Phyllis Schlafly’s Eagle Forum has a sample resolution for use, presumably by city councils and state legislatures, that is little more than a list of religious right talking points about the evils of an independent judiciary. Before the resolution begins, they rant a bit:
The last time I read the U.S. Constitution (which was quite recently), the document still began with the words, “We, the People of the United States . . . .” If this declaration means anything today, it means that the American people have a right to know — necessity of knowing — the basic philosophical and constitutional positions of their leaders — before those leaders are chosen. It also means that we have the right — and necessity — of exercising oversight of our leaders on an ongoing basis.
This is true even, or especially, with appointed federal judges. Reconstructionist (i.e., “activist/liberal”) judges are leading the assault on America’s Judeo-Christian foundations in our nation’s Culture War. (This “Culture War” is a climactic battle between the Judeo-Christian and Humanistic worldviews.) Indeed, these Reconstructionist federal judges (particularly U. S. Supreme Court Justices) have changed the nature of the courts, the Constitution, and the culture in this War.
Very annoying that they use the term “reconstructionist” in this manner; that term has an accepted use, identifying those hardcore Calvinists who want the Old Testament law installed as the civil and criminal law of the land. But on the substance, they miss what the right wing always misses about the judiciary — it was designed explicitly and intentionally not to be beholden to “we the people.” Those Founding Fathers that they claim to support so much did that on purpose and explained exactly why they did it that way. Much like the Bible, the religious right claims to believe in it without having actually read it.
Here’s the resolution:
WHEREAS, the Constitution of the United States is, and must be, the Supreme Law of the Land, superior to all court decisions;
WHEREAS, the Constitution must be interpreted in the light of its text, constitutional tradition, and its Judeo-Christian foundation;WHEREAS, the Constitution contains nothing that requires a “wall of separation between church and state”;
WHEREAS, a total separation of religion and law/government is impossible;
WHEREAS, the Framers of the Constitution did not intend that a total separation be attempted;
WHEREAS, the English Common Law in which American law is rooted was Christianized;
WHEREAS, the U.S. Supreme Court does not require a total separation between “church and state”;
WHEREAS, Reconstructionist (activist/liberal) federal judges have blatantly assaulted these fundamental Constitutional principles and have re-written them under the guise of interpreting them;
AND WHEREAS, We, the people, still possess the ultimate human political power in this nation and have delegated to the President and Congress in the Constitution very broad powers to establish and empower national courts;
BE IT RESOLVED THAT ________ actively supports
- the Congressional denial of jurisdiction to courts to hear challenges to either the verbal or non-verbal acknowledgement of God — i.e., “God” meaning the Deity central to the Ten Commandments – on public property and in official utterances such as (but not limited to) the Pledge of Allegiance and national motto.
- Congressional refusal to recognize, fund, or otherwise enforce court decisions that prohibit either the verbal or non-verbal acknowledgement of God — i.e., “God” meaning the Deity central to the Ten Commandments — on public property and in official utterances such as (but not limited to) the Pledge of Allegiance and national motto.
It’s nice that they admit that phrases like “under God” and “In God We Trust” are referring to the “Deity central to the Ten Commandments.” That really should end all that “ceremonial deism” nonsense by which the courts, perhaps ironically given the context, have continued to uphold such things. I wish the courts really were half as good on these issues as the wingnuts think they are.