Moral Contradictions

Wednesday, July 13, 2005

Jay Sekulow hates America

Okay, that might be a bit strong, yet an email to his services makes it seem that way. (Jay Sekulow is pictured standing to the right of Randall Terry, lover of intolerance and advocate of killing abortion doctors).

Titled "Encourage President Bush: Consensus means Compromise!" Sekulow, Chief Counsel at Pat Robertson's American Center for Law & Justice (ACLJ), has some harsh words for the upcoming Supreme Court nomination.

Here's the email:

It is the moment we have been waiting for - the most significant crossroads in Supreme Court history.

With the resignation of Justice Sandra Day O'Connor - President Bush has an historic opportunity to leave a lasting legacy on the Supreme Court of the United States ...

... and on your rights and freedoms as guaranteed by our United States Constitution.

And it is for moments like this that the ACLJ exists ... to help you make your voice heard - opposing the views of left-wing organizations like the ACLU and People For the American Way. To protect men and women of faith in America. To present your views in a manner that will have a lasting impact for you and your family.

So today, we invite you to join us in our nationwide campaign to encourage President Bush as he makes this most important decision in the days to come ... and to ask him to stand his ground ... by signing our Petition to the President for NO CONSENSUS.

He has promised a strong, conservative candidate.

One who values life, liberty, and freedom.

One who will not legislate from the bench to suit his or her own politically or personally-motivated agenda.

One who will respect and uphold our Constitution as written.

And that is what we expect him to deliver.

Our President must stand strong against the political maneuvering of activist groups like People For the American Way, the ACLU, and other organizations. He must reject the call for a "consensus" candidate.

(On its face, the idea of consulting various members of Congress to find an appointment whom all will agree on before the final vote sounds like the "American ideal" ... however, our Constitution gives the President authority to choose whomever he thinks will best fill the position. Congress is then entitled to vote "yes" or "no.")

In this case, "consensus" would mean compromise.

And we cannot stand for that!... [the email finishes with a plea to sign a petition].

(bold emphasis mine)


Folks, we can debate all we want to about our Founding Father's intent, but one thing is clear: The Constitution was born out of compromise. Without both sides giving up something dear, progress is halted and all sides lose. I am amazed that the ACLJ had the gall to send something like this even after President Bush's rebuke to special interests gearing up for a fight.

Folks like the ACLJ believe their time has come, other folks be damned. Groups on the left and right believe that they and only they are right and are not willing to have a dialogue or even consider forming a consensus with others, no matter how much else they may have in common.

I'm particulary intrigued by the continued call for "One who will not legislate from the bench to suit his or her own politically or personally-motivated agenda." Does that just mean they won't pursue an agenda with which they agree? If the nominee has an agenda of "Reclaiming America" will the ACLJ condemn him or her?

Furthermore, I am a "man of faith" but the ACLJ does not represent me. I know I'm not alone in this group. How dare they pervert the entire title of "men and women of faith" to further their non-compromising, un-forgiving, and un-American agenda.

I ask, how do these words and actions serve to further God's will and win people to the Lord?

0 Comments:

Post a Comment

<< Home