Religion & Law

I would like to thank Steve Shiffrin for his challenging remarks in his post entitled ?More Progressives and the Mission of this Site.? I am pleased with Steve?s kind words about the talented individuals who offer posts on the Mirror of Justice. Excluding myself, I share his sentiment. I am not sure that the issue he identifies, i.e., ?the posts on this site predominantly come from conservatives,? is accurate and thus warrants the solution he proposes, i.e., to add more ?progressives? in order to ?better achieve [MOJ?s] mission??

Surely if any individual contributor thinks that his or her perspective on Catholic legal theory is inadequately treated, that person has the ability to remedy the situation quickly by posting more contributions. I do not agree with Steve?s point that ?urging those progressives on the site to do more or post differently will help only at the margin.? As I reflect on what Steve says, I cannot fathom what advantage the ?conservative? has over the ?progressive.? Moreover, I do not understand his criteria for determining what makes a contributor a ?conservative? and what makes one a ?progressive.?

When it comes to the notion that there are different perspectives on the issues, who addresses them, and how they are addressed, I would concur that there is diversity of opinion. But I would be averse to say that the differences that emerge in our discussions are reducible to the dichotomy of ?conservative? versus ?progressive.?

It is clear that each contributor has many other responsibilities in his or her life. We are all teachers and have different obligations as educators. Some have families and the attendant responsibilities require much attention. Some have pastoral duties that necessitate a substantial amount of time in a personal schedule, particularly on weekends. Some have to care for ailing relatives, the responsibilities of which are not regulated by a convenient schedule. Some have a demanding travel schedules dictated by public speaking engagements. Some have administrative responsibilities that necessitate enormous accountability. But these distinctions do not, in my opinion, give any person more free time or any advantage to contribute to the Mirror of Justice than anyone else. In this regard, I believe that the playing or contributing field is about as level as it could be.

I respect Steve?s request to place any discussion of individual opinions about how we identify one another in another forum. However, his call for arguments ?to the contrary? regarding his perspective that ?conservative? voices predominate over ?progressive? voices thereby mandating an increase in ?progressive? voices being added to the list of contributors appears to be within his call for public discussion. I have offered my preliminary thoughts on Steve?s challenging remarks and look forward to hearing what others may have to say.

RJA sj