To measure the climate of justice in Alabama
doth require a clairvoyant—because of the Chief Justice.
He’s quoted in this morning’s Birmingham News regarding
the recent Supreme ruling on who has right of “marriage.“
Best I can tell from what Moore tells the interviewer, not
a word he says is untrue, much less nonsense, as some say.
He says he does not dispute that the Highest court ruling
is precedent for all courts lower, only he believes
it is not in accord with the Constitution. Nothing
untrue there . . . the Chief Judge is quite consistent with himself . . .
and four Supremes, as well as many U.S. citizens.
“In the Dred Scott case . . . the Supreme Court ruled that blacks were property . . . .
Were they right? Of course not.” And so he concludes, they are not right now.
Thus the interview goes, with various twists and turns that
only go to show one thing, a tango of one ego.
A brilliant flight of fancy doth come when our Mister Moore
likens to Nuremberg his belief on same-sex marriage.
When asked if he expected state officials to obey the law of the land, he says:
“Could I do this if I were in Nuremberg . . . say that I
was following orders of the highest authority
to kill Jews?” When reminded that the trial was about those
following orders to kill human beings, he but asks,“Is there a difference?”
So the one thing detractors can say of Roy Moore is that
he seems unable to tell a difference between his
tale and a hole in the ground. Yet that’s considerable,
considering the law is not confined to Judge Moore’s head.
He, and every official so involved, will follow law
or soon be without their jobs. There’s precedent for that, too.
No comments:
Post a Comment