Thursday, October 13, 2005
Hewitt vs. Neuhaus
We all know that Hugh Hewitt has smugly and firmly planted his feet in the shoes of loyalist hack for the White House. Just the other day, he was predicting not only confirmation for Miers, but conservative conversion for her. He was just as smug and certain about this as he was about finding WMDs in Iraq.
Then there is Fr. Neuhas' take on the issue in First Things:
I'm glad to see the Wall Street Journal weighing in, from an angle more sensible than that of the Interfaith Alliance, on the use of religion in promoting the nomination of Harriet Miers to the Supreme Court. A similar ploy was used when Justice Anthony Kennedy was nominated. Senator Jesse Helms said to Kennedy, "I think you know where I stand on abortion." Kennedy responded, "Indeed I do and I admire it. I am a practicing Catholic." We know what that means—or doesn't mean. Once he was on the court, Kennedy helped entrench the unlimited abortion license in the Casey decision of 1992, and has since "grown," as they say in Washington, in sundry other liberal directions. It is very good to know that Ms. Miers is born again, but that doesn't tell us a whole lot about her views on the legal protection of the unborn. As Dr. Timothy George, dean of Beeson Divinity School, a Baptist institution, will remind us when he delivers FIRST THINGS annual Erasmus Lecture next week, the Southern Baptist Convention was still supporting Roe v. Wade as late as 1980, and many evangelicals have still not been converted to the pro-life position. It seems Ms. Miers is definitely pro-life, but that doesn't tell us how she would read the law with respect to abortion. As I said earlier, I expect Ms. Miers will not withdraw (and) her nomination will likely be confirmed by the Senate, and, if she turns out to be a constitutional textualist along the lines of Scalia and Thomas, the present row will soon be forgotten, with only wounded conservative egos to show for it. On the other hand, if...
I will go with the good Father on this one who, as a convert to Catholicism, has a better understanding of what is at stake than the one has turned from the complete Truth.
Then there is Fr. Neuhas' take on the issue in First Things:
I'm glad to see the Wall Street Journal weighing in, from an angle more sensible than that of the Interfaith Alliance, on the use of religion in promoting the nomination of Harriet Miers to the Supreme Court. A similar ploy was used when Justice Anthony Kennedy was nominated. Senator Jesse Helms said to Kennedy, "I think you know where I stand on abortion." Kennedy responded, "Indeed I do and I admire it. I am a practicing Catholic." We know what that means—or doesn't mean. Once he was on the court, Kennedy helped entrench the unlimited abortion license in the Casey decision of 1992, and has since "grown," as they say in Washington, in sundry other liberal directions. It is very good to know that Ms. Miers is born again, but that doesn't tell us a whole lot about her views on the legal protection of the unborn. As Dr. Timothy George, dean of Beeson Divinity School, a Baptist institution, will remind us when he delivers FIRST THINGS annual Erasmus Lecture next week, the Southern Baptist Convention was still supporting Roe v. Wade as late as 1980, and many evangelicals have still not been converted to the pro-life position. It seems Ms. Miers is definitely pro-life, but that doesn't tell us how she would read the law with respect to abortion. As I said earlier, I expect Ms. Miers will not withdraw (and) her nomination will likely be confirmed by the Senate, and, if she turns out to be a constitutional textualist along the lines of Scalia and Thomas, the present row will soon be forgotten, with only wounded conservative egos to show for it. On the other hand, if...
I will go with the good Father on this one who, as a convert to Catholicism, has a better understanding of what is at stake than the one has turned from the complete Truth.
