On the Blindness of Justice and Morality

Parshat Shoftim

by Rabbi Avi Billet

On July 25, Brett Stevens (not to be confused with Bret Stephens) wrote on amerika.org that the Israel-Hamas conflict shows the true nature of liberalism. 

 Some of his points suggested that liberalism focuses on appearance and nothing more, arguing for the moral high ground. However, he contends, that supporting the weaker party in a struggle does not automatically translate to being in that moral high ground. Supporting a militarily weaker group whose ideology is irrational, destructive, and murder-focused does not bode well for those who claim morals drive them.

 In Stevens’ view, “Conservatism thinks about results, so it picks the action which will bring best results. Liberals think about appearances, and so choose whatever option makes them look good, and then ignore the consequences [until after] disaster unfolds.”

 His conclusion: “[W]e have people out of their heads on the drug of artificially boosted self-esteem that liberalism provides, cheering for the genocide of the group that the last world war was fought in part to protect.”

 Political ideologies aside, in light of the opening of our parsha, Mr. Stevens couldn’t be more correct. The Torah tells us, “Do not bend justice and do not give special consideration [to anyone]. Do not take bribes, since bribery makes the wise blind and perverts the words of the righteous.” (16:19) With reference to inter-human dealings, the Torah, from which only truth emerges, couldn’t come up with a truer insight into human nature.

 It’s not that the liberal media (i.e. The New York Times) takes bribes. Nor is it the case that all of the protestors in San Francisco, Los Angeles, Boston, and all over Europe are taking bribes.

 But they have been made blind because, as Dennis Prager has put it, were the two sides of the conflict described as neutral parties – group A and group B – every sensible person in the world would side with the group that describes Israel’s perspective. However, since one of these groups is called “Israel,” a word which triggers the most irrational form of judgment, it is automatically painted as the guilty party by bigots and anti-Semites who refuse to acknowledge their bigotry and anti-Semitic natures. We have all seen videos of protests, with horrific small-scale or larger-scale violence, profanity, despicable name-calling (“Nazis,” “baby killers”) aimed at those who present Israel’s rights to live peacefully, and to defend itself when attacked by rockets and terrorists (excuse me, “freedom fighters.”)

 Before he was President, John Adams defended the British soldiers who had fired on civilians at the so-called “Boston Massacre.” Adams won the case. Did it matter that the soldiers were trained fighters, better armed, and in a place where some (ignorants) might have called them “occupiers?” No! Because justice is supposed to be blind. And the judges who judge cannot be blinded by greed. The soldiers in that case had been provoked and were fearful for their lives. They fired in self-defense. And just because someone dies in a shooting does not mean the dead was the innocent party.

Even President Obama, whose support for Israel is suspect, declared years ago that "If somebody was sending rockets into my house where my two daughters sleep at night, I'm going to do everything in my power to stop that. And I would expect Israelis to do the same thing." I think he has less of a problem with Israeli shooting down missiles (which is why he supports Iron Dome), and much more of a problem with Israel actually attacking the source of the missiles. Stop the rockets once they’re mid-air, yes. But don't allow them to be shot from the ground, because if you attack the rocket-launcher, people will die. Sigh.

 Targum Yonatan explains what bribes do to judges: “It causes utter stupidity to happen upon them.” It doesn’t matter if the person is judging correctly in the case, or judging incorrectly. The judge who takes a bribe becomes blind to realities and justifies things that are unjustifiable.

 And so it is with those who judge with pre-conceived notions. Those who believe that Jews whose “genocide the last world war was fought to prevent” (as Stevens put it - though that was really an outcome and not purpose for fighting - FDR was no tzaddik -) are the bad guys are buying into the oldest bribe in the world, the worst stereotype to plague the history of humanity, that the evils of the world are the fault of the Jews.

 The Ro”sh on this verse puts it rather succinctly: “Bribery (however defined) causes the judge to become evil,” for not seeing the case for the sides it truly presents. When it comes to defense and preservation of self, John Adams got it right. If the soldiers who were threatened and who caused the deaths of “civilians” in self-defense could be acquitted, a Jewish State which defends itself (while suffering deaths of civilians, including children) and causes the unfortunate death of civilians in the process is completely in the right.

 Those who see it otherwise, don’t understand what Steve Wozniak, co-founder of Apple, had to say in his recent visit to Israel. “Had a good time visiting Jerusalem and Gaza Strip today. If Israel did not react, the rockets would continue anyway. If Hamas halted rockets, Israel would not attack them. Peace.”

 When the world ceases to be morally blind (instead of taking the liberal “moral highground), and will judge a case based on merits without pre-conceived notions, maybe there will be Peace indeed.

Justice Justice You Shall Pursue (Deut. 16:20)

A related essay on this subject can be found here

Measure for Measure

There is justice, and there is "justice." The Torah (usually) advocates that justice take the form of "middah k'neged middah" (מדה כנגד מדה) a.k.a. "measure for measure." While Rabbinic law has explained that "an eye for an eye" (Exodus 21:24, Leviticus 24:20) refers to monetary payments, such punishment is a payment for the monetary value of the lost organ or limb. How the value is determined is a subject of a different discussion.

The Torah unequivocally has a capital punishment system embedded in its laws. When, how and how often it was evoked is also a subject of a different discussion. The Talmud describes that in the event a murderer subverts the system through a technicality such that the court could not execute him, they had other methods to ensure his inevitable demise.

There was no such thing as 'death row' or a long-term prison sentence for murderers. Accidental murderers went (of their own accord) to cities of refuge to avoid retribution from relatives of the deceased. In some cases their exile may last for the rest of their lives. [See the footnote below for an example of an accidental murder and a situation that would warrant this exile.]

Punishment was meted out immediately, whether it be a fine, restitution, lashes, or the death penalty. And none of the death penalty punishments were costly - court orders were not a burden on society.

The Modern World

While I do believe in the death penalty for murderers, I understand that not everyone agrees to this. But I also believe that a person who takes a life in any way other than defense (of self or of another), in battle, or through a pure accident - a pure accident might include a car accident on a slippery road, or a doctor who does everything right but loses a patient - has lost the privilege to live in society. A drunk driver, for example, might not be a "deliberate murderer," but getting behind the wheel after drinking is not a pure accident. The driver made a choice that was not beyond his/her control.

Certainly a deliberate murderer should get no mercy. Even if s/he finds religion when s/he is in prison, and even if s/he can become a contributing member of society. By Torah law, s/he should have been dead shortly after s/he was convicted, so what s/he accomplishes later in life is enough of a "freebie" for a person, to my mind, that anything beyond bread and water to continue to live out his/her life, is a gift the person does not deserve.

Pan Am 103

The Lockerbie bomber was released from prison.

[Note from 8/20/2012 - I just revisited this page and noticed that all but one of the links I had left here are now inactive. They were articles about the Lockerbie bomber being released, as one article put it "Scottish authorities released him on compassionate grounds because he is dying of cancer."]

Where was his compassion for his victims? Why is this man still alive? Eichmann wasn't given compassionate jail time. He was killed after his conviction.

Is it possible that His Murderousness was a tool for an economic deal? Nothing disgusts me more.

I hope this man rots. 270 people died, including one person I knew growing up - Joseph K. Miller - on account of this monster's actions. He is undeserving of any compassion and he ought to die in prison. He should have been executed, but that is not "compassionate enough."

I heard one talk-radio host put it this way: If Bernie Madoff (who ruined many lives and may have caused a few suicides and crimes to be committed) were to be dying of cancer, would anyone tolerate his being released from prison in order to die with his family? Obviously that wound is very fresh, but the wound of Lockerbie and Pan Am 103 is still fresh for the relatives of the victims, those who knew them, and all of us who saw a first glimpse of how our world was changing when terrorists started using or destroying planes to make their "freedom fight" known to the world.

Ecclesiastes was right when he said (10:19) - "Money is the answer for everything." In other words, the pursuit of money justifies every dishonest or dishonorable behavior perpetrated by man.

England, you should be ashamed.
**********************************************
What is an "Accidental Murder"? - two kinds

An "accidental murder" (shogeg or שוגג) is when someone does an action that is potentially dangerous to someone else, without bothering to check if someone is in harm's way. It may include a gross negligence on the part of the "perpetrator."

Examples might include:

• someone purposely running a red light and hitting a pedestrian who had the right of way
• shooting a person while hunting
• throwing rocks over a precipice, unaware someone is down below
• dropping anything from a high place where there is no designation to do so, such as at a construction site

According to the Torah (Numbers 35, see also Joshua 20 and 21), people who do this must go to exile, where they will establish residence until the High Priest passes away.
Other examples of accidental murder in which there is no culpability (o'ness or אונס) are when the person did nothing wrong or negligent and circumstances were completely beyond control. Other than the examples mentioned above, other instances of this would include:

• Driving normally on a highway, and someone jumps in front of your car from an overpass (assuming they survive the jump)
• When the victim goes into a clearly marked restricted (DANGEROUS) area, such as at a shooting range, or a high voltage facility, or underneath a roller coaster (I mention this because there was a case last last year when someone was killed doing this), and the shooter, worker or operator does what they are supposed to and don't know of their victim's presence until it is too late

As soon as it becomes clear that there was no way for the accident to be avoided, the responsible party is deemed exempt from any punishment or retribution.