BOUND BY OATH (OR AFFIRMATION) :

Pledging Allegiance To Fundamentalism (David Corn, June 28, 2002, AlterNet)

At the [G-8] summit, [George W. Bush] opened a press conference with Russian president Vladmir Putin by saying, "We need common
sense judges who understand that our rights were derived from God and those are the kind of judges I intend to put on the bench." That is a
major--and stunning--policy declaration. Bush was announcing a new litmus test for judges. It's not just whether you're a conservative or
constructionist (or meet the political needs of Karl Rove, Bush's uberstrategist). The question is, do you believe in God and believe that secular law follows the law of God? In other words, there are no atheists--or agnostics--in Bush's chambers.

Did Bush realize what he was saying? Is he going to ask all potential judicial nominees to tell him their view of God and the derivation of rights? How is this fundamentalism--only believers need apply--different from that of America's enemies?

The more important question is : do they believe in the rights and the system of government delineated in the Constitution? If they do, and they don't believe that they derive from God, then it's incumbent on them to explain where they are derived from. Since all attempts to derive them from other sources have failed, it seems fair to question whether we'd want such people trying to uphold a Constitution that they don't really believe in and swearing an oath that can't bind them. What Mr. Corn doesn't seem to realize is that this fundamentalism, unlike that of our enemies, undergirds the system of laws and government of our nation. Posted by Orrin Judd at July 2, 2002 10:14 AM