I hate to tell tell Kevin Drum, but a belief in natural law is hardly all that radical.
Certainly it isn’t a reason to join Harry Reid in proclaiming Clarence Thomas to be an embarassment.
I would note that the very fount of classical liberalism, John Locke, adhered to the concept of natural law. Indeed, said list is quite long and regardless of what Drum’s commenters may think, the issue isn’t one of imposing religion on people.
Indeed, regardless of one’s position on God, the statement that “all men are created equal and endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness” is a direct statement of natural law which really does not require any particular theistic view of the universe to accept: the bottom line is that human beings have rights because of their very existence, not because the state grants them. Now granted, natural law scares the diehard atheist who doesn’t wish to acknowledge the possibility of a higher moral authority than the mind of man. Indeed, this is the man trouble with a wholly secular view of morality: it is simple something that someone thought up. If there are no natural laws, then really there is no morality save what we say it is.
If we utterly reject the natural law foundation of our constitution just because it suggest some icky connection to something that might have something to do with God or something, then we vitiate our own rights and define them not as our birthright, but as a gift from the state. And as we all know: if the state giveth, the state can taketh away.
You wouldn’t have these problems if you would just stop reading reading Kevin Drum. I have told told you this many many times before.
Aren’t you listening?
Comment by John Lemon — Sunday, December 12, 2024 @ 7:58 pm
In fact I was wondering how long it would take for you to admonish me on this point yet again.
I must confess: record time!
Comment by Steven Taylor — Sunday, December 12, 2024 @ 8:01 pm
That’s my job - to break records.
And remember, Santa is watching you.
He knows what you’ve been reading.
Comment by John Lemon — Sunday, December 12, 2024 @ 8:03 pm
And yet, somehow, Kevin Drum is considered a major fount of wisdom by the left. Go figure.
Comment by bryan — Sunday, December 12, 2024 @ 8:05 pm
As are:
Eleanor Clift
Michael Moore
Maureen Dowd
Al Franken
Janine Garofolapogous
and …
Sean Penn.
(P.S. Don’t tell them that these folks ain’t all that smart. It will help us in two and four years.)
Comment by John Lemon — Sunday, December 12, 2024 @ 8:07 pm
Locke out
Steven Taylor attempts to remind Kevin Drum that a belief in natural rights, such as that of Clarence Thomas, is hardly a right-wing radical (or reactionary?) notion; indeed, it was a bedrock principle that this nation was founded on, explicitly…
Trackback by Signifying Nothing — Sunday, December 12, 2024 @ 8:25 pm
You’re absolutely right that a believe in natural law isn’t radical - it’s regressive. Much has happened in the world of political philosophy since John Locke. And a serious question: if it’s ok for Supreme Court justices to be looking to God for guidance, what would happen if a Jewish or Muslim majority were ever appointed to the court?
Comment by Lance McCord — Sunday, December 12, 2024 @ 8:35 pm
Well, Lance…
If a Muslim majority was appointed to the Supreme Court, they probably would lop off lots of heads.
And you are right to note that lots has happened in philosophy since the English/Scottish Englightenment, such as existentialism, nihilism, Marxism, the Da-Da art movement, and post-modernism. And since we are reminded that truth is all subjective, I guess that proves you’re wrong. Ha! Put that in your deconstructionist pipe and smoke it (but not in a public building since they are smoke free now).
Comment by John Lemon — Sunday, December 12, 2024 @ 8:39 pm
And I forgot to mention Bozoism, the philosophical thought of Bozo the Clown.
Comment by John Lemon — Sunday, December 12, 2024 @ 8:39 pm
As my wife would say, “I’m sick and tired of explaining you away at parties. From now on, if we ever have guests over, I am telling them that you died in a blimp accident and am banishing you to the crawlspace.”
Comment by John Lemon — Sunday, December 12, 2024 @ 8:40 pm
And if a Jewish majority were appointed to the Supreme Court, they would lop off lots of … well, let’s just leave that to the immagination.
In any event, I have no problem with a Christian or Jewish majority on the SCOTUS as they are relatively sedate religions nowadays. Islam has to get beyond that whole “sharia” thingy and recognize that natural law philosophy of the Scottish Enlightenment can coexist with religion in a pretty mellow way.
Whoa, that Cable-Safe ad looks really cool!
Comment by John Lemon — Sunday, December 12, 2024 @ 8:44 pm
Well, I’ve just determined that Lance needs a philosophy class. Apparently, by his own admission on his blog, he skipped lots of classtime at college to play guitar on a bench.
I bet these are Steven’s favorite students — the 4.0 high school students who know so much that they don’t have to attend college classes. Enlightenment comes through a cheap 6 string and a Phish CD.
But then again, there really isn’t much to learn in college anymore.
Comment by John Lemon — Sunday, December 12, 2024 @ 8:54 pm
Lance:
“Natural law” does not equal “looking to God for guidance”.
Hence the need for the philosophy class
And, I would not, there have been persons of Jewish persuasion on the Court. The issue here isn’t relgious, per se.
And if we ever get a Muslim on the Court decidated to Sharia, I would guess that that would mean a rather radical transformation in the US would already have taken place, no?
Comment by Steven Taylor — Sunday, December 12, 2024 @ 9:22 pm
Hey, isn’t this the Lance guy who owns that airforce base?
Or maybe he is a corporal.
Whichever, he needs to attend class a wee bit more.
And by the way, when you send out your Christmas cards, please do not send me one with your kids pictures on it. I am so sick of those type of cards. I really don’t care what anybody else’s kids look like.
Comment by John Lemon — Sunday, December 12, 2024 @ 9:42 pm
But aren’t non-secular views of morality–and the natural law philosophy–things that man made up, as well? Surely, revealed truths aren’t the only basis establishing the principle of the consent of the governed.
Comment by Alexander the Grate — Monday, December 13, 2024 @ 4:41 pm