Most of us are still reeling from the nearly incomprehensible Supreme Court ruling announced this morning. It is now, however, perhaps more than ever, that we must be clear concerning the real issues and the real problem.
First of all, we need to remember that during the debate leading up to the passage of the health care law (the Patient Protection Affordable Care Act), the Administration, and its allies in the legislature, vigourously denied the notion that the mandate to buy health insurance and the penalty for failure to do so amounted to a tax. Still, when the opening arguments of the case were presented to the High Court back in March, by that time, the Administration was arguing the opposite (i.e. that yes, it is indeed a tax). In this way, the Administration made its case for the law on constitutional grounds. In other words, the President of the United States is a liar, who said one thing in order to get what he wanted, and then proceeded to do something completely different. This is objectively true. The evidence will not support any other conclusion.
It is a staple teaching of all traditional ethical systems that the purpose of speech is to express what is actually in the speaker's mind, and that to use deceit in order to further one's ends is vicious. Neither is it permissible, according to traditional ethics to do something evil (deceive someone, for example) in order that something good can occur as a consequence. In such a case, the "good" that is supposed to result from the vicious action (e.g. deception) is actually not a good at all, because the morality lies in the interior act, which attains its value from virtue. This president has proven himself to be one of the most vicious men of our times through his rank duplicity, as well as his support of a multitude of things that are intrinsically as well as objectively evil.
Sadly, the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court, John Roberts has today become an accomplice to this evil man's deceptions. It is worth noting that traditional ethics also tells us that one of the ways to share in the guilt for the crimes of others is to become an accomplice to those crimes. How is the Chief Justice an accomplice to the President's crimes? By accepting and furthering the specious argument that the mandate is a tax --a tax, which, by some miracle of nature, is levied by the insurance companies, not the State.
So what is wrong with the PPACA anyway? Its problem is that, like its authors and the Chief Justice, it is vicious. It is so wrought with vice that it is rotten to the core. Why? Because it tramples on the virtue of justice. We have known since the third century B.C., thanks to the Greek philosopher Plato, that the essence of justice is to give to each whatever is his due. Well, in a just society, the real decision-making power belongs to the heads of families to make decisions that effect the good of their families. Only those decisions that the heads of families delegate to the local government legitimately belong to the local government. Similarly, only those decisions delegated by the local government legitimately belong to the state government, and so on, up to the federal level. This aspect of the virtue of justice is called the principle of subsidiarity. It is of the greatest importance, because subsidiarity keeps the emphasis in human society where it needs to be in order to ensure justice-- that is, on the family and the individual. It is, after all, the human person, who is made in the image of God, not the State or any other organization that is created by the compact of certain human persons.
The President and the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court (and many others) have commited a grave crime against justice by overturning the principle of subsidiarity (and doing it by mendacious means). Recently, David Brooks wrote a column in which he claimed that we have a crisis of authority in America, not a crisis of leadership. He explained that the country's problem is that no one is anymore willing to follow those who are our elected leaders. However, contrary to Brooks assessment, these are vicious men (and women). We elected them because we believed that they were virtuous. We were deceived. The President, the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court, and all those who have abetted them are liars (devoid of virtue). No good man is morally required to admire them, respect them or obey them.
DEUS VIDEAT ET JUDICET!
(May God see, and may He judge!)
No comments:
Post a Comment