Monday, May 02, 2011
Did we win?
Amid the jubilance and the flag waving, here is my question of the day: When did revenge become justice? Is that the American way now? If so, then perhaps Osama has won in a fashion--our liberal democratic principles are in shreds.
Years ago Christiana Amanapour reported that he was living comfortably in a suburb in Pakistan, though we were still being fed the media hype that he was living in Afghan caves. Do we dehumanize our enemies that much, that our thinking is distorted, that we think a man on dialysis would be cave dwelling?
Years ago Christiana Amanapour reported that he was living comfortably in a suburb in Pakistan, though we were still being fed the media hype that he was living in Afghan caves. Do we dehumanize our enemies that much, that our thinking is distorted, that we think a man on dialysis would be cave dwelling?
Labels: democracy, justice, Osama
Tuesday, June 23, 2009
Defining Justice
I ask my students to define "justice." It is a term we use a lot, it is one of the chief cornerstones of our modern liberal state--up there with liberty and equality. It is the purpose of the Constitution, stated in the Preamble: "to establish Justice." Think, also, of the last line of the Pledge of Allegiance: "With liberty and justice for all."
So, what is "Justice"--Is it fairness? How is that defined? Is it playing by the rules? does it matter who establishes the rules? Is it "due process of the law" and if so, does due process have limits?
And, just as importantly, what does justice do? Does it seek truth? Right wrongs? Level the playing field? Allow for equality? Allow for liberties? Enforce any of these?
Justice, is not seeking the truth by all possible means but is a decision best left to the states and their elected officials and the strict following of established criminal justice proceedings. It is "a prompt and considered legislative response" according to Chief Justice Roberts writing for the majority in this case that involved an Alaskan man, Osborne, incarcerated for rape and attempted murder. The case and conviction can not be reopened, because, in other words, justice had already been served. Justice is procedural.
[Osborne had asked to test the DNA evidence since DNA technology is much advanced since the time he was convicted. He had even offered to pay for the testing himself. (Pass your cursor over the title of this post will get you the link for the June 19th 5-4 opinion).]
So, what is "Justice"--Is it fairness? How is that defined? Is it playing by the rules? does it matter who establishes the rules? Is it "due process of the law" and if so, does due process have limits?
And, just as importantly, what does justice do? Does it seek truth? Right wrongs? Level the playing field? Allow for equality? Allow for liberties? Enforce any of these?
Justice, is not seeking the truth by all possible means but is a decision best left to the states and their elected officials and the strict following of established criminal justice proceedings. It is "a prompt and considered legislative response" according to Chief Justice Roberts writing for the majority in this case that involved an Alaskan man, Osborne, incarcerated for rape and attempted murder. The case and conviction can not be reopened, because, in other words, justice had already been served. Justice is procedural.
[Osborne had asked to test the DNA evidence since DNA technology is much advanced since the time he was convicted. He had even offered to pay for the testing himself. (Pass your cursor over the title of this post will get you the link for the June 19th 5-4 opinion).]
Labels: justice
