A Moment of Truth
When sifting and sorting through the vagaries of human potential, our limitations, and our conduct under life’s circumstances, there are no perfect choices. We are all imperfect beings in an unpredictable world. Still, we can know excellence when we see it, we can sense honesty when we hear it, and our intuition about goodness is hard to deceive. In making such choices there are those who fall by the wayside, others that wobble, and still others that rise to the top. Merrick Garland is a candidate for the Supreme Court who rises to the top. His academic record, his judicial life, and his personal history up to his 63 years speak well for him. We can only ask what his life on the bench might portend for us and for the nation in the years ahead.
We do not ask Supreme Court justices to be perfect brings or to make perfect decisions. We ask only that they make choices that are consistent with our values, our history, and the law. Each of those avenues is also subject to imperfections. We rarely ask anyone to be a visionary, but that is precisely where our sights should be set when deciding who can fulfill his or her responsibilities on our highest court.
It is too easy, too self-serving, and too dishonest to seek a candidate who will follow a political agenda—our own political agenda—after taking a seat on this court. To pursue such a course of action is break faith with our heritage, with our needs, and with our collective sense of justice.
History can be thought of in just a few short moments. They are propitious moments when we know our choices can mean something important; moments when we can sense that all who went before us are watching; moments when the cosmic scales of justice have taken center stage. It is a moment when we can send a message to the world not so much about who we are, or what we are, but what we believe about ourselves and our potential. It is a moment of truth.
Truth has no agenda. Truth is simple. Truth is justice. Do we have the courage to face the truth and welcome it into our future? That is our choice today. This is our moment.
Love ya!
Jane
My senator, John Cornyn of Texas, sent me a tricky survey yesterday that really disgusted me. It asked only two questions: Yes, the people should have a say in the selection of a Supreme Court justice and, No, the people should have no say.
For those of us who have interest in who gets selected, we would choose, Yes. It would seem that we would give up our right as citizens to get involved by saying No. Unfortunately there was no follow-up survey questions related to our selection.
The deception is that now Sen. John Cornyn is gathering, Yeses, to be able to go ahead and do what he wishes (stall the hearing process) because his reelection by a vast majority (his people) apparently gives him a mandate to speak, "for the people." I have sent him a message, but I think I will call his office today and reiterate that he should not send out deceptive surveys without allowing us to speak our minds about why we chose Yes or No.
Ron