A controversial topic for a controversial world has been placed in the hands of the United States Supreme Court.
I certainly don't envy their task.
When the highest court in our nation convenes to contemplate specific legalities of an issue as it applies to our constitution, it can be a bit tricky to navigate. For starters, all appointed judges have had a lifetime of their own established morals and values. They differ from one another, obviously. Even within the liberal group of judges (or the conservative group), they have much different viewpoints.
All of which are valid.
Politics are often polarizing. Democrats and Republicans fight their positions sometimes as down and dirty as a Missouri fan defending themselves against a KU fan. What we hope exists within each camp is passion. Passion for their belief system. What we hope doesn't exist in either camp is influence. Obviously, the latter would be damning to us all.
Alas.... it happens everywhere. It happens in families, in business and in politics. That's why companies often refer to the "politics in the office". It can get downright dirty and difficult to navigate who is in which camp and how one should align themselves.
Although Americans are typically impatient, we will have to wait for awhile on this one. The judges are working on two related cases, both of which address the legality of gay marriage. Their first debate? Whether or not they should even be hearing the cases.
Yep, it's gonna take awhile. Media is reporting we won't know anything until June.
Full transparency is beginning to change everything we do in our world. No longer will our appointed justices sit in debate for months on end in complete secrecy. They will debate publicly, essentially, being taped/recorded.
I'm not sure I can agree with this. Oh sure, some would agree it keeps them accountable. Not so really - they were already transcribed word for word and held for future generations to review so it's not like they could hide. Coming into the digital age has an entirely new format of confrontation to it. In my opinion, the justices have to live in complete solitary once their debates are aired as to not be influenced by the outside world before deciding their position. How fair is it to appoint someone to do major lifting for this country and then force them to live in this fashion?
How many business meetings do you engage in each week that you would not have televised on your company's intranet for the rest of the associates to see?
It would certainly temper the way you communicated. It may even hamper your ability to express your position, especially if there were repercussions (even though that's typically illegal).
It should be interesting to follow. A lot of Americans will bury their heads in the sand during conversations of fiscal budgets, tax increases and military cuts but when a social topic is discussed related to personal choices they are up front and center. With the case just being opened yesterday, I already have a ton of friends on facebook identifying their positions.
It's gonna be a long haul. Be patient and let them do their work. And try, really try, to remember this.
No matter what camp you may reside.
Happy Wednesday, friends!