Today at BYU Dallin Oaks attacked the Renaissance, science, humanism and
Supreme Court civil rights decisions.
The way he uses his Supreme Court clerkship and professorship at the University of Chicago as badges while he spouts this sophistry is sickening. He was there with Earl Warren as the Supreme Court made the Bill of Rights' promise real. Oaks is a son of perdition.
The LDS Church uses Oaks to make these speeches precisely because he's got that resume. Yes he knows Constitutional law. But what this boils down to is values; specifically, the Constutution's values. Those of us who disagree with Mr. Oaks, who feel strongly that he is preaching a benighted "gospel" that is at odds with the Constution's values, should not shrink from saying his values are wrong. Oaks' values are wrong. Henry Billings Brown, who wrote the opinion known as Plessey v. Ferguson, which for 58 years made it constitutional for states to put white and black children in separate schools, knew well the Constitution and cases interpreting it. (LDS leaders roundly condemned Brown v. Board of Education, the opinion written by Oaks' mentor Justice Warren, that overturned Plessy.) But most of us are now enlightened enough to regard Billings' values and Taney's values and LDS leaders' values in 1954 as benighted and not the values elucidated in the Bill of Rghts.
The Supreme Court has read the Constitution to say that Americans have a fundamental right to marry. Is that what Oaks finds offensive about the Supreme Court decisions? Because gays and lesbians tell us that they can only form the kinds of close relationnships that make a happy and lasting marriage possible with people of the same sex and this is just the way they are, like skin color or gender or the sexual preference of heterosexuals like Mr. Oaks. What Oaks fears is that his LDS Church will continue to lose moral authority to secular institutions that protect our liberties like the Supreme Court, universities, etc. So, choose ye this day whom ye will serve, Oaks and the legacy of Justice Taney, or our current Supreme Court and the legacy of Justice Warren.
Supreme Court civil rights decisions.
The way he uses his Supreme Court clerkship and professorship at the University of Chicago as badges while he spouts this sophistry is sickening. He was there with Earl Warren as the Supreme Court made the Bill of Rights' promise real. Oaks is a son of perdition.
The LDS Church uses Oaks to make these speeches precisely because he's got that resume. Yes he knows Constitutional law. But what this boils down to is values; specifically, the Constutution's values. Those of us who disagree with Mr. Oaks, who feel strongly that he is preaching a benighted "gospel" that is at odds with the Constution's values, should not shrink from saying his values are wrong. Oaks' values are wrong. Henry Billings Brown, who wrote the opinion known as Plessey v. Ferguson, which for 58 years made it constitutional for states to put white and black children in separate schools, knew well the Constitution and cases interpreting it. (LDS leaders roundly condemned Brown v. Board of Education, the opinion written by Oaks' mentor Justice Warren, that overturned Plessy.) But most of us are now enlightened enough to regard Billings' values and Taney's values and LDS leaders' values in 1954 as benighted and not the values elucidated in the Bill of Rghts.
The Supreme Court has read the Constitution to say that Americans have a fundamental right to marry. Is that what Oaks finds offensive about the Supreme Court decisions? Because gays and lesbians tell us that they can only form the kinds of close relationnships that make a happy and lasting marriage possible with people of the same sex and this is just the way they are, like skin color or gender or the sexual preference of heterosexuals like Mr. Oaks. What Oaks fears is that his LDS Church will continue to lose moral authority to secular institutions that protect our liberties like the Supreme Court, universities, etc. So, choose ye this day whom ye will serve, Oaks and the legacy of Justice Taney, or our current Supreme Court and the legacy of Justice Warren.
Comment