Mirror of Justice

A blog dedicated to the development of Catholic legal theory.
Affiliated with the Program on Church, State & Society at Notre Dame Law School.

Sunday, December 24, 2006

Conservatives and prison reform

An interesting read, in the New York Times Magazine, about the right's "jailhouse conversion" on a number of criminal-justice and prison-reform issues, including the "Second Chance Act."  I was struck by this passage:

Over the past decade, as the political scientists William Galston and Elaine Kamarck have suggested, the culture war of the 1970s and 1980s that revolved around race has been replaced by one that revolves around religion. A side effect has been a radically different crime debate. If the Second Chance Act fails to pass, it will not be because the two parties cannot agree on the importance of rehabilitation programs in prisons. But it may be because they disagree on the role religious organizations should play in rehabilitation. . . .

By passing the Second Chance Act, Democrats can acknowledge that the Christian desire to improve the lives of prisoners is more than a mere proxy for evangelism. And in doing so, they can re-embrace a cause of their own: the creation of a criminal-justice system that is more humane and more just. The current moment is, in Michael Jacobson’s view, “the best opportunity of the last 25 years for altering the way in which the United States has used incarceration.” But if that moment is to be seized, if there’s any possibility to reform a prison system that almost everyone thinks has failed, both parties are going to have to rely, at least a little bit, on faith.

Also this, regarding Sen. Sam Brownback:

There are few, if any, senators more closely identified with the Christian conservative movement than Sam Brownback. Like a growing number of conservatives, Brownback is a political proponent of the so-called new-evangelical causes, which range from AIDS in Africa and slavery in Sudan to poverty and the Prison Rape Elimination Act, a bill that helped build the coalition of Democrats and Republicans in the re-entry movement. Even when he disagrees with his fellow religious conservatives, he gives faith-based reasons for doing so. A convert to Catholicism, he has said his religion informs his support for a less punitive approach to immigration reform. In February, he held a hearing intended to foster debate on whether the death penalty can be reconciled with Pope John Paul II’s call to create “a culture of life.”

Brownback also routinely mentions prison reform — especially the faith-based variety — in public speeches.

Friday, December 22, 2006

"Left Behind" video games

Hmmmm.  I am starting to think it was good that I stopped playing video games in the "Asteroids" and "Galaga" days . . .

"Humane" legislating

On December 6, the House of Representatives voted on the Unborn Child Pain Awareness Act, which would have required abortion facilities to inform women considering abortion after 20 weeks of pregnancy that the abortion will likely cause her unborn child intense pain.  It would also required abortionists to offer mothers a chance to give their babies anesthesia before the abortion.  It would not have outlawed a single abortion.  It would seem, then, the kind of non-prohibitory, educational, conscience-raising measure that, it is often suggested by pro-lifers on the political left, pro-life people can and should support.

While 210 of 219 Republicans (96 percent) voted for the Act, just 40 of 192 Democrats (21 percent) did likewise.

Daniel Allott notes:

Even worse, of the 6 Democratic congressmen recently recognized by the Humane Society as "The Best of the Best" (meaning they received a perfect voting score and sponsored animal protection legislation), not one voted for the UCPAA. Conversely, four out of the five Republican Representatives at the top of the Humane Society's list also voted for the UCPAA, including the legislation's primary sponsor, New Jersey Representative Chris Smith.

Here's hoping for better things from the next Congress.

Finnis on Thomas More, conscience, and morals

This essay, "Thomas More and Today's Crisis in Faith and Morals," by my colleague John Finnis, is, I think, a must-read.  It is relevant and responsive to many of the discussions and debates we've had here on MOJ over the years.  (It's hard to believe that we can now refer to things we've been doing on MOJ "over the years"!).

Sarat on "botched" executions

Death-penalty expert Austin Sarat has this FindLaw column, "When Executions Go Wrong: A Horribly Botched Florida Killing Adds Strong Impetus to a National Reconsideration of Capital Punishment," on the recent Diaz execution.  I'm not sure I agree that focusing on the method-of-execution debate the wrongful-conviction problem -- although very, very important -- is a good abolition strategy.  There will always be plenty of capital murderers whose factual guilt is unquestioned and unquestionable, and -- it seems to me -- it is also always possible for death-penalty supporters, legislators, and prison administrators to devise new execution protocols and methods.  Maybe it's just because I have an unhealthy attraction to abstract moral arguments, but it seems to me that the question, at the end of the day, remains, "do some murderers deserve the death penalty and, if so, may our governments administer that penalty?"   

Monday, December 18, 2006

Amen!

"Make School Choice a Factor in 2008," writes Edwin Fuelner:

. . . If politicians really want to improve lives, they'll expand -- not shut down -- the school-choice programs that are already helping students from poor families.

Apparently it's never too early to start campaigning, so let's make school choice a critical factor in the 2008 elections.

Robert George on Public Morality

Many of us have blogged and written about the question, "to what extent should the law embody and enforce morality?"  Now available over at First Things is Robert George's recent essay, "Public Morality, Public Reason."  (This might be worth reading in conjunction with the recent Skeel / Stuntz paper on legal moralism, "Christianity and the (Modest) Rule of Law.)  The conclusion:

[F]rom the Catholic vantage point, there is something scandalous in the effort of theorists such as Rawls and Habermas to remove such issues from public debate by arbitrarily restricting reasons on one side of the debate over the nature, dignity, and destiny of the human person. There is nothing “liberal,” “democratic,” “reasonable,” “moral,” or “ethical” about that.

Pope Benedict on secularism and symbols

A good read:

Catholics cannot accept a vision of secularism "as an exclusion of religion from various society environments and as its exile in the framework of the individual conscience." Benedetto XVI wanted to clarify this in a speech addressed today to the Union of Italian Catholic Law Experts. According to a certain vision, he explained, "secularism would be expressed in the total separation between the Church and State, and the Church would not any role of intervening on topics relating to the life and behaviour of citizens."  Plus, he added, "secularism would even bring the exclusion of religious symbols from public places for the carrying out of the political community's functions: from offices, schools, courts, hospitals, prisons." The Pontiff stated, "Today there is talk of secular thought, secular morality, secular science, secular politics." A concept that must be rejected because it is based on "an unreligious vision of life, thought and morality: in other words a vision in which there is no room for God, for a Mystery that transcends pure reason, for a moral law of absolute value that is in effect all the time and in every situation." According to Benedetto XVI, "it is the task of all believers, in particular followers of Christ, to contribute to elaborating a concept of secularism that, on one side, acknowledges to God and its moral law, to Christ and to his Church their place in human life, individual and community, and on the other side, affirms and respects the autonomous legitimacy of worldly situations" that represent "a legitimate need, that not only is postulated by the men of our times, but is also conforming to the wishes of the Creator. In fact, from their condition as creatures, everything receives their consistency, truth, goodness, their own laws and their own order: and everything that men is obligated to respect, by acknowledging the needs of the methods of every single science or art." Ratzinger underlined, "Only if we realize this, we can measure the weight of the problems coming from a term like secularism, which seems to have become almost the qualifying emblem of post-modernity, in particular for modern democracy." To distinguish between secularism and laicism is for Benedetto XVI particularly necessary in "a historic time that is exciting because of the progress that humanity has carried out in many fields of law, culture, communication, sciences and technology. Some people attempt to exclude God from every part of life, presenting him as an antagonist of man." And it is up to Christians "to demonstrate that instead God is love and wants the goodness and happiness of all men," in other words, "to make people understand that the moral law given by God, and that comes to us with the voice of conscience, has the goal of liberating us from evil and making us happy, not to oppress us." The Pope concluded, "We must demonstrate that without God man is lost and that the exclusion of religion from social life, in particular the marginalization of Christianity, ruins the foundations of human coexistence," that "before having a social and political nature it has a moral nature."

Yup.

Perry on Human Rights

Professor Solum has named Michael P's new book, "Toward a Theory of Human Rights," his "Legal Theory Bookworm" download-of-the-week.  Congrats to Michael.

Urban Christians

"More Christians should live long-term in cities," argues Pastor Timothy Keller.  (Or, as MOJ-friend Phil Bess would say, "walkable, mixed-use settlements.")  Keller also says that, once in cities, Christians should "be a dynamic counterculture," should "be a community radically committed to the good of the city as a whole," and should "be a people who integrate their faith with their work."  Good stuff.