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, March 14, 2010

"Intervening Decision": A Response to Bob

Bob provisionally suggests an equivalency between the intervening decision of a user of a school voucher and a user of government assistance to purchase abortion coverage arguing in both cases that we effectively "blind" the state in these matters for the time being because of deep disagreement among the populace over the role of faith in one's education and the moral status of the unborn respectively.

I would argue that the two cases are not equivalent for the following reasons.  As a People, I hope that we are in agreement that the intentional taking of innocent human life is wrong.  What we disagree about is the application of this principle to the facts in the abortoin context.  But, the facts are not really in doubt.  Biologically, the unborn child is a human being at an early stage of development.  Those who would deny this, deny it out of innocent or willfull ignorance.  Those who do not deny the science but nevertheless insist that abortion should remain a choice with the mother (the Roe court's term for the pregnant woman) disagree with the principle that the intentional taking of innocent human life is wrong.  To the extent that the Court will let them, I don't think the political branches must blind themselves to either the principle or the very clear scientific facts.

With respect to the role of religion in one's life and education, our country has a long history of what I might call soft public theism.  The Declaration of Independence, Madison's Memorial and Remonstrance ("Before any man can be considered as a member of Civil Society, he must be considered as a subject of the Governour of the Universe"), Washington's Farewell Address, Thanksgiving proclamations, Lincoln's Second Inaugural, etc. all testify to this.  We also have a strong tradition that religion can't be compelled or imposed.  Madison said "The Religion then of every man must be left to the conviction and conscience of every man; and it is the right of every man to exercise it as these may dictate."  Vouchers then are in one sense a way to honor and support what we as a Nation do agree upon.

I look forward to responses from Bob and others.

Friday, March 5, 2010

Challenges

Challenges was my first post on the new Law, Religion, and Ethics blog.  In that post, I posed some questions for both theists and secularists, concluding with:

Can and should theology and theologically informed philosophy provide a foundation for the rights, liberty, and equality we cherish (the inalienable rights mentioned in the Declaration) in our pluralistic society? Is Christian intolerance of difference a real concern? Is it any more of a concern that secularist intolerance of Christian belief? How do we achieve the right balance between communal needs – the common good – and individual freedom to diverge from communal norms? Is the right balance more likely to be achieved in a secularist state where religion is privatized and marginalized or in a theistically informed secular state where the ultimate questions are welcomed and robustly debated in the public square?

 

If you want to weigh in comments are open at the link above.

 

Tuesday, March 2, 2010

Happy Texas Independence Day!

Monday, February 15, 2010

Ken Starr to Baylor

The Waco Tribune reports that Ken Starr, currently the dean at Pepperdine Law School, has been named President of Baylor University.

Thursday, February 11, 2010

Democratic Party Delegate

In scanning our family's 1984 photo album, I came across a gem that I thought I'd pass along.  Here is my credential as a Democratic Party Delegate to the 1984 Travis County Democratic Party Convention.  In either that year or 1988, my wife and I also were delegates to the State Convention.  Image12-6

Wednesday, February 10, 2010

"Freedom from" or "freedom for"

Yesterday in my Catholic Jurisprudence class, we discussed Cardinal Dulles' essay "Truth as the Ground of Freedom" (in Catholic Perspectives on American Law).  During the discussion, I suggested that the concept of "freedom from" authority is illusory because all freedom is exercised "for" some good as directed by a criteria external to freedom itself.  I might, for example,  choose to act according to my understanding of the moral law and to act in such a way that I develop habits that make it easier for me to so act.  Or, I might act according to the dictates of my passions (or the strongest passion at the moment).  In both cases, I am placing myself under some authority - either the authority of the moral law or the authority of my strongest passion -  and exercising my freedom "for" some good, whether it be the good dictated by the moral law or the good achieved in satisfying that passion.

What do you think?  Am I missing something in my analysis?  Comments are open.

Tuesday, February 9, 2010

The D.C. School Voucher System

Fred Hiatt has an op-ed on the Washington Post's web site titled "Why is Obama killing off D.C.'s voucher program?"  Here is the first paragraph:

The Obama administration said it was going to respect science and respond to evidence -- a contrast, many Democrats said, to the previous regime. So why is President Obama killing off the program that offers the best chance to find out if school vouchers work?

Monday, February 8, 2010

John Allen and the New Demography

See the links for MOJ’s discussion of John Allen’s first, second, and third trends that are revolutionizing the Church.  This post focuses on his fourth trend – the new demography.

In my dystopia, the kind and merciful policy makers of the future will give each person five years of retirement before sending them peacefully to the end or the next stage of the journey, depending on one’s theology.  In this world, workers can retire at any age they want, health permitting, and then enjoy five years of social security and medicare before relinquishing their claim to a share of the earth’s (and the state’s) limited resources.

If the population trends and projections cited by John Allen are correct, we are in for a rocky future on many fronts.  Allen (p. 144) says that “[a]fter leveling out at 9 billion sometime around 2050, the population of the planet will begin to fall, and will do so with increasing momentum throughout the rest of the century.”  This will be a world-wide phenomenon as the global south’s fertility drop below the replacement level of 2.1, joining the 43% of the world’s population that already lives in countries with below replacement level fertility.  Allen discusses the world-wide phenomenon, but I’ll restrict my opening remarks to the United States.

A few fast facts (or projections):

·         Hispanic fertility rates in the U.S. are 2.3 compared to 1.8 for non-Hispanic whites.

·         The median age in the U.S. will rise from 30 in 1950 to 41 in 2050.

·         By 2050, there will be 16 million more Americans 65 and above than 14 and below.

·         “In 1955, America had nine workers for every retiree.  Today the ratio is 3.3 to 1, and it will fall to 2 to 1 by 2035” (p. 155)(About the time I’m ready to hang it up, if I remain healthy that long).

·         “By 2020, 1.2 million Americans aged 65 and older will have no living children, siblings, or spouses.”  (p.158).

Questions and comments about the law, lawyering, and legal education in light of the “new demography”:

·         What role can and should lawyers, including Catholic lawyers, play in creatively responding to the fiscal and more broadly economic crisis that will result from the graying of America?

·         How can law schools help current students to see and prepare for their roles in responding to the coming fiscal and more broadly economic crisis?

·         Immigration will continue to be an issue although as Allen points out, as population growth in the global south slows and eventually reverses itself, there may be less potential immigrants to replace the current American workforce and thereby support our current retirees.  Will and should we view Muslim immigration into Europe the same as Hispanic immigration into the U.S. or are there good reasons to distinguish the two cases?

·         How will the changing racial or ethnic make-up of the United States effect our culture, including our legal culture?

·         It is likely that we will need more lawyers doing pro bono work on behalf of the elderly poor who might have legal needs distinct from other impoverished populations.

·         In light of globalization, lawyers will also be called to think about all these issues on a global as well as local scale.

·         How should we deal with what I suspect will be an incredible loneliness of those who have no family?  (Not really a legal question, but one on my mind).

Concluding thoughts.  This chapter has been, for me, the most depressing so far, especially as I think about the future for my four children who are all in their 20’s.  Social upheaval and dislocation are bound to occur as a result of the “new demography.”  Our economic system requires growth and the opening of new markets.  Declining and aging populations don’t bode well for a robust economic future.  (I’m not an economist, so I’d appreciate any correction to my intuitions).  Our welfare state (as small as it is compared to some other states) will be crushed, I would think, under the weight of an aging population.  We will need bright, young creative minds, to help navigate these uncharted waters.  Catholics, including Catholic lawyers, can play an instrumental role.  At the quotidian level, I suspect that the loss of community contributed greatly to the current crisis, and I know that Catholics and others are working creatively in law and other disciplines to foster community, be it in the new urbanism or a revitalized agrarianism.   Can and how might the law be used to encourage healthy communities where child bearing and child rearing are once again attractive choices?

Comments are open, and I would appreciate your thoughts.

Thursday, February 4, 2010

Conference Announcement: The Edith Stein Project 2010

On February 12-13, Notre Dame will host the annual Edith Stein Conference.  This year's conference is titled "No Man is an Island:  Creature, Culture, & Community.  As a proud father, I have to mention that one of the featured speakers is Anamaria Scaperlanda-Ruiz, an Notre Dame alum and one of the projects co-founders.  Her co-authored and co-presented paper is titled "Let's Get Physical, Metaphysical:  An Integrated Understanding of the Pill, Jello Shots, and Eating Disorders."  Click here for the  full conference schedule.  This has been a wonderful conference the past five years, and I expect it will be again this year.  So, if you are in the area, consider attending. 

Conference Announcement: Signs of the Times: The First Amendment and Religious Symbolism

On the afternoon of February 12, the University of Oklahoma and the Oklahoma Law Review will hold a symposium entitled "Signs of the Times:  The First Amendment and Religious Symbolism."  Featured speakers include MOJ'ers Tom Berg and Eduardo Penalver. I hope to see some of our local readers at what promises to be a lively event.