ESR | The readers write back

Then write a letter to ESR for publication! Names withheld by request and all letters are subject to editing for length, clarity or language. Letters from anywhere on the political spectrum are welcome and will be printed. Please state whether you wish your name to appear with the email.

web posted November 21, 200

Re: Getting serious about the Supreme Court by W. James Antle III (November 7, 2005)

W. James Antle III responded negatively to Joe Liberty's rational warning about Sam Alito. I believe Joe's concerns are very well founded.

George W. Bush is not a true conservative and NOBOBY he nominates will be one. Why do we keep expecting a fig tree to bear olives?

Alito has already promised he won't let his supposedly conservative views affect how he judges (http://www.breitbart.com/news/2005/11/15/D8DT2F802.html). He won't try to overturn abortion because Roe vs. Wade "deserves great respect" and its supposed right to privacy is "settled law".

Well, big deal. He won't do any more for righteousness than Ruth Bader-Ginsburg. We keep supporting phony wolves in sheep's clothing like this, and then wonder why America keeps sliding toward Sodom.

He has ruled on abortion four times, and NOT ONCE did he take a 100% pro-life position, in fact three of the four he took the pro-abortion side. The stare decisis precedent excuse is a copout to retain an ungodly liberal agenda, even if espoused by a professed conservative.

Somehow abortion BECAME legal, and precedent was ignored. Somehow the Bible and prayer got thrown out of the public arena, and precedent was ignored. Somehow the sodomite agenda has been adopted and precedent was ignored. Somehow gun control was passed and precedent was ignored. How come stare decisis is only applicable to conservative rulings and liberals can violate it at will - without protest even by most conservatives!?!

So after a lifetime of capitulation and going with the flow we're supposed to believe if Alito gets on the Supreme Court he will suddenly grow a backbone and begin swimming upstream? How many times will conservatives smack their heads on the same wall before they realize it will hurt every time?

Alito chaired a task force that recommended the decriminalization of sodomy. He wrote. "The Conference believes that no private sexual act between consenting adults should be forbidden." Are brothers and sisters "consenting adults"? How about fathers and daughters?

Alito supports the "Lemon test" that public displays of religion are only acceptable if combined with something like Santa Claus or Frosty the Snowman.

The only thing that Alito has over Miers is he is a more proficient wolf in sheep's clothing.

Teno Groppi

How disappointing to read your weak defense of Bush Supreme Court nominee Alito through your distortion of Joe Eldred's informative letter to the editor.

Joe knows exactly what he is talking about when citing Alito's abysmal judicial record on abortion, noting that Alito has sided with baby-killers in three out of four cases, and yielded the fourth to pro-lifers only on a judicial "crumb" tossed out by liberal Justice O'Conner (who typically changed her mind when Alito's case later reached the Supreme Court).

It is doubly disappointing to read of your apparent support only for judges that represent the "legal mainstream". That mainstream today has very little to do with Constitutional government and everything to do with humanist, godless legal positivism. Are these your values as well? If so, your readers would be wise to take notice. If you were a lower court judge, would you support "stare decisis" when innocent lives were on the line?

Any honest appraisal of Alito's record in the last decade can lead only to the conclusion that Alito has no personal or professional qualms about the "legality" of abortion-on-demand.

Sincerely,

Barry Kroeker

W. James Antle III responds:

Given the exchange my piece has provoked, maybe conservatives are taking the Supreme Court even more seriously than I thought! Since at least half the justices appointed by Republican presidents have been disappointments and Alito seems to be willing to play politics to be confirmed, the skepticism is understandable.

My main objection to the thrust of these letters is this: the isolated votes my correspondents are highlighting don?t do justice to Alito's full track record, which has generally been constitutionally sound. That doesn't mean he will not disappoint us if confirmed; it doesn't address how precedent would come into play in his abortion jurisprudence. Those are serious concerns. But for conservatives to be taken as seriously as we take the Supreme Court, we ought to be fair enough to carefully evaluate his record in total rather than regurgitate a set of purist talking points.

Re: An idea whose time has come by Bruce Walker (November 14, 2005)

I noticed that you have used the word "Farsi" (instead of "Persian") as English name of our language in your website.

I would like to point out that Farsi (which is originally Parsi) is the native name of our language and Persian is its English equivalent; as the native name of German language is 'Deutsch', but we never use 'Deutsch' in place of 'German' in English; or native term of Greek Language is "Ellinika" and always in English we say 'Greek' language, not 'Ellinika' language. Same to "Espanol" vs. "Spanish".

If you notice the title of dictionaries that have been written by several great Persian scholars (eg. Prof. Moein, Prof. Aryanpour, Prof. Baateni, etc.) The title of all of them is "English-Persian Dictionary" not "English-Farsi Dictionary".

Meanwhile the official institution "Farhangestan; The Academy of Persian Language and Literature, in Tehran" in an announcement has rejected the use of the word 'Farsi' instead of 'Persian' in English.

According to Dr. Hossein Sameie (visiting linguistics professor of Emory University in Atlanta), "Persian, alongside the name of a language, may be used, as an adjective, for the other aspects of our history and culture. For example, we can speak about 'Persian Literature', 'Persian Gulf', 'Persian Carpet', 'Persian Food'; this way, 'Persian' may be a common concept and function as a link between all aspects of Iranian [Persian] life, including language. 'Farsi' does not have such a characteristic"

Best regards,
Pejman Akbarzadeh
Member of Artists without Frontiers (Tehran Chapter)

web posted November 14, 2005

Re: Getting serious about the Supreme Court by W. James Antle III (November 7, 2005)

We should not be satisfied with Alito as an improvement over Roberts, Miers, and Gonzales. Like them, Alito is pro-abortion. In 1997, he joined a decision applying the Supreme Court's 1973 decision in Roe v. Wade, which established a constitutional right to abortion, to uphold a New Jersey law that let parents sue on behalf of deceased children but not deceased unborn children. In 2000, he joined a decision applying Stenberg v. Carhart - another 2000 decision that struck down a Nebraska law that banned a procedure its critics call partial-birth abortion - to a similar New Jersey law. In 1995, he cast the deciding vote in a 2-to-1 decision striking down parts of a Pennsylvania law that restricted abortion. Additionally, as a senior at Princeton University, he chaired an undergraduate task force that recommended the decriminalization of sodomy, and said discrimination against gays in hiring ''should be forbidden.''

Joe

W. James Antle III responds:

It is good to see that my correspondent has done his own research into Judge Alito's record. It would be even better if he actually knew what he is talking about. Nothing he cites proves that Alito is "pro-abortion."

Most legal professionals and almost all federal judges respect vertical stare decisis-the principle that lower courts should be bound by Supreme Court precedent. Almost no judge believes so strongly in horizontal stare decisis that they would reject the Supreme Court's prerogative to revisit its own precedents. It would be my preference and presumably that of my correspondent for lower-court judges to ignore case law that clearly contradicts the constitutional text. But that is a more difficult thing to do in practice than it is in theory, and in any event my correspondent and I appear to be on the losing side of that debate. To exclude lower-court judges who apply Supreme Court precedent from future nominations is to exclude anyone who is in the legal mainstream.

When Alito cast his 1997 and 2000 abortion votes, he was an appellate judge applying Supreme Court precedent. It does not mean he believes Roe, Casey or Stenberg were correctly decided. In fact, he dissented from Casey before it was appealed to the Supreme Court. These votes are no more an indication of how he would vote as a justice than his votes on Princeton student committees, my correspondent's reference to the latter being utterly sophomoric.

There are things for conservatives to watch for in Alito's record-he isn't a sure bet on Roe or anything else-but the idea he isn't better than Miers or Gonzales is laughable.

web posted October 24, 2005

Re: The Marxist confessional: Worldwide psychiatry by Michael Moriarty (October 17, 2005)

Mr. Moriarty was right about one thing in this article. In his statement, "Stockwell Day lived through this same nightmare when he became leader of the Reform Party. His own conservative "friends" eventually undercut his mandate.", he has "hit the nail on the head."

Stockwell Day still has the potential of making a great party leader. He is doing an excellent job in his role as Foreign Affairs Critic.

If only those who are supposed to stand behind their leader would do so we could have leaders of his character and integrity take the helm as they should.

Sincerely,

Don Allan