Is Justice Dead Yet?

Unbelievable. Well, not really. We’re talking about the Clintons here. To what am I referring? That secret not-so-secret meeting that took place between the former president and the current attorney general, Loretta Lynch.

Let’s see now, why would Bill Clinton want to speak to the person in charge of investigating his wife who is running for president? For the life of me, I just can’t figure that out, can you?

Under Criminal Investigation

Oh, that explains it. Nothing to see here. Move on.

Secret Meeting

Of course, there is that matter of Lynch having been appointed to her federal judgeship by Bill Clinton, but I’m sure that had nothing to do with it. She doesn’t owe him anything.

Yes, Godfather

Clinton denies that he was trying to put any pressure on Lynch. He’s very good at denials. It kind of reminds me of another one he tried to foist on the country:

Improper

Trust. It’s important. Integrity. It’s what we should look for in any candidate. When it comes to the Clintons both have always been absent.

If You Believe

Hillary was questioned by the FBI for over three hours last Saturday. What will come of that? The Benghazi Report came out earlier last week; it was damning, but both the Democrat party and the media don’t care.

Nothing New

If Hillary Clinton is not indicted for her actions as secretary of state, we will know that justice has died in America.

Lewis: Justice & Mercy

C. S. Lewis 11Is it really merciful not to carry out justice? Is the concept of justice too harsh? Should a Christian believe in punishment for crimes?

C. S. Lewis thought through this issue in an essay he published in 1949 called “The Humanitarian Theory of Punishment.” If we go by feelings, we may think we are being humane in forgiving without real punishment. Lewis disagrees.

The essential act of mercy was to pardon; and pardon in its very essence involves the recognition of guilt and ill-desert in the recipient. If crime is only a disease which needs cure, not sin which deserves punishment, it cannot be pardoned. How can you pardon a man for having a gumboil or a club foot?

Lewis begins with the common-sense acknowledgement that a man is accountable for his actions. No one is accountable for a mere physical deformity; that’s not a moral issue. But there is a real right and wrong for which our choices determine our guilt or innocence. Humanitarians instead wish to treat any “bad” choice as merely a disease for which one is unaccountable. Lewis will not have that.

But the Humanitarian theory want simply to abolish Justice and substitute Mercy for it. This means that you start being “kind” to people before you have considered their rights, and then force upon them supposed kindnesses which no one but you will recognize as kindnesses and which the recipient will feel as abominable cruelties. You have overshot the mark.

Justice-MercyThat may seem counterintuitive to some, but what Lewis is saying is that offering “mercy” to people who never have come to grips with the injustice they have committed is no mercy at all; people need to answer for their sinful actions. That’s the only possible path toward redemption. They will only understand genuine mercy if they first feel the hammer of justice. The Law leads to the Gospel.

Mercy, detached from Justice, grows unmerciful. That is the important paradox. As there are plants which will flourish only in mountain soil, so it appears that Mercy will flower only when it grows in the crannies of the rock of Justice: transplanted to the marshlands of mere Humanitarianism, it becomes a man-eating weed, all the more dangerous because it is still called by the same name as the mountain variety.

Humanitarian mercy is a fake mercy, and dangerous because it tries to pass for the real thing. For mercy to have its full impact, justice must come first.

Charleston’s Testimony to the Power of the Gospel

What has occurred in the aftermath of the unconscionable murders in Charleston is a testament to the power of the Gospel of Jesus Christ. The attitude of forgiveness in the hearts of family members who lost loved ones is a remarkable witness to how God’s love can erase bitterness.

That’s on a personal level, of course. Justice still needs to be meted out to the murderer. One can forgive while simultaneously seeking a just punishment for what he has done. God is a God of both mercy and justice—both need to be seen in this situation.

The other tremendous positive message coming out of Charleston is how the community has bonded together to show that racial harmony is achievable. This is no Ferguson or Baltimore. Again, this is another glowing testimony to how God can bridge any divide.

Charleston Cross

As for the victims of this horrendous act, if they were committed Christians, as their attendance at a midweek Bible study would indicate, they have received exactly what Jesus has promised to all of His followers: eternal life.

Blessed

May none succeed in exploiting this tragedy for political purposes. Instead, let’s rejoice that, even in the midst of such a tragedy, God can be honored.

Lighting the Way

The good news continues. The Democrat Senatorial Campaign Committee has pulled back from many of the ads they were going to run on behalf of Mary Landrieu in Louisiana for the runoff election. Apparently, they think it’s not worth the cost. She will undoubtedly be leaving her Senate seat and returning to the private sector.

Also, an update on what I reported yesterday. I had written that the GOP now controls 2/3 of the state legislative bodies. That number is now 70%. So, if you stop and think about the political trend of the country, it is encouraging. Republicans now have the majority in Congress, 2/3 of governors, and 70% of state legislative chambers. If that’s not a wave, what is it?

There’s only one roadblock for a complete turnaround, and it resides in the White House, where the president has infamously said he has a phone and a pen, and he will act unilaterally—something he pretty much repeated in his press conference on Wednesday. Yet most of the voters on Tuesday repudiated that message:

Pen & Ballot

This penchant for acting like he is the government must end. The government established by the Constitution did not authorize the president to be a king, let alone behave as if he has some kind of divine right to do as he wishes, regardless of the other branches of the government and the desires of those for whom the government operates—the people. The message should be clear to him:

New Paperweight

The issue is whether he is listening or even cares to listen. One commentator opined last night that it might be that Obama doesn’t truly grasp what took place on Tuesday, and may not get the full message until he is forced to deal with a Republican Congress beginning in January. I’m not sure that’s the case; I’m more inclined to think he knows what has happened, but just stubbornly refuses to submit to it.

Word is out that he resents having been put on the back burner by his party during the campaign. Little good it did them; the voters still knew who is responsible for our current mess:

Thank You Cards

But one election is not our salvation politically. The nation remains in critical condition spiritually. Government isn’t, and never will be, our savior. Unless we turn things around spiritually, we’re still going the wrong direction:

Handbasket

I pray Republicans will accomplish what they can within the limits of what government is ordained by God to do, and within the constraints of constitutional authority. That by itself, though, will not be enough. The root of our problems has never changed: the sinfulness of man. We must address that with the Gospel if we ever hope to move the nation in a new direction.

Ultimately, it won’t be government that turns things around; it will be the Christians in society. We need to remember that Jesus called us the salt and the light. We need to be vigilant to preserve the good in our society and to provide light on the path toward righteousness and true Biblical justice.

Farewell, Eric Holder (We Hope)

Right about the time I was leaving for a week and not planning to write any blogs, Eric Holder announced his resignation as attorney general. Of all the high-level appointees in the Obama administration, he was probably closer to his boss than anyone. In most ways, he was the extension of Obama into the American justice system.

In case you’re wondering, I’m not saying that was a good thing. Holder was arguably the most divisive attorney general in American history, again a mirror image of his chief. For him, and for Obama, nearly everything has a racial angle. Neither did he have much respect for the laws of the nation with which he disagreed, not even bothering to enforce them.

His tenure at the Department of Justice was a travesty in so many ways it’s hard to come up with a complete listing of his egregious actions.

Work Done

Holder raised stonewalling and disingenuousness to an art form. If you are to believe him, nothing wrong ever happened on his watch:

Holder Scandals

Some of the cartoonists played upon an identical theme after learning of his upcoming resignation:

Relief

Leaving You

Justice

The whole concept of equal justice under the law has taken a real body blow under Holder. The rule of law has been dismantled plank by plank.

Why leave now? Some have speculated he’s just getting out while the getting is good, before the house collapses around him:

Now Hiring

A scarier prospect is that he is now in line to be nominated to the Supreme Court. That would be an even greater travesty—and tragedy—than having him as head of the DOJ. That’s another reason why it’s so crucial that Republicans control the Senate the last two years of Obama’s reign. Hopefully, there would be enough backbone in the Republican senators to doom any attempt to put this man on the highest court in the land.

Farewell, Eric Holder. And may we never again see your type in the position you have held for nearly six years.

Zimmerman, Martin, & the Media

Yesterday I mentioned the three groups most responsible for ramping up the racist angle in the Zimmerman-Martin case. The Florida prosecutors and the perpetually aggrieved, self-identified civil rights activists who are still living in the middle of the twentieth century were two of them. I believe, though, that the third group—the mainstream news media—was the catalyst for all the trumped-up drama we’ve witnessed.

Right from the start, the media played this tragedy as a racial thing, as if this one incident were a snapshot of the current state of race relations in America. Forget that most violence against blacks is committed by other blacks; forget that Chicago and other cities have a violence epidemic in black communities that has nothing to do with racism; ignore all the progress that has been made over the last fifty years; look past the fact that the president of the United States and his attorney general are both black (unless, of course, you consider Obama a “white black” due to his parentage—in the same manner as the media attempted to portray George Zimmerman as a “white Hispanic).

Once the media created the initial uproar, the governor of Florida felt the pressure to appoint a special prosecutor. That may have been the first mistake. The second mistake was the prosecutor herself, Angela Corey, who seemed to love a microphone and deemed it her duty to emphasize a racial component.

Such is the state of a nation living under the reign of political correctness.

Meanwhile, the perpetually aggrieved activists, emboldened by their media allies, and with the help of an administration that also lives in the 1960s, staged massive protests, demanding Zimmerman’s head, convinced he was guilty of murder before all the facts were examined. Never mind that Trayvon Martin was no longer the youth of the pictures on our TV screens; don’t mention his fascination with drugs and guns; pass over his troubles at school; instead, make him into an innocent symbol of racial hatred against minorities.

Again, all this was perpetuated by the media.

In one particularly dishonest incident, NBC doctored a recording of Zimmerman’s statement to the police that made him sound like a racist. Zimmerman’s lawyers are now proceeding with a lawsuit against that network.

Once the trial began, there was no other news worth reporting:

The Latest

Top Story

As the testimony in the trial continued—nonstop coverage on all cable channels—some uncomfortable facts came out. One witness who was talking with Martin by phone at the time of the attack admitted he was the one to insert race into the incident, referring to Zimmerman with a racial slur. Talk about an inconvenient truth. It also seemed as if some of the prosecution’s witnesses were helping the defense more than the prosecution. The narrative was not going as planned. What could they do?

Fire

Now that it’s all over, it seems it’s not all over at all. Anger and resentment are coming to the forefront. The administration is seeking to use a “hate crime” allegation to put Zimmerman back on trial at the federal level. The concept of a hate crime is a tautology. Most crime has hatred connected to it. The goal of modern hate crime legislation is to punish people for what they were thinking in addition to their actions. It’s an attempt to criminalize thoughts, which is about as unconstitutional as possible; it’s the opposite of the Founders’ intentions.

Yet we are on this path, fueled once more by the media working in tandem with bitterness and resentment:

Blindfold

Justice is under fire in this country, but not in the way the media would have us believe. Don’t expect the aftermath of this trial to be any better than the atmosphere that led to it.

The Gosnell Verdict

In a week of breaking news coming at us like a whirlwind, none is more important to me today than the verdict reached yesterday in the Kermit Gosnell trial. The jury did its duty, which was by no means a guarantee. Gosnell was found guilty of three counts of first-degree murder, one count of involuntary manslaughter, and a couple hundred other counts dealing with the breaking of Pennsylvania laws regarding late-term abortions and other matters.

We now come to the sentencing portion. Will he get the death penalty? Keep in mind that those three counts of first-degree murder were only the ones that were formally prosecuted. Gosnell has operated his “clinic” since the 1970s. His horrific practices—killing children after they were born—is something that has been going on for years. Frankly, this makes him one of the greatest mass murderers in American history.

Christians who shy away from endorsing the death penalty have a misunderstanding of Biblical justice. The New Testament doesn’t change the principle established in the Old. The most sacred gift God has given is the gift of life. When another human being takes away that gift arbitrarily, without any good reason, he has broken a barrier that God Himself set up. Civil government, in its job of meting out civil justice, has an obligation to take the lives of those who have crossed that line. This is not contradictory; there is a clear distinction between the murderous acts of individuals and the responsibility of governments to bring someone to account for those acts.

So, yes, I favor the death penalty in this case. There are no genuine mitigating circumstances. This man is monstrous, and an example needs to be set.

Some commentators yesterday surmised that this might change the course of the abortion discussion in America and make people less accepting of it, after having witnessed the barbarity of Gosnell’s practices. I hope so, but I’m not yet convinced. The Gosnell case can serve a valuable public service if we are open to learning from it, but never underestimate the desire of people to simply avoid the issue and continue on as before.

This also points to the moral dichotomy that exists in the minds of our citizens. On the one hand, we are disgusted and sickened by the infanticide portrayed via Gosnell; on the other hand, if those babies’ lives had been terminated prior to leaving the womb, many would find no problem at all with it.

The only difference between the life of the baby in the womb and the life of the baby recently emerged from the womb is only a matter of inches. Both lives are equally sacred. Both are innocent. Both deserve the protection of society.

Since Roe v. Wade in 1973, more than 55 million American children have been slaughtered. This is truly one of the greatest holocausts in human history. War is horrible, but just compare the loss of American lives in all our wars with the number who have lost their lives through abortion. This pictorial illustration should make it clear:

So tell me, which one should concern us more?

If the jury decides on anything less than the death penalty for Gosnell, justice will have been short-circuited. Righteousness will have been diminished. What of mercy, you say? How merciful was Gosnell toward those innocent children? God extends mercy when man has a repentant heart. Gosnell is unbowed in his arrogance. He is a man with a seared conscience. He needs to serve as a testimony that this culture hasn’t turned its back completely on a clear understanding of good and evil.

I’m continually reminded of this short passage in the book of Isaiah:

Woe to those who call evil good, and good evil; who substitute darkness for light and light for darkness; who substitute bitter for sweet and sweet for bitter. . . ; who justify the wicked for a bribe, and take away the rights of the ones who are in the right.

Evil has been clearly identified here. Darkness has been exposed. May the rights of the unborn be restored in our day.