American conservatism's most ferocious internecine controversy in years erupted when the journal First Things published a symposium on "the judicial usurpation of politics," exploring the daring question "whether we have reached or are reaching the point where conscientious citizens can no longer give moral assent to the existing regime." A far-flung debate ensued, engaging scores of contestants in countless journals and newspapers. A new volume collects for the first time the original symposium and the most important responses, with a new 90-page essay by First Things' Richard John Neuhaus, "The Anatomy of a Controversy." Collected here is the original November 1996 symposium on "The End of Democracy? The Judicial Usurpation of Politics," in which Robert Bork, Russell Hittinger, Hadley Arkes, Charles Colson, Robert George, and the editors of First Things confront five decades of judicial decrees arrogating to the courts the final say on abortion, euthanasia, homosexuality, obscenity, and other fundamental questions of how we order our lives together. Responses from 20 eminent commentators follow (including Gertrude Himmelfarb, Mary Ann Glendon, William Bennett, Norman Podhoretz, and William Kristol), ranging from condemnation of the symposium's reckless flirtation with rebellion to praise for its forthright engagement of distressing but urgent questions. An extended review of the contours and implications of the controversy by Father Neuhaus rounds out the volume.
Book Description
Editorial Reviews
From Kirkus Reviews
A one-stop opportunity to assess in the round a durable dispute on the political right, set off by a symposium in last November's edition of First Things. The journal featured a symposium devoted to the issues of whether America's judiciary has usurped the democratic political process and what could or should be done about it. The collection (whose contributors included the heavyweight likes of Hadley Arkes, Robert H. Bork, Charles Colson, and Robert P. George) touched off an immediate furor that has yet to abate among conservative intellectuals and their principal journals (such as the American Spectator, the Weekly Standard, and Commentary). This volume encompasses all of the original articles, several of which assert that citizens repelled by the activist excesses of ultraliberal courts that purportedly find hitherto unsuspected rights in the US Constitution would be justified in considering civil disobedience or outright resistance to their government. There is also a representative sample of the impassioned responses these essays evoked (inter alia, from William J. Bennett, Midge Decter, Gertrude Himmelfarb, William Kristol, and Norman Podhoretz). Finally, there is a longish last word entitled ``The Anatomy of a Controversy'' from Richard John Neuhaus, the Catholic priest who serves as editor in chief of First Things. Although American Tories share common concerns about bedrock matters like abortion, death (assisted suicide, euthanasia), and marriage (among homosexuals), the magazine's compilation suggests that they're a diverse and fractious lot given to spirited argument on ends versus means as well as the socioeconomic and moral or religious underpinnings of their political faith. In short, an instructive and ready reference to the debate on judicial restraint being conducted by the right wing of the domestic electorate--without benefit of coverage by the mainstream press. -- Copyright ©1997, Kirkus Associates, LP. All rights reserved.
Product Details
Would you like to update product info or give feedback on images?
|
Customer Reviews
|
Share your thoughts with other customers:
|
||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Most Helpful Customer Reviews
1 of 7 people found the following review helpful:
1.0 out of 5 stars
Typical Court-Bashing from Self-Styled Constitutional Scholars,
By
This review is from: The End of Democracy?: The Judical Usurpation of Politics (Hardcover)
Frankly, there's nothing much here that Colson, Bork, Dobson, Arkes, and the like haven't said before or wouldn't be happy to tell you again. More interesting (although too disjointed to be of much value) are the responses that this book includes from those who were not active participants in the 1996 First Things Symposium that this book encompasses.
If you've read one screed suggesting that the Supreme Court's opinions in Casey and Romer authorize Christians to rebel against the government, then you've read them all. Dobson and Colson (one a non-lawyer, the other disbarred) are particularly obnoxious in this context, as they are both out of their depth and eager to replace our nation's history and historic Christian doctrine with a distinctly un-edifying polemic against the courts.
Share your thoughts with other customers: Create your own review
|
|
Tag this product(What's this?)Think of a tag as a keyword or label you consider is strongly related to this product.
Tags will help all customers organize and find favorite items. |
Sell a Digital Version of This Book in the Kindle Store
If you are a publisher or author and hold the digital rights to a book, you can sell a digital version of it in our Kindle Store.
Learn more
Customer Discussions
|
This product's forum
Active discussions in related forums
Search Customer Discussions
|
Related forums
|
