The cost to get on the High Court: Renounce The Natural Law
Forget Anita Hill. She was a shill, a smokescreen, a popular cause to rally behind. She was an assassin, yes, but the question is why was she stationed in the book depository window in the first place?
It was not to strike a blow for sexual harassment. Ted Kennedy sat in judgment of this very fine man, as did many other Democrat and Republican Senators who engaged in acts much more grievous than those Anita Hill charged against Thomas.
Damnable hypocrites, all.
If not sexual harassment, why then, the assassin Anita Hill?
The answer is The Natural Law. More specifically how the Natural Law could affect Roe v. Wade, the High Court’s lawless 1973 ruling that created, out of thin air, a “constitutional right” to terminate pregnancies equal to (or great to in the minds of the elite) all other rights in the Bill of Rights.
Clarence Thomas was a proponent of The Natural Law. The Natural Law is no friend of abortion on demand.
Thomas caved under Senate pressure and renounced the Natural Law as a guide for America’s post modern judiciary – surely the price one must pay to become a judge in post modern America.
(As an aside, this website may soon post evidence that one even has to do that to become an attorney in some jurisdictions in post modern America.)
If you have read this post then you are now ready to read “the rest of the story” on Justice Clarence Thomas’ rocky road to the High Court.
Those in the know at the time realized that Thomas was a threat to the post modern legal landscape and thus had to be “neutered.”
He was. Professor Charles Rice knows the score. He tells us in 50 Questions that it went down like this:
