Why Akathleptos?

Why Akathleptos? Because it means Uncontainable. God is infinite. Hence, the whole universe cannot contain Him. The term also refers to the incomprehensibility of God. No man can know everything about God. We can know Him personally but not exhaustively, not even in Heaven.

Why Patmos? Because the church is increasingly marginalized and exiled from the culture.

Why Pen-Names? So the focus is on the words and not who wrote them. We prefer to let what we say stand on its own merit. There is precedent in church history for this - i.e., the elusive identity of Ambrosiaster who wrote in the 4th century A.D.

“Truth is so obscured nowadays, and lies so well established, that unless we love the truth we shall never recognize it." Blaise Pascal

Tuesday, April 25, 2017

Increasingly bizarre judicial pronouncements are the inevitable result of a willful abdication of moral truth

Hadley Arkes penned a brilliantly devastating analysis here of what actually transpired when the United States Supreme Court mandated abortion in 1973 as the law of the land. He makes it astonishingly clear that moral truth was never addressed or even considered by the court dissenting minority. It's the most powerful analysis of Roe v Wade that I've read. (The article is posted on the First Things web site and is accessible to everyone; without a subscription you can access 3 free articles per month.)

Justice Holmes gave voice to the modern legal project when he registered the hope that “every word of moral significance could be banished from the law altogether, and other words adopted which should convey legal ideas uncolored by anything outside the law.” In other words, an understanding of “law” made ever purer by being ever more detached from any moral content.

... What we have had, then, are judges of the left making moral arguments, and instead of showing why those arguments are spurious, the conservatives retreat to the simple report of the positivist that there was no mention of marriage or abortion in the text of the Constitution. The question of marriage offered the most notable and recent example. And yet, these deep flaws in conservative jurisprudence come into sight even more dramatically if we return to that question of abortion, and look back forty years to the briefs and the dissenting opinions that were offered in Roe v. Wade.

... The killing of the child—the gravest concern that had brought forth the law—was now displaced as the main question in the case. The harm done to the fetus was replaced with the harm visited on the people and legislatures in the separate states, as they were barred from “balancing” how much they “valued” the life of a child against the interests and convenience of a pregnant woman.

... This was the familiar response of conservative jurisprudence: to appeal to “tradition” as a way of evading that vexing question of whether the practice in question is morally defensible or indefensible. The claim was that we would find a ground of argument far less contentious, far less open to political quarreling, if we appealed to the historical record, rather than invite an argument over moral truths.

... And yet that was never enough to shake the confidence of conservative judges that the appeal to tradition is valued precisely because it delivers a ground of judgment safely distant from the need to weigh the moral justifications for acts of legislation.


The judicial refusal to address the moral truth of an issue surrenders the most powerful and effective weapon, raising the White Flag before the battle even begins. While other considerations may of course be present when adjudging an issue, moral truth is always paramount and must always have the final say. The refusal to acknowledge, defend and judicially enforce moral truth is the death blow for any culture or civilization. We often hear that the state "cannot legislate morality" ------ Hogwash. Whether we admit it or not, most laws do in fact legislate moral truth. Universal laws against rape, murder, theft, assault, etc. all legislate moral truth.

Increasingly bizarre judicial pronouncements are the inevitable result of a willful abdication of moral truth.

No comments:

Post a Comment