Life Learning Series

(Up Close and Personal)

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

There has been much discussion about a certain linguistic flourish, which contained the expression, wise Hispanic. This expression, along with its containing thought, was for a limited audience. It is a way of striving to achieve a first mark in the journey toward excellence in judicial behavior. It is only a first marker, and only one of several such markers. We could replace the words, wise Hispanic, by any other personality that a person might express when they have set their mind to performing consistent judgment, for the rendering of decisions based on the applicable law. It is not an exclusive, or negatively comparatively, expression; except where experience might raise a negative feeling in those who are without it.

In that light, let me extend the statement (not amend it) with the following . . .

“For, I know that there is a wise Hebrew, who continually makes more righteous judgments than any man or woman–for there is no man or woman who can ever attain to the richness of his experiences. This Hebrew man is the true higher mark of judicial activity; not, me. Please receive a portion of his words, following:

Then certain of the scribes and of the Pharisees answered, saying, Master, we would see a sign from thee. But he answered and said unto them, An evil and adulterous generation seeketh after a sign; and there shall no sign be given to it, but the sign of the prophet Jonas: For as Jonas was three days and three nights in the whale’s belly; so shall the Son of man be three days and three nights in the heart of the earth.The men of Nineveh shall rise in judgment with this generation, and shall condemn it: because they repented at the preaching of Jonas; and, behold, a greater than Jonas is here. The queen of the south shall rise up in the judgment with this generation, and shall condemn it: for she came from the uttermost parts of the earth to hear the wisdom of Solomon; and, behold, a greater than Solomon is here.(Matthew 12:38-42)

. . .

– Leaning on the Highest Judge (Portion 04) Conclusion – 

….

Strict Procedure

The application of judgment is according to a strict protocol; an application in which you, too, participate, members of the Senate, and of the House of Representatives. This is not new insight for you; we say it only to close the loop in the matter of judgment. As God gave Moses His Law, so, too, you are empowered to present the law of the land to the judges of the land, as well as to all other citizens of the land. As Moses did not modify the Law of God, so, too, we judges must not modify the law of the land. This is binding even though we may reach points of tension with the law.

When I consider the burden that a judge must negotiate in his or her self during times of tension with the law, my mind reviews the atmosphere of the time of tension that Moses faced, as he attempted to carry out the edicts of the LORD. In a certain assignment, Moses could not fathom how anyone or anything could do it; especially, not him. This is the recap of that time, briefly.

Then Moses heard the people weep throughout their families, every man in the door of his tent: and the anger of the LORD was kindled greatly; Moses also was displeased. And Moses said unto the LORD, Wherefore hast thou afflicted thy servant? and wherefore have I not found favour in thy sight, that thou layest the burden of all this people upon me? Have I conceived all this people? have I begotten them, that thou shouldest say unto me, Carry them in thy bosom, as a nursing father beareth the sucking child, unto the land which thou swarest unto their fathers? Whence should I have flesh to give unto all this people? for they weep unto me, saying, Give us flesh, that we may eat.(Numbers 11:10-13)

 +=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+

– Leaning on the Highest Judge (Portion 03) –

Predisposition to an opinion

The deference of Jesus of Nazareth, in dependence on the wisdom of his Father, leads me to thoughts about opinions. Undoubtedly, some of the complainants that appear in our courts will try to sway the court to adopt a certain opinion of theirs. Sometimes, the motivation will be, substantially, self-serving on the part of the complainant. Hopefully, this will consist of a small fraction of the complaints. But whether it is small, or large; we must have a body of rules and laws that cannot be adjusted for the sake of unconnected agendas. These types of rules and laws are the things that Jesus received from his Father. In that respect, the Senate and House of Representatives, with the support of the Office of the President of the United States of America; together, serve as an extension of this principle for the sake of national legislation. We, who are of the court, depend on you; as Jesus depended on his Father.

In the laws of the nation, provided by you, we need to be able to clearly identify your intent in framing the law. For, some complainants will be sincere about the value of their cause, even though others will come with an agenda. The latter group reminds me of the one that fills the office of the highest spiritual Adversary. This Bible introduced us to this adversary, in the temptation of Job, the man. The highest Adversary does not limit itself to persuading individuals. This Adversary also plays a part in trying to sway the judgment of the Highest Judge. The Adversary failed to achieve this goal, and was disbarred from practicing as a prosecuting attorney in the court of Heaven; according to the report of a certain eyewitness.

And there was war in heaven: Michael and his angels fought against the dragon; and the dragon fought and his angels, And prevailed not; neither was their place found any more in heaven. And the great dragon was cast out, that old serpent, called the Devil, and Satan, which deceiveth the whole world: he was cast out into the earth, and his angels were cast out with him. (Revelation 12:7-9).. 

+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+

– Leaning on the Highest Judge (Portion 02) –

__

(General Thoughts)

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Herein, are some possible thoughts, as one stands before the Congress of the United States, in the matter of confirmation for Supreme Court judicial service.

Among the things that are often discussed, and that will, no doubt, be explored, are the matters of conflict of interest, and predisposition to an opinion. These are matters that I thought about during the time when the news of a certain recent candidate’s (the female one, not the male that preceded her) appointment to the highest court, in the United States of America was broadcast. I will share those thoughts.

The tone of the narrative will be, substantially, role playing. However, there may be times of divergence from the role play. This may take the form of a spectator providing commentary. Then again, there may not be any diversion; the intent is to make this flow as a narrative, as much as possible. So, bypassing the cordialities, let us jump to a point after that. As we continue from that point, we share thoughts on the matter of conflict of interest.

+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+

– Leaning on the Highest Judge (Portion 01) –

–

Government of the people

by the people

for the people

as an altruistic umbrella

is a theologically dangerous belief

because it is a philosophically ridiculous tenet

======================================

a mental meal, in three portions

A glitch in the practice of Democracy (Portion One)

A glitch in the practice of Democracy (Portion Two)

A glitch in the practice of Democracy (Portion Three) 

—-