that justice was not achieved in the George Zimmerman trial. But they fail to understand that the concern of the courts is not to dispense justice.
It is only to ascertain what the law dictates. According to the law, the jury had no legal recourse but to acquit Zimmerman. But justice was not served. Had Zimmerman not chosen to confront Martin, this young man would still be alive. Not only are the courts not equipped to dispense justice, in many ways they even prohibit the pursuit of justice.
The judge may well have desired to administer some degree of punishment to Zimmerman but was, by law, forbidden to do so.
One of childhood’s earliest exclamations is, “That’s not fair.” Built into our psyche is a desire for fairness. And this desire we have for fairness, and our inability in this life to exercise it or obtain it, is one of the greatest arguments (evidence?) for the existence of an omniscient entity able to dispense fairness (justice). Our unusually wise Founding Fathers understood this and had part of God’s law, the Ten Commandments (largely ignored by present occupants), etched on the wall of the building housing the U.S. Supreme Court.
True justice will continue to elude us as long as we refuse to exercise justice. God has provided a wonderfully safe place for human life to develop. We have, primarily for the convenience of the carrier (mother), invaded this space and snuffed out the precious life sheltered there. The law permits this, but can we, by any stretch of the imagination, claim that justice was done? A few minutes, or even seconds, after birth, it becomes illegal. Even the most fanatical pro-choicers must recognize how ridiculous this is.
And God, in his infinite wisdom, created humans as male and female, emotionally and physically able to enjoy a satisfying and fulfilling life together. And together, mother and father, they provide the optimum environment for raising children.
The preservation of life from conception and the restriction of marriage to the union of one man and one woman are clearly Christian principles. And homosexual activity is described as sinful by Scripture, along with the recognized sins of adultery, lying, stealing, coveting, etc.
We, of course, have the option of ignoring Scripture, or editing it to say what we want it to say to suit our purposes, as many liberal theologians have done. But we cannot jettison these basic Christian principles and call ourselves Christian (the president notwithstanding). The Democratic party has endorsed these anti-Christian activities in spite of paying lip service to God. Does that make “Christian Democrat” an oxymoron?
To call the department administered by Attorney General Eric Holder the Department of Justice is a gross misnomer. It’s only concern is the law, and if justice does occur, it is almost by accident. A more appropriate title would be the Law Department. But even that is a stretch when only the violations of certain laws are pursued.
What is the just punishment for an Ariel Castro and his extended savage treatment of his three captives? We have no laws that come close to punishing him as his actions deserve. And is it just (or even sensible) to spend millions on a trial of Nidal Hasan, whose guilt is not in question?
And the plethora of laws passed by Congress, some of which its members are totally ignorant about, makes a mockery of justice. Finding loopholes has become more important than following the law. Law-abiding is only for the naïve. If we are concerned for the future of our nation, we would do well to heed the words of the prophet Micah, “To act justly and to love mercy and walk humbly.”
Weather JournalEarly mix, then ice storm Sunday