 |
 |
 |
|||
Legal
|
Justice And BeliefsJustice: Based On Laws - Not BeliefsJustice must spring from laws not religious or non-religious beliefs. Justice must conform to a codified set or rules, regulations, and laws that serve everyone, regardless of their belief structure. It is for this reason that the beliefs of judges must be called into question. We must understand what a judge believes and which religion, if any, he or she practices. We must also know which comes first in that judge's life, his or her religion or the Constitution and the laws they must swear to uphold and enforce. Judges, especially those selected for our Federal court system and especially any one, judge or not, selected for the Supreme Court, should be asked and if possible verified that their personal beliefs will not interfere with their interpretation of our Constitution and our existing body of laws. It doesn’t matter what a judge believes unless those beliefs contradict our Constitution and our established laws. If these beliefs, religious or otherwise, prevent that person from handing down a death sentence, that person must not be allowed to participate in any trial or ruling where a death sentence is a legal possibility. If that person’s religious beliefs prevent abortions, then he or she should be asked if their beliefs come before the Constitution. Yes, a person’s beliefs and experiences will effect how he or she interprets a law or a ruling but if a Church ruling takes precedence over our Constitution and laws that should and must be known by those responsible for appointing that judge. The beliefs of a judge are important because if those beliefs are contrary to our established laws, can that judge rule impartially on any case that conflicts with his or her religious or moral beliefs? Justice cannot be defined by any one set of religious beliefs. However, the more organized the religion the more we can know about how a member of that religion will be prone to rule. This is why any judge must place the Constitution and our body of laws above their church and their individual beliefs. The Constitution and the law should be more important to a judge than any church, sect, or creed. The dispensation of justice cannot be and must not be based on any one religion, sect, or creed. Laws cannot be based on any one religious text. Why? Because if the religious beliefs of that country or group should change over time the laws must change to allow for the time and the technology. If clergy and not (we hope) impartial judges interpret the laws, then the laws will depend on the clergy’s willingness to change, which may mean the possibility of the clergy loosing power. There are enough problems with the concept of controlling judges without bringing those who claim to speak for their deity into the mix. Justice must be based on the laws of the land not on the convictions of the presiding judge or clergy. Laws should be argued and debated before being enacted and it is extremely difficult to debate with a deity that is reported to have spoken thousands of years ago but there is no recent record of that deity directly adjusting his or her laws to conform to changing times and technology. Democracy cannot exist if controlled or dictated by any one religion. Religion by its very nature does not promote democracy but promotes the rule of the few and the few are determined by the powerful in that religion. Author: Don Miller
|
2005 Articles |
|||