Supreme Court Justice, and former General Counsel to the American Civil Liberties Union, Ruth Bader Ginsberg, was recently asked by an Al-Hayat Egyptian TV reporter if Egypt should look to Constitutions such as ours as a model when they draft their own.She believes that Egypt should be, “Aided aided by all Constitution writing that has gone on since the end of World War II.” She Believes our Constitution is an antique.
Does she believe the U.S. Constitution should be a model? Absolutely not. She believes that if she were drafting a Constitution right now, that she would look to South Africa’s as a model. She told the reporter, “I would not look to the U.S. Constitution, if I were drafting a Constitution in the year 2012. I might look at the Constitution of South Africa. That was a deliberate attempt to have a fundamental instrument of government that embraced basic human rights, had an independent judiciary. … It really is, I think, a great piece of work that was done. Much more recent than the U.S. Constitution.” She also said “we are still forming the more perfect union. ”
We don’t believe that Clarence Thomas, Antonin Scalia, Sam Alito, John Roberts, or the Founders share her belief that the Constitution is an ever changing document.
It’s no surprise that she is a big fan of the very progressive South African Constitution adopted in 1997. One of the purposes of their Constitution is socialism, as is written in its preamble.
“We therefore, through our freely elected representatives, adopt this Constitution as the supreme law of the Republic so as to heal the divisions of the past and establish a society based on democratic values, social justice and fundamental human rights;” Whenever the words "social justice" are used in any context, its time for a closer look.
What exactly is this “Social Justice” South Africa is talking about? It is the "Fundamental Change" that Obama is foisting on this country as you read this. It is a concept of equality that involves an economic equality of outcome dreamed up and manufactured for all participants in a society. This comes in the form of socialism or communalism. It comes in the form of income redistribution through taxation, welfare, monetary policies, and is mostly progressive redistribution from the rich to the poor.
Obama, Ginsberg and Obama’s appointees Sotomayor and Kagan are proponents of equality of income, equality of condition, distributive justice, and equality of results as espoused in the South Africa Constitution. Obama would be proud to this Constitution because it "Fundamentally transformed" South Africa.
Here are some "Highlights” of the South Africa Bill Of Rights.
As labor unions here lose clout as states move toward "Right to Work," they would salivate over union provisions in South Africa's Bill of Rights that guarantee labor's power there and say,
“Every worker has the right to form and join a trade union,
to participate in the activities and programmes of a trade union; and to
strike.” There's money to be made by union bosses there.
Environmentalists here would clamor for South Africa Constitutional environmental provisions that say,
“Everyone has the right to an environment that is not harmful to their health or well-being; and to have the environment protected, for the benefit of present and future generations, through reasonable legislative and other measures that prevent pollution and ecological degradation; promote conservation; and secure ecologically sustainable development and use of natural resources while the promoting justifiable economic and social development.”
The Global Warming scam is practically written into their Constitution. In fact, the last United Nations Conference on Global Warming took place in Durban, South Africa last November. Fortunately, that Conference flopped.
Obama already is a proponent of their Universal Healthcare System that will start this April when every citizen there earning above a certain income will be required by law to make a contribution to the National Health Insurance Fund. It will not be possible to opt out of this responsibility. Sound familiar?
South Africa's National Healthcare is mandated by their Bill of Rights provision that says, “Everyone has the right to have access to health care services, including reproductive health care.” Obama is currently trying to make the Catholic Church and other religious organizations subservient to his vision of reproductive health care. Typical of Obama, as he knows what is best for them rather than what they know is best according to their own religious tenets.
The South Africa Bill of Rights also creates a welfare state and bestows rights to “sufficient food and water and social security, including, if they are unable to support themselves and their dependents, appropriate social assistance. The state must take reasonable legislative and other measures, within its available resources, to achieve the progressive realization of each of these rights.” This is a nanny state to the extreme.
And, there is the long sought right to housing that is the liberal's dream.
Here is that Guarantee in South Africa.
“Everyone has the right to have access to adequate housing. The state must take reasonable legislative and other measures, within its available resources, to achieve the progressive realisation of this right.”
That would help Obama to achieve one supporter’s dream when he was elected. She gleefully said on election day, “I never thought this day would come. I’ll never have to work to pay for gasoline again. I’ll never have to work to pay my mortgage again.”
The Occupy loonies would be thrilled with the Bill of Rights educational provisions. They are demanding free college education. Well, study in South Africa. Their Bill of Rights proclaims, “Everyone has the right to a basic education, including adult basic education; and to further education, which the state, through reasonable measures, must make progressively available and accessible.”
Democrat appointed liberal judges here can get guidance from these provisions in making legal decisions in America. “When interpreting the Bill of Rights, a court, tribunal or forum must promote the values that underlie an open and democratic society based on human dignity, equality and freedom; must consider international law; and may consider foreign law.”
This foreign law interpretation use in South Africa's Constitution is already a favorite of Justice Ginsberg, who said in a speech at American University,
“ …why not the analysis of a question similar to the one we confront contained, for example, in an opinion of the Supreme Court of Canada, the Constitutional Court of South Africa, the German Constitutional Court, or the European Court
Justice Anthony Kennedy actually cited the very same European Court of Human Rights in a landmark ruling supporting homosexual rights. Justice John Paul Stevens cited foreign law in a footnote in one opinion. Antonin Scalia said in response, "The views of other nations, however enlightened the justices of this court may think them to be, cannot be imposed upon Americans through the Constitution."
He has been consistent in opposing American Courts’ use of Foreign law in deciding cases here. He believes that U.S. attitudes about what is decent and right, and not foreign ones, are what should matter.
Can you think of one situation from global warming, to taxation, to voting, to gun rights that you would personally give a damn about what foreign Constitutions say or how foreign courts have ruled? We don’t think so.
