Thursday, November 12, 2009

Still a Liberal and Activist Supreme Court, part 2

Last year, I wrote piece on a Supreme Court ruling that the death penalty is an unconstitutional penalty for the crime of raping a child. Now SCOTUS is considering going even further.

They are now trying to find out where to “draw the line” on life sentences without the possibility of parole. In particular, the question at issue is whether or not a juvenile could be given this sentence and if so at what age. There is a lot at stake as SCOTUS hears Graham v. Florida (08-7412) and Sullivan v. Florida (08-7621).

The eighth amendment states:

Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.

This amendment is the basis for the argument that sentencing juveniles to life in prison without the possibly of parole should not be allowed. Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg thinks that it is hypocritical for the state of Florida to have laws against underage drinking, driving and marrying and at the same time give juveniles such harsh sentences. But according to the Bible:

18 If a man have a stubborn and rebellious son, which will not obey the voice of his father, or the voice of his mother, and that, when they have chastened him, will not hearken unto them: 19 Then shall his father and his mother lay hold on him, and bring him out unto the elders of his city, and unto the gate of his place; 20 And they shall say unto the elders of his city, This our son is stubborn and rebellious, he will not obey our voice; he is a glutton, and a drunkard. 21 And all the men of his city shall stone him with stones, that he die: so shalt thou put evil away from among you; and all Israel shall hear, and fear.

Deuteronomy 21:18-21 (KJV)

Not only is SCOTUS sticking its nose where it doesn’t belong by violating states’ rights, but this also denigrates the Holy Scriptures, our God who wrote it, and further erodes our position as a nation under God. The entire Bible, not just the New Testament, reveals God’s character and sense of justice. Both this current consideration and the previous one regarding the death penalty clearly intimate that God’s choice of punishments is unreasonable, hypocritical and should be held to be unconstitutional. They arrogantly assume that they have the wisdom to determine whether or not someone can be “reformed”. They fail to take into account that it is a person’s soul that is of the utmost importance, and that Our Founding Fathers recognized that the death penalty could sway a lawbreaker to repentance.

When I wrote part 1, seven out of nine Supreme Court Justices were appointed by Republican Presidents. Now it is six out of nine.

To read more about these pending cases, click here.

No comments:

Post a Comment