It started long before Harriet Miers nomination to the Supreme Court. It even
started long before John Roberts' nomination to the Supreme Court. Conservative
concerns about the U.S. Supreme Court started many years ago.

Over the past few decades, the Supreme Court has increasingly ventured far from
its Constitutional intent. The Court has become a purveyor of social change and
the forced liberalization of America. Moving further from the scope and
limitation intended by the country’s founding fathers to interpret the
Constitution and various legislation, it has instead become an instrument of
secularization and reference to international law. The extreme liberal and
secular movements in our country make inappropriate and frequent use of the
Court when other governmental avenues - such as the U.S. Congress - are no
longer at their disposal.

As a citizen, I find this trend disturbing and unacceptable. The Court now
routinely accepts cases and delivers mandates related to matters best left
either to the States and their legislatures or the U.S. Congress. Furthermore,
their decisions typically contradict or go beyond the will and belief of the
vast majority of the U.S. citizenry. Borrowing a term from the late New York
Democratic Sen. Daniel P. Moynihan, it appears that the Court has unfortunately
become an agent of "defining down deviancy."

As a conservative, I do not want to turn the Supreme Court into some sort of
politically conservative court. While I certainly want to have the damage from
politically liberal directions undone, I simply want the Court to return to its
Constitutional scope and roots. To accomplish this, the Court should not be
politically conservative, but it must become more judicially conservative, and
therefore, more Constitutionally based and motivated. As such, we must have
jurists who are "originalists" and "strict constructionalists."

Many well-known and vocal Conservatives were apparently expecting and hoping
that President Bush would nominate someone who would result in an easier
confirmation process. However, if the President's nominee was the judicially
conservative and strict Constitutional constructionalist type of jurist that is
so desperately needed, then regardless of how well they are known or how
extensively their background is documented, the process will necessarily be
painful and difficult. We should not expect otherwise. This sort of nomination
threatens the liberal and secular chokehold on our government and culture
through the misuse of the Supreme Court. This seems to be just the latest
example of how many Conservatives and Republicans need to stop avoiding every
battle for what is right for the life, spirit, and direction of our country,
preferring to do what seems to be politically expedient at the time.

As a Christian, I view the Miers' nomination somewhat differently, though it is
still completely consistent with my views as a simple citizen and as a
conservative. Based on his character, his faith, his long-term relationship
with Miers, and his appointments to the lower courts, I trust President Bush’s
judgment. Even though I periodically struggle with that trust, he seems to have
stayed the course related to his promises about court appointments. Furthermore,
if Harriet Miers is an "originalist" (as she has described herself), a "strict
constructionalist", and an evangelical Christian, I will be much more likely to
trust that her judicial character will be consistent with the country’s
establishment by our founding fathers and the free practice of the Christian
faith.

Of course, I absolutely do not want to force Christianity on the citizens of the
U.S. or turn the country into some sort of theocracy. However, the voluntary
personal and corporate acknowledgement of God, as the founding fathers of our
nation and states did and assumed, is not establishment of a specific religion.
In fact, the total exclusion of God is, in essence, the establishment of a
specific, man-based religion better known as secular humanism. We should not
strive for nor allow the United States to become a Christian theocracy. But
likewise, we should not strive for nor allow this country to devolve into
nothing more than a secular humanist state.

And finally, as a Christian, I should also do everything in my power to ensure
this great country does not dishonor the Lord in its execution of government in
its various forms and performances. However, I must also remember that our hope
as individuals and as a country does not lie in any worldly establishment or
government institution, but ultimately in the Lord God alone through His
provision, grace, and mercy.

© Sam Bridges and VociferousSam.com

Sam Bridges is the founder and chief editor of VociferousSam.com, a website
dedicated to providing insightful commentary on today's world and culture from
a God-centered worldview and Biblical perspective. He is happily married to a
beautiful Christian woman and is the father of five magnificent children. He
is a deacon, Sunday School teacher, and webmaster at his church.

In addition to the VociferousSam.com website, Sam is a regular columnist for
RenewAmerica.us, TheConservativeVoice.com, and WebCommentary.com. His
commentaries have also been published on BushCountry.org, and
OpinionEditorials.com. For more information and commentary, visit
http://www.VociferousSam.com.