Nov. 24, 2009 Rabbi Avi Shafran : The Atheists' unintended gift JWisdom.com: You are a Philanthropist with Aliza Bulow (5 minutes) Nov. 23, 2009 The Jewish Ethicist by Rabbi Dr. Asher Meir: Negotiating nuisances JWisdom.com: Actually, it really is all about you with Rabbi Lawrence Hajioff Nov. 20, 2009 Rabbi David Aaron: How to make every second of your life come first Caroline B. Glick: Whither American Jewry Nov. 19, 2009 Binyamin L. Jolkovsky: Please Listen to this Godcast (5 minutes) Jonathan Tobin: ADL Crosses the Line with Report Bashing Obama Critics Nov. 18, 2009 Rabbi Yonason Goldson: What Judaism has to say about the secret of the Mona Lisa's smile JWisdom.com: The (Jewish) Dating Game with Rabbi Lawrence Hajioff (8 minutes) Nov. 17, 2009 Steven Emerson: How Does the 4th Amendment Impact Terror Finance Investigations? JWisdom.com: If Frank Sinatra married Edith Piaf with Rabbi Y.Y. Rubinstein (2 minutes) Life lessons from what would be regarded as the most inappropriate lyrics ever sung Nov. 16, 2009 The Jewish Ethicist by Rabbi Dr. Asher Meir : When borrowing is stealing JWisdom.com: Deconstructing faith with Rabbi Warren Goldstein (9 minutes) Nov. 13, 2009 JWisdom.com Sarah's subjective reality with Rabbi Sroy Levitansky ( 6 minutes) Caroline B. Glick: Obama's failure, Netanyahu's opportunity Nov. 12, 2009 The Kosher Gourmet By Marialisa Calta : A sweet sweet potato treat JWisdom.com Does God get tired? with Rabbi Harvey Belovski ( 5 minutes) Nov. 11, 2009 Rabbi Avi Shafran: Jews and money: When anti-Semitism isn't JWisdom.com Marriages are not made in Heaven with Rabbi Lawrence Hajioff (VERY fast 15 minutes) Nov. 10, 2009 Michael Doyle: Author of book exposing CAIR ordered to remove supporting documents from Web JWisdom.com If the creation so loudly shouts the existence of the Creator, why aren't more people believers? with Rabbi Naftali Brawer (9 minutes) Nov. 9, 2009 Mark Steyn: Shooter exposes hole in U.S. terror strategy JWisdom.com It's never too late to have a happy childhood with Sarah Chana Radcliffe (5 minutes) Nov. 6, 2009 Rabbi Berel Wein: Choosing to hear JWisdom.com Zero to 1/60th: How to Empower An Hour with Gavriel Aryeh Sande (7 minutes) Caroline B. Glick The mullahs' big week Suzanne Fields A Fallen Wall for Fallen Man Nov. 5, 2009 The Kosher Gourmet: Three scrumptious -- but simple -- butternut squash dishes JWisdom.com Hidden Hints: Unlocking Faith & Prayer with Rabbi Jay Yaacov Schwartz (10 minutes) Nov. 4, 2009 Tom Hamburger and Kim Geiger: Should prayers be covered? JWisdom.com When God played peacemaker With Rabbi Sroy Levitansky (5 minutes) Nov. 3, 2009 Martin Peretz: Beware, Barack. Beware, Rahm. Beware, Axelrod JWisdom.com Are you are closet idolater? With Sara Yoheved Rigler (10 minutes) Nov. 2, 2009 Paul Greenberg: The Holocaust is now on Facebook JWisdom.com Abraham's Strange Change With Rabbi Yitzchok Fingerer (5 minutes) Oct. 29, 2003 Mortimer B. Zuckerman: Graffiti On History's Walls (MUST-READ!)

Jewish World Review Jan. 12, 2006 / 12 Teves, 5766 Solomon Amendment: Issue of hypocrisy By Jonathan Turley http://www.JewishWorldReview.com | Following oral argument on Dec. 6, the U.S. Supreme Court is now pondering the wisdom of Solomon. The Solomon Amendment withholds federal funds from any school that does not provide the same access to military recruiters as it does to other potential employers. Law schools have rallied against the rule for violating their nondiscrimination policies as well as their constitutional rights of speech and association. In the balance are the right of Congress to condition the receipt of federal funds, the right of free speech-and literally billions of dollars that could be lost by schools unable to reconcile anti-discrimination policies with their receipt of federal money. This case has presented a difficult question for academics who generally support gay rights. Last year, this issue was presented to my law school faculty when we were asked to join the Forum for Academic and Institutional Rights (FAIR) in challenging the rule. Twenty-six law schools have joined the coalition, though many have done so anonymously to avoid any retaliation from the government. As a legal commentator, I have long supported gay rights and opposed the ban on openly gay citizens in the military. Yet I spoke against joining FAIR. Despite my personal respect for academics on the other side of this issue, I continue to believe that schools are not just wrong on the law but hypocritical in their positions in this litigation. The first problem with this case is the anonymity of many schools. (To its credit, George Washington University Law School joined as a named institution). Basically, these schools are asserting the principle of nondiscrimination while trying to avoid any of the costs of principle. These schools are hiding their identities not only from the government but also from their alumni. It is a disturbing lesson for their students-assuming that their students even know their position. PRINCIPLE HAS A PRICE If it is true that military recruiters are engaged in a discriminatory policy, then the schools should bar them from campus. Instead, schools are allowing the interviews to go forward-interviews that they have analogized to the segregationist policies of the Civil Rights period. If the Solomon Amendment is discriminatory, then schools should refuse to cooperate and accept the consequences for such a principled stand. What schools cannot do is to engage in a practice that they consider morally wrong while claiming no moral obligations to stop. When I raised this issue in the past, I was told that schools could simply not afford such a stance. After all, the University of California alone could lose hundreds of millions of dollars in universitywide grants. Of course, this merely sharpens the age-old test of principle v. price. According to legend, Winston Churchill once asked a socialite if she would sleep with him for 1 million pounds. When she admitted that she would, he offered one pound. "Winston! What sort of woman do you think I am?," the woman objected. He responded, "We have already established what you are, now we are just haggling over price." Law schools appear to be only haggling over the price of principle. Thus, we have decided to assume the appearance of principle while avoiding its costs. There is also the question of the propriety of law schools entering this litigation as parties. There are many on faculties and within student bodies who agree with the policy and legal arguments of the military. I do not. However, there was no reason why professors have insisted on schools taking an institutional stand- rather than have professors litigate as individuals. Advocates wanted the imprimatur of law schools to support an otherwise shaky legal argument. Despite the appellate ruling in favor of the schools, Congress is on good legal ground in its position. Allowing military recruiters on campus does not force a law school to endorse the practice. Indeed, the school may warn students that the recruiter is viewed as discriminatory and practice free speech denouncing its presence. Moreover, the Supreme Court has never held that the military policy on gays is Unconstitutional and has so far refused to give sexual orientation the same protection as race, religion, national origin or even gender. Thus, the military is not engaged in an unconstitutional act. Finally, the fact that the military is on campus does not force students or a school to associate with anti-gay views-any more than recruiters from anti- abortion or pro-abortion-rights groups are associating their views by their mere presence on campus. The Supreme Court will most likely uphold the Solomon Amendment. Law schools will then have to face the moral question that they sought to avoid in this case: whether to continue a practice that they consider morally and legal wrong-or just continue to haggle over price. Every weekday JewishWorldReview.com publishes what many in in the media and Washington consider "must-reading". Sign up for the daily JWR update. It's free. Just click here. JWR contributor Jonathan Turley is a law professor at George Washington University. Click here to visit his website. Comment by clicking here. ARCHIVES © 2005, Jonathan Turley

Arnold Ahlert  Mitch Albom  Michael Barone   Dave Barry  Tony Blankley  Andy Borowitz  David Broder  Stratfor Briefing  Mona Charen  Linda Chavez  Ann Coulter  Greg Crosby  Larry Elder  Suzanne Fields  John Fund  Frank J. Gaffney  Lloyd Garver  Jonah Goldberg  Julia Gorin  Jonathan Gurwitz  Paul Greenberg  Lewis Grossberger  Victor Davis Hanson  Betsy Hart  Nat Hentoff  David Horowitz  Laura Ingraham  Cheri Jacobus Jeff Jacoby  Paul Johnson  Jack Kelly  Ed Koch  Ch. Krauthammer  Michael Ledeen  John Leo  David Limbaugh  Kathryn Lopez  Rich Lowry  Michelle Malkin  Jackie Mason  Dick Morris  Bill O'Reilly  Jim Mullen  Clarence Page  Kathleen Parker  Dennis Prager  Wesley Pruden  Tom Purcell  Jonathan Rauch  Celia Rivenbark  Robert Robb  Cokie & Steve Roberts  Pat Sajak  Debra J. Saunders  Culture Shlock  Roger Simon  Michael Smerconish  Thomas Sowell  Mark Steyn  John Stossel  Cal Thomas  Bob Tyrrell  Diana West  Dave Weinbaum  George Will  Walter Williams  Byron York  Mort Zuckerman  Robert Arial  Chuck Asay  Baloo  Chip Bok  Dry Bones   Lisa Benson  John Branch  Gary Brookins  John Cole  J. D. Crowe  John Deering  Brian Duffy  Everything's Relative  Mallard Fillmore  Jake Fuller  Bob Gorrel  Joe Heller  David Hitch  Jerry Holber  Steve Kelley  Jeff Koterba  Dick Locher  Chan Lowe  Ranan R. Lurie  Jimmy Margulies  Rick McKee  Michael Ramirez  Kevin Siers  Jeff Stahler  Ed Stein  Danna Summers  John Trever  Gary Varvel  Kirk Walters  How 2  Lori Borgman  The Savvy Consumer  Elder matters  Fixit  Dr. Peter Gott  GET A JOB! by Marty Nemko  Richard Lederer  Tech Maven  Every Monday Matters  Nutrition Myths  Bookmark These  Bruce Williams  How Stuff Works