Blogroll

Interesting quandry

Today’s court ruling setting South Dakota’s first execution in 59 years jsut two weeks from now could pose some interesting questions for the pro-life movement in South Dakota, particularly Catholics.

The court order allows Elijah Page to be executed at the South Dakota Penitentiary the week of August 28. Page pleaded guilty to the kidnapping and brutal beating death of Chester Poage and received the death penalty. His death sentence was affirmed (lengthy PDF file) by the Supreme Court in January and Page sent a handwritten letter (PDF file) to the judge, his attorneys and the news media anouncing that he did not want to pursue any further appeals. The ruling determined Page was competent to make that decision.

What makes this a bit more interesting is that Gov. Mike Rounds, who signed the abortion ban legislation, is not only pro-life, he is also a Catholic. Although it does not appear a formal statement has been isused by the Catholic Diocese of Sioux Falls, it’s Catholic Advocate Network posted a notice online on July 31 asking Catholics to contact Gov. Rounds and “request that he intercede and prevent the execution of Elijah Page.” A link to the “action alert” appears on the Diocese’s “Respect Life” web page, which is generally devoted to anti-abortion issues.

It will be interesting to see not only how he reacts, but also the response of those who pushed and supported the abortion ban on the basis of respect for life.


As a society, we must seek solutions to crime that respect the dignity of every human life, including the hardened criminal, and preserve justice in this state through non-violent means.

Catholic Diocese of Sioux Falls “Action Alert” on Elijah Page

J.A.I.L. tidbits

  • PP does an excellent job deconstructing and looking behind comments here and on the No on E blog that I briefly addressed here. Tell me again that Amendment E isn’t backed by the fringe.NOTE: PP has a special update that is also worth reading.
  • The No on E Committee got some press over the weekend as a result of its booth at the Sioux Empire Fair. According to the article, there were no pro-Amendment E booths at the fair. I find it curious, though, that while the story evidently justified being on the front of Sunday’s “Sioux Empire” section, it does not appear on the local daily’s web site.
  • A Minnesota judge hits the nail on the head in his description of Amendment E. He views it as yet another method to attempt to intimidate judges who are bound to follow established law, regardless of whether they personally agree with it.

    If the truth doesn’t save us, what does that say about us?

    Lois McMaster Bujold, Diplomatic Immunity

  • Lengthy weekend miscellany and marginalia

    Recent travel leads to an extended list of linkage this weekend:

    • I’m enough of a Jon Stewart fan that I have both a “Jon Stewart for President 2008” t-shirt and bumper sticker. But I’m not sure about this.
    • On a related note, while I’m not a fan of the Colbert Report, those who are might have fun with this. (Via Roberson’s Interminable Ramble.)
    • Publishers Weekly’s Book Life comes up with a list of 15 top books about rock ‘n roll, of which I’ve read about a quarter.
    • Here’s an interesting list of court opinions that cite blogs.
    • In light of the London terror arrests, this article (PDF file) on the risk of terrorism may be even more relevant. It notes: “Even with the September 11 attacks included in the count, the number of Americans killed by international terrorism since the late 1960s (which is when the State Department began counting) is about the same as the number of Americans killed over the same period by lightning, accident-causing deer, or severe allergic reaction to peanuts.”
    • The “long list” for the 2006 Lettre Ulysses Award for the Art of Reportage has been announced. (Via The Millions.)
    • A Canadian reviewer who, like me, panned John Updike’s Terrorist takes the initiative of coming up with a list of English language books written by Arab and Muslim writers exploring “the Muslim mind.” (Via Critical Mass.)
    • On a somewhat related note, the essay in this weekend’s New York Times Book Review takes a look at Turkey’s prosecution of writers.
    • The Guardian looks at the role of drugs in Philip K. Dick’s work and life.
    • I’ve suspected this most of my life.

    We’re about eight Einsteins away from getting any kind of handle on the universe.

    Martin Amis on Bill Moyers’ Faith and Reason

    Book Review: Terrorist by John Updike

    The thought of a John Updike novel pondering America’s post-9/11 angst may lead to a belief that the world is beginning to see the 9/11 literary canon so many people seem to desire. While post-9/11 America sets the stage for Updike’s 22nd novel, Terrorist, let’s hope it is a step along the way to that canon and not a cornerstone.

    Terrorist is the story of Ahmad Ashmawy Mulloy, an 18-year-old graduating senior from a decaying high school in the decaying factory town of New Prospect, N.J. Although born and raised in the U.S., Ahmad is far different than his classmates. Ahmad is the son of a woman of Irish-American heritage (hence Mulloy) and an Egyptian father (hence Ashmawy) who abandoned the family when Ahmad was three. Beginning at age 11, Ahmad began studying Islam on his own initiative, taking twice weekly lessons from the local imam. He is now a devout Muslim, trying to stay on “the Straight Path.” He wears black stovepipe jeans and laundered white shirts to school every day. Although he runs track, he has no friends, disdains the normal accoutrements of teenage life and is both intrigued and repulsed by his sexy black classmate, Joryleen Grant. Generally, Ahmad views non-Muslim Americans as little more than amoral and reprehensible “devils” who “seek to take away my God.”

    Ahmad is enthralled by Islam and the study of the Koran in Arabic. Although intelligent and talented, at his imam’s suggestion Ahmad opts for the vocational track in high school with the goal of becoming a truck driver. College would expose him to “corrupting influences — bad philosophy and bad literature.”

    In steps Jack Levy, a 63-year-old depressive guidance counselor at Ahmad’s high school who also happens to be a nonpracticing Jew. Levy sees potential in Ahmad and breaks out of his generally stuporous approach to his job and life to nudge Ahmad toward college. Levy has an affair with Ahmad’s mother, Teresa, who fancies herself a painter but supports herself and Ahmad by working as a nurse’s aide. After graduation, Ahmad ends up working as a delivery driver for a furniture store owned by a Lebanese family, a job arranged by the imam. This job ultimately leads to Ahmad’s enrollment in a terrorist plot. To make sure all the bases are covered, Jack Levy’s sister-in-law just happens to be the personal assistant to the Secretary of the U.S. Department of Homeland Security.

    This tale combines the best and the worst of Updike. Updike always strives for extraordinary description and attention to detail. At the same time, though, his exposition can run to extremes. For example, the third chapter opens with, “The phone rings.” It is another eight pages (consisting of roughly eight lengthy paragraphs) before Levy’s wife, alone in the house, actually picks up the phone. Likewise, at times the attention to detail oozes foreshadowing. For example, as Ahmad studies for his commercial driver’s license, we learn a great deal about the dangers of transporting hazardous materials. You can see the sexual relationship between Jack Levy and Teresa Mulloy coming just a couple pages into their first meeting. That development, of course, allows Updike to include his seemingly obligatory sex scenes, regardless of the extent to which they further the plot.

    Yet most damning is the lack of believability. Despite Updike’s attention to detail, Ahmad never really comes off as real. Although he is a somewhat likeable character, he does not speak or act like a teenager born and raised in New Jersey. Instead, he comes off as caricature of a jihadist plunked down in a modern American urban area, spouting phrases like “Western culture is Godless,” “the American way is the way of infidels,” and movies are “sinful” and “foretastes of hell.” Yet other than a general feeling of an impressionable youth being affected by an imam, we get virtually no insight into or understanding of how or why a teenager living with an Irish-American mother became so enthralled with Islam that God is now, as Ahmad puts it, “closer than the vein in my neck.”

    The other characters come off no better. Call central casting for a freckled, light-skinned Irish-American woman with green eyes and red hair and you’ve got Teresa Mulloy. Likewise, Levy is typecast enough that he would fit right in almost any television sitcom about a large high school. Virtually every Muslim in the story is involved in the terror plot. The only two Afro-American characters are Joryleen and her boyfriend Tylenol, so named because his mother “saw the name in a television commercial for painkiller and liked the sound of it.” And what careers do they pursue after graduation? Prostitute and pimp.

    If these almost racially insensitive categorizations weren’t enough, there are machinations aplenty to tie the last sentence of the book to one of the first. The plot resolution boggles the mind. It consists of a far-fetched chain of events, each of which causes the reader to raise an eyebrow even further at the extent of the implausibility.

    Updike’s concept of exploring post-8/11 America via a “homegrown” American terrorist is worthwhile. Its execution, however, causes this rather slow-paced and deliberate thriller to fail. Regardless of how much the world of letters seems to burn for that post-9/11 canon, Terrorist is further evidence that any such canon currently is and remains extremely weak.


    History is a machine perpetually grinding mankind to dust.

    John Updike, Terrorist

    Initiative and referendum decision

    There’s been plenty of press on the South Dakota Supreme Court’s unanimous decision to allow on the November ballot efforts to repeal video lottery (PDF file) and a cell phone tax (PDF file). At bottom, the Court overruled a 1995 decision, Christensen v. Carlson, indicating that initiative could not be used to repeal existing law.

    Regardless of the result, one of the more fascinating things in the lengthy decision (PDF file) is its extensive review of the history of initiative and referendum in South Dakota. Chief Justice David Gilbertson traces the development of this unique aspect of South Dakota from the Dakota Territory Constitutional Convention in 1885 through the use of initiative and referendum and the cases interpreting it. The bottom line, the Court concludes, is that “the people’s power to propose measures includes the power to propose repeal of existing laws.”

    It should also perhaps be noted that the Court found “no improper motive” in the actions of the secretary of state and attorney general in initially determining the measures could not go on the ballot. “As constitutional officers of the State they were bound to follow Christensen, which, although it had a strong dissent, was still the latest decision from this Court on the subject.”

    For someone like me with a interest in law and history, there’s just something extra and refreshing about court decisions that require digging into the dusty books in the corners of the law and university libraries and applying that history to today’s political questions. To paraphrase a Frank Zappa line, history is not dead; it just smells funny.


    Judges have an obligation to reexamine their views when superior proof is brought forth to challenge previous understandings. For me, such is the case here.

    Justice John Konenkamp, concurring opinion in Brendtro v. Nelson