Earlier on today I was reading an article on CNN about the next Supreme Court nominee Sotomayor. Her judging abilities were being critiqued by the NRA due to her past rulings against the Second Amendment, the right to bear arms (not to be confused with bare arms or the more interesting grizzly bear arms). Her critics were worried that as a judge in our highest court she would be carrying too much preconceived baggage about the Second Amendment. As all judges are supposed to be impartial arbiters of the Constitution in all her ink-and-parchmented-glory the concern might seem valid.
As I read this and pondered the gravity of the NRA's accusation I began to think 'Don't we need bias in the Supreme Court?'. Without dissenting opinions and biases the Constitution would remain unchanged to this day, that is if America could have survived that long with only 10 Amendments. Aside from the important task of protecting the sanctity of the Constitution the Sup. C. must also make adjustments to it in order for the document to properly reflect the views of the citizens it binds and protects. A nation, much like a business, must adjust with the change of time, technology, and society or face the consequences of stagnation. Regardless of any judge's personal bias or opinion, which as human beings all of them posess, as Americans we must maintain the faith that our government will adjust to fit the needs of the majority of our country. I would gladly take a judge who desires to "improve" the Constitution than an automated robot who refuses to change the words on a piece of old paper regardless of how it effects America. What would be next? Robot Presidents, robot police, robot taxi drivers, robot neighbors. I would rather die than suffer under the opression of the Steel Fist, but that's just my opinion. Ehhhhh...
No comments:
Post a Comment