Is this justice? Part 2

For a person to sexually assault another person is a seriously wrong thing.  It is a heinous act that causes a lifetime of trauma.  It should never be allowed to happen, and the person guilty of such an act should be punished.

To falsely accuse someone of such an act is just as wrong.  To attempt to ruin someone else’s life, to subject them to the public shame, the constant suspicion, the loss of reputation – for whatever reason – is terribly wrong.

I think we are quick to agree with the first statement.  Not so much the second.  I think we are making some strides with uncovering sexual misconduct and exposing it.  But we are in danger of going way beyond that, into using the accusation as a weapon to get what we want.

The US Senate Judiciary Committee has been investigating the claims against now Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh since they came to light.  It was a serious matter, and it deserved a serious examination.

The committee interviewed some 40 people, reviewed the evidence submitted by his accusers, monitored social media and news outlets, and eventually released a 414-page report detailing their findings.  The FBI even opened a 7th probe into Kavanaugh’s personal history.  When they were finished, there was nothing about the personal or professional life of Brett Kavanaugh that they did not know.

In other words, the investigation was as thorough as you could you get.

The investigation is now complete, and Kavanaugh was found to be innocent.

“Following the separate and extensive investigations by both the Committee and the FBI, there was no evidence to substantiate any of the claims of sexual assault made against Justice Kavanaugh,” the report said.

In one case, the committee concluded that the accuser and her lawyer “criminally conspired to make materially false statements to the Committee and obstruct the Committee’s investigation.” Both have been recommended to the Justice Department to be investigated.  The attorney, meanwhile, was himself recently arrested for domestic violence.

In another case, a woman who accused Kavanaugh later admitted under questioning by the committee that she did not know him, “and merely used it as a ‘ploy’ to ‘get attention’” according to the report.

None of the claims against him were found to be credibleBut does that change the way anyone feels?  It should.

If we are going to be upset at people for mistreating others, and for breaking the law, should we not also be upset when an innocent person is falsely accused of mistreating others, or of breaking the law?

I think the answer is a resounding yes.  Because if it is not, we are doing a serious disservice to those who genuinely were wronged.  Their credibility is being taken away, by those who continue to cry wolf.

What I’ve also observed through this, is that one side of the political aisle is becoming more ruthless in the way they try to win.  The Kavanaugh story has shed light on the tactics they are now willing to use to get what they want.  It should be disgusting to anyone who truly cares about what is right and wrong.

It should also serve as a wake-up call.  Because if the left will try to take out a good and decent man by such an intended grave injustice, what will they not do, to get what they want?


Is this justice?

When President Trump announced Brett Kavanaugh as his nomination to the Supreme Court, I immediately felt sorry for him.  I knew the fierce opposition he would face.  And it wasn’t because of debate on his qualifications or merits to become a Justice.  No, he had impeccable credentials.  It was because there would be those who so desperately wanted the “balance of power” to stay either neutral or left-leaning, that they would stop at nothing to keep him from being confirmed.  Even if that meant destroying his character, reputation, family, life.

I looked at his background, and it was obvious that he is qualified for the position.  He is as solid a pick as you can find.  Yet, I knew it would be horrible the challenges he would face, the accusations made, the harassment he and his family would have to endure.  It made me wonder why he would sign up for it, if he had been properly prepared, and what kind of resolve he truly had.  Because people would try to destroy him.  And they certainly have.

And a potential Supreme Court Justice should be properly vetted.  I believe he was.  But when it became apparent that there could be no legitimate challenge to him professionally, we have seen him attacked personally.  To the point that his life and reputation are, in his words, “totally and permanently destroyed.”

It is really a sad day.  Because the man is of solid character.  He has every appearance of a man of integrity, a family man, without a checkered past.  One who is a gentleman and who is generous.  In fact, a large group of women who know him professionally and personally, jointly signed a statement saying the same thing.

And that is what makes the accusations against him at the 11th hour all the harder to believe.  Serious allegations should be taken seriously.  They should be examined properly.  Properly being the key word.  If you look at the details of this week’s accusations objectively, I think you will find them hard to believe.  A man who is a sexual predator as a teenager doesn’t usually go on to become a boy scout as an adult.  The timing alone should make us suspicious.  The fact that the democrats on the Judiciary Committee knew about this for weeks, and only unveiled them just ahead of the confirmation vote should be the biggest red flag.

I could unpack all of why I believe these allegations are false, but time and space prevent it.  But basing your reason for considering a man unfit for office on a single allegation from one person, uncorroborated by another witness, from more than 35 years ago, with key details missing, and everyone she names as being present denying under oath that they were, is not wise.

It makes me wonder, along with Marc Thiessen, “How Much Evidence Do We Need to Destroy Someone?”

If we care about justice, about what is right, then we will want the truth to win out.  Even if the truth conflicts with our own agenda.  Right?  Or have we reached a point in our society where our own desires are more important than doing what is right?  I certainly hope not, but the events of this week do nothing to assuage my doubts.

A Tough Choice but One We Have to Make

This election is, without a doubt, the hardest to stomach in my lifetime.  Aside from the bitter debate and rhetoric, the two major party candidates do not appeal to me.  It makes one ask “Could we not have done better than this?”  And yet, in a way these two candidates reflect who we are as a country.  From the say and do anything to get ahead, the corruption and lack of respect for the rule of law of the democrat nominee, to the brash, arrogant, disrespectfulness of the republican nominee, this is who we’ve become.  While we cry out for better candidates, we need to become a better people.

Still, we must make a decision.  It’s one I’ve wrestled with, but have reached a conclusion.  Let me say that I understand if you decide simply not to vote.  I considered it for a while, even voting 3rd party.  But allow me to make the case that one presidency will be better for the country than the other, and significantly so.  And as such, I encourage you to cast a vote.

Whether we want to believe it or not, the Supreme Court has become as important as the Presidency.  Liberals have found a way to put into law that which the elected representatives of the people would reject, and that is through the courts.  That is why it is of utmost importance for justices to be nominated who will interpret law by the Constitution, rather than make law that they feel is right.  With an expected 3-4 Supreme Court nominees, we are looking at swaying the country’s future in two very different directions based on who will make those nominations.

While Donald Trump has promised to nominate justices who adhere to the Constitution, Hillary Clinton has made no secret that she will nominate those who would actively seek to make law, and only those who adhere to the pro-abortion position.

This ties into my second main concern.

A Clinton presidency would ensure that abortion remains settled law for another generation.  I’m not saying a Trump presidency would necessarily mean a reversal of Roe vs. Wade, but that possibility would at least exist.  We know that it wouldn’t with a Clinton presidency.

A liberally packed Supreme Court could very well strike down every state restriction on abortion, if the recent Texas case is an indication. All the small gains the pro-life movement has made over the last 40 years would be gone.  And millions of innocent children would continue to be killed in the womb every year.  Is this something you are comfortable with?  As for me, I cannot sit by and allow that to happen.

Another concern is over the investigations into Hillary Clinton’s email use and the practices of her and her husband’s charity.  Though the FBI has said their investigation is finished, they were outspoken that she was extremely careless in handling classified information, and that she lied to the American people on multiple occasions regarding the investigation.  Here is a short clip illustrating this.

Someone so dishonest, who will lie to your face, and who has been involved in numerous scandals throughout her public life is not someone I want to be President.

Donald Trump is not a man I really wish to see become President.  From his character, his past, his temperament and more, I would really rather not support him.  His opponent, however, is one I feel would be far worse as a President.  So, what do I do?

Daniel Darling wrote an excellent article on why Christians should vote.  He made two outstanding points on this very issue.  The first is that voting does not mean that you’re putting “your full faith and power in a candidate or movement.”

“We vote, not because we believe our man or woman will usher in the Kingdom, but because we are fulfilling a God-given stewardship.”

And at a time when neither candidate truly appeals to many of us, he reminds us that:

“even in the best election with the most inspiring of choices, we are choosing between two fallen sinners. Every election is about the lesser of two evils.”

Folks, it is this simple: if we lose the Supreme Court, we will lose our freedoms as well.  So I encourage you: vote.  And not just for President.  Vote for the court.  Vote for unborn lives.  But vote.