August 7, 2008 Rabbi David Gutterman: A Continuing Story With a Sustaining Goal Rabbi Berel Wein: Mourning and morning JWisdom: Yes, we are still in exile by Rabbi Sroy Levitansky August 6, 2008 David Ashenfelter: Government made military engineer's life a living hell because of his faith, Defense Department report documents Jonathan Tobin: Speak the Truth; Defeat the Lies JWisdom: Jewish Spirituality: Fusion or Confusion? by Rabbi David Aaron August 5, 2008 Chris Leppek: Church/state wall beginning to crumble? Paul Greenberg: Exit Olmert (no encore, please) JWisdom: Serenity: Make the commitment by Rabbi Zelig Pliskin (Read by Gavriel Sanders) August 4, 2008 The Jewish Ethicist by Rabbi Dr. Asher Meir: Am I taking advantage of another's psychological quirk? Andrew Silow-Carroll: A black and a Jew walk into the White House… JWisdom: The Holocaust in the Perspective of Faith: Edward R. Morrow visits the ‘living dead’ by Rabbi Nosson Scherman August 1, 2008 Rabbi A. Henach Leibowitz: We have the power to alter another's destiny — use it well Caroline B. Glick: Why Olmert — finally — did it JWisdom: Life By The (Book of) Numbers by Rabbi Sroy Levitansky July 31, 2008 This Week in Biblical History by Rabbi Yonason Goldson: Ezra the Scribe returns from exile Joan Verdon: Demure is in demand: More brides seek 'modest' gowns JWisdom: You don't have to be ‘compatible’ to have a stable, happy relationship by Malka Shulman July 30, 2008 Jonathan Tobin: Does Israel need 'tough love'? The Kosher Gourmet by Gail Borelli: Pickling captures the fleeting tastes of summer's fruits and vegetables JWisdom: Serenity: It's Really Up to YOU! by Rabbi Zelig Pliskin (Read by Gavriel Sanders) July 29, 2008 Rabbi Avi Shafran: Good things happen Dick Morris: How Israel's race could shift ours JWisdom: Holocaust in the Perspective of Faith by Rabbi Nosson Scherman: Equal but Not Jewish or Jewish but Not Human? July 28, 2008 The Jewish Ethicist by Rabbi Dr. Asher Meir: How and when to lie Steven Emerson: More Perils of Interfaith Dialogue JWisdom:: A TripTik for Your Spiritual Journey by Rabbi Dovid Gross July 24, 2008 Rabbi Berel Wein: On the road again --- and again and again Richard Z. Chesnoff: Mideast Refugees --- Failure vs. Success JWisdom:: Word power is about more than vocabulary by Rabbi Sroy Levitansky July 23, 2008 Jonathan Tobin: The Mufti of Jerusalem's Nazi ideology lives on among contemporary Islamists The Kosher Gourmet by Joe Gray: Smoked paprika turkey meatballs simmered in red wine and tomato sauce JWisdom:: 'Routine' doesn't need to mean ‘rote’ By Rabbi David Aaron July 22, 2008 Yossi Klein Halevi: Dear Barack Obama Elliot B. Gertel: Eli Stone: Self-indulgent, arrogant corporate attorney as modern-day prophet JWisdom:: Three Weeks - Nine Days - One Purpose by Rabbi Mordechai Becher July 21, 2008 The Jewish Ethicist by Rabbi Dr. Asher Meir: Spending your kids' money Mitch Albom: A grim exchange illustrates a key difference JWisdom:: The Holocaust in the Perspective of Faith: Hammered on the Anvil --- Severed by the Sickle by Rabbi Nosson Scherman July 18, 2008 Rabbi Nathan Lopes Cardozo: The Sanctification and Importance of Time Caroline B. Glick: US wants it absolutely clear it has no intention of attacking Iran's nuclear installations Mona Charen: What can you say about a people who welcome a child murderer as a hero? JWisdom:: Living a dog's life, dawg? by Rabbi Dovid Gross July 17, 2008 Steven Emerson: Deals with devils Libby Lazewnik: One Step at a Time JWisdom:: Leader the follower? by Rabbi Sroy Levitansky July 16, 2008 The Jewish Ethicist by Rabbi Dr. Asher Meir: Poaching humans The Kosher Gourmet by Linda Gassenheimer: Meaty pasta salad with summer berries perfect for warm evenings JWisdom:: Keeping A Secret by Rabbi Mordechai Becher July 15, 2008 Dennis Prager: False Equation: Opposing Same-Sex Marriage and Opposing Interracial Marriage Joel Greenberg: Researchers look to Israeli circumcision program to help combat AIDS 'Alternatives' to Logic Won't Work JWisdom:: Re-Jew-venating prayer, Part V: Why Judaism ISN'T Spiritual by Rabbi David Aaron July 14, 2008 Jonathan Rosenblum: A warning from Canada to those who value life Jonathan Tobin: 'Alternatives' to Logic Won't Work JWisdom:: Holocaust in the Perspective of Faith by Rabbi Nosson Scherman: Poland's Unique Antisemitism, Part II July 11, 2008 Rabbi Francis Nataf: It's hard to be humble when you're great Caroline B. Glick: A tale of two hostages JWisdom:: Profane for Prophet by Rabbi Sroy Levitansky July 8, 2008 The Jewish Ethicist by Rabbi Dr. Asher Meir: Q. Duty to save gullible from themselves? Frank J. Gaffney, Jr.: Islamists have the West just where they want us March 22, 2007 J-Rhythms with Avraham Rosenblum: JWR's cutting-edge music program showcasing performers -- singers, song writers, musicians, and bands -- who learn and live the Torah lifestyle (OUR NEWEST IGODCAST !) Oct. 29, 2003 Mortimer B. Zuckerman: Graffiti On History's Walls (MUST-READ!)

Jewish World Review March 2, 2005 / 21 Adar I, 5765 Black robes and betrayal By Tony Blankley http://www.JewishWorldReview.com | The United States Supreme Court has struck again — this time overturning by a 5-4 decision, all statutes that apply the death sentence to 16- and 17-year-old murderers. As a former prosecutor I am convinced that from time to time juries find before them 16- or 17-year-old defendants who understand full well the vicious nature of their murders and deserve — after receiving the full panoply of due process — to be fried, gassed, hanged, shot, injected or otherwise sent promptly to hell. Even if you are of a sympathetic nature and believe that the little 17-year-old darlings deserve to be rehabilitated, you might still find this Supreme Court opinion stomach turning for its sheer disdain of logic, public attitudes and American law. But first: The crime, as described yesterday by Justice Kennedy in Roper v. Simmons, writing for the majority: "At the age of 17, when he was still a junior in high school, Christopher Simmons ... committed murder ... There is little doubt that Simmons was the instigator of the crime. Before its commission, Simmons said he wanted to murder someone. In chilling, callous terms he talked about his plan with his friends ... Simmons proposed to commit burglary and murder by breaking and entering, tying up a victim and throwing the victim off a bridge. Simmons assured his friends they could "get away with it" because they were minors." A few hours later, he proceeded to do just that, breaking into a home, covering the victim's head in a towel, wrapping her up in duct tape and tying her hands and legs together with electrical wire. Then he drove her to a bridge and threw her off into the water, where helpless, she drowned. The question before the Supreme Court was whether this presented a case of cruel and unusual punishment in violation of the 8th Amendment to our Constitution. No, the court was not concerned with whether being assaulted in your home, wrapped in a towel, duct tape and electrical wire, and thrown off a bridge was cruel and unusual punishment. That's OK. The Court is only concerned with whether it was cruel and unusual to execute the strapping 17-year-old murderer who did it. The gist of the majority's analysis is that whether the crime is constitutionally "unusual" depends on whether "evolving standards of decency" have reached the point in our history when such punishment has been clearly rejected by society. It happens that only 15 years ago, the Supreme Court found that the kind of statute in question was constitutional. But, rather than overturning that case, yesterday, the court found that in the last 15 years, a national consensus against such punishment had emerged. The majority based that conclusion on the fact that "18 states — or 47 percent of states that permit capital punishment — now have legislation prohibiting the execution of offenders under 18," and four of those states have adopted such legislation since the Supreme Court's ruling of 15 years ago. As Justice Anton Scalia fumed in his dissent: "Words have no meaning if the views of less than 50 percent of death penalty States can constitute a national consensus. Our previous cases have required overwhelming opposition to a challenged practice, generally over a long period of time." In this case, a majority of relevant states approve the practice. Recognizing that they were arguing a rather weak set of facts regarding a national consensus, the majority supplemented its argument with the self-aggrandizing assertion that "In the end our own judgment will be brought to bear on the question of the acceptability of the death penalty under the Eighth Amendment." Outrageously, the court asserts such power because, as Justice Scalia characterized, "juries cannot be trusted with the delicate task of weighing a defendant's youth along with other mitigating factors." This assertion, of course, undermines "the very foundations of our capital sentencing system." The majority, still sensing its arguments to be rather feeble, went on to try to buttress their case further by citing a menagerie of international treaties and foreign laws, claiming: "The opinion of the world community, while not controlling our outcome, does provide respected and significant confirmation for our own conclusions." In support thereof they cited, inter alia, the U.N. Convention on the Rights of the Child, a treaty before signing which the United States Government expressly reserved "the right ... to impose capital punishment on any person (other than a pregnant woman) ... " To which Justice Scalia observed in his dissent: "Unless the Court has added to its arsenal the power to join and ratify treaties on behalf of the United States, I cannot see how this evidence favors, rather than refutes, [the majority's] position." After Justice Kennedy used five pages of his logically incoherent majority opinion to cite a hodgepodge of foreign laws, he limply and defensively concluded his opinion: "It does not lessen our fidelity to the Constitution or our pride in its origins to acknowledge that the express affirmation of certain fundamental rights by other nations and people simply underscores the centrality of those same rights within our own heritage of freedom." When a Supreme Court Justice feels it necessary to write as the closing words of his opinion that he still holds fidelity to the Constitution, it is more than reasonable to assume he knows he has just betrayed that sacred document. But at least he has vouchsafed his popularity at liberal cocktail parties for another year. Every weekday JewishWorldReview.com publishes what many Washington and the media consider "must-reading". Sign up for the daily JWR update. It's free. Just click here. Tony Blankley is editorial page editor of The Washington Times. Comment by clicking here. Archives © 2005, Creators Syndicate