Show Our View Distributed by King Features Syndicate Supreme Court church decision isn’t real clear We'll be the first to admit it: We’re a bit confused by the Supreme Court ruling last week which held as we understand it that churches can discriminate in employment practices While churches of a number of denominations praised the decision it was hailed as a particular victory for the LDS Church Officials of that church sought review of a lower court decision some time ago which held that it was unconstitutional for the church to fire seven employees at Beehive Clothing Mills and the Deseret Gymnasium in 1981 and 1982 because they did not have the appropriate paperwork required for admittance to a Mormon temple Such paperwork also is an indication we understand that the church member has paid hisher tithes to the church The high court’s reversal last week of the lower court’s ruling is confusing because it seems to apply only to the operations of a church Indeed Justices Brennan Marshall Blackmun and O’Connor although voting for the decision wrote separately that the ruling should apply only to operations that are clearly religious in nature Yet one of the seven people fired was a Janitor at the Deseret gymnasium How that role could be interpreted to be “religious’' in nature escapes us Another aspect — and this one is more amusing than confusing — is the great rejoicing that went up from the various religious officials because “separation of church and state” had in their view at last been upheld That’s amusing because evangelists preachers bishops etc of all denominations are usually the first people to jump the fence that supposedly separates church from state once some sensitive political issue (liquor laws censorship of cable TV “sin” taxes etc) comes up! But not everyone is happy about the high court’s ruling Civil rights advocates are worried that the decision will have particular significance here in Utah where the LDS Church is such a powerful force “I think the Mormon Church is a very good illustration of the problem” said ACLU member Deborah Ellis “In Utah the Mormon Church is one of the biggest employers in the state It controls many jobs “We don't believe Congress (which exempted churches from the provision of the Civil Bights Act which prohibits discrimination on the basis of religion) really intended to activities of give such a broad exemption in “non-profi- t” non-religio- us non-religio- us churches” The official LDS position on the other hand was this: "(It is ) a landmark decision (that) reaffirms and strengthens the constitutional First Amendment values and will reduce the role of courts and government agencies in the regulation of religious activities and organisations” While Arthur Mayson who had worked at the 18 for before he was fired had this to say : gym years “It was the principle of it mainly — to think that they had that much power I’m not fighting the church I’m fighting the principle that you have to pay (tithing) or you can’t hold a Job” We suspect this issue isn't dead Certainly it would be interesting to see some effort to interpret how broad Congress really intended the church exemption to be After all churches are some of the biggest property owners in the nation yet they pay no taxes and now it appears may discriminate in employment practices in the name of separation of church and state d Given this emphasis by the churches on the First Amendment of our Constitution it will be interesting to see once a big issue develops if all the preachers continue to be as vocal as they have been at times in the past about issues which clearly involved “state” rather than “church” Forgive us for being skeptical but we suspect "separation of church and state” win not be viewed as an issue then which is why we won’t be surprised to see all the folks who normally jump the fence continue to do so After all interpretations of “right” or “wrong” are usually a product of “whose ox is getting gored” And if it's your ox who cares about the First Amendment— right? new-foun- Letters to the editor alternatives must be carefully worked out Of the 317 million Provo To the editor: Canyon construction project only $300000 is earmarked for Some weeks ago in an article vegetation in about proposed improvements Provo Canyon That is woefully to the Logan Canyon highway inadequate the statement was made that No one fools Mother Nature Cache citizens should be prenot UDOT Let's be Certainly pared to lie down in front of the certain that what we do today bulldozers if necessary to keep leaves her enough to work with Logan Canyon from suffering undisturbed for the next SO the same fate as Provo Canyon years Having been involved for the If we stand united there may past year in the efforts to be some trees left in the camitigate the construction dam- - nyons to stand beneath I would to Provo Sesto suggest aCanyon more effective Janice Reeb method of ensuring that “imCitizens for a Safe and Scenic provements” to canyon roads in Canyon Utah reflect the public desire to Sundance Utah preserve and enhance multiple use and natural beauty On June 30 at 7:30 pm in the Orchard Elemental? School To the editor: 1035 N 800 East Orem the to public has the opportunity As a resident of Cache Valley say to the Utah Department of for nearly a year and hopefully Transportation and the Federal for many years to come it is a “We Highway Administration: joy to be Involved in missionary care about our canyons” endeavors here And especially While improvements to cahere where missionary work u necesnyon highways may be so important to so many people sary in the name of safety it is How beautiful mi the mountime to look more carefully at tains are the feet of those who our diminiahing natural resources and determine that if See LETTERS on page II must be disturbed UDOT meeting A joy they mmtr wrkjtim in m arm wm capital ? “so "non-profi- t" Reagan to leave his mark on judiciary James i Kilpatrick WASHINGTON Ronald Reagan has had his full share of disappointments over the past six and a half years Federal deficits remain stubbornly large farm problems grow worse the trade imbalance is a headache the affair is a mess But one disappointment may outrank all the others: Reagan has been able to name only two new members to the US Supreme Court Iran-Cont- A Conservative View ra By this time if we were to take history as a guide he should have had better luck In a little more than three terms in office Franklin Roosevelt named eight men to the court In two terms Eisenhower nominated five (and regretted three of them) Nixon made four appointments Even Harding had four chances Yet here is Reagan with only 18 months to go and he has only Sandra Day O’Connor and Antonin Scalia to carry his flag into the 21st century It scarcely seems fair After all William Brennan was 81 in April Lewis Powell will be 80 in September Thurgood Marshall will be 79 next month Harry Blackmun turns 79 in November It had not seemed unreasonable to suppose that by this time some of these distinguished gentlemen might have retired or been summoned to a yet higher court There they sit imperturbable contented as frogs on a lily pad while time passes and opportunity shrinks Still the disappointment is not total In the end the Constitution is what the Supreme Court says it is but the high court hands down opinions in only 180 cases a year The great bulk of federal jurisprudence goes on in the district courts and in the 13 appellate circuits Here Reagan steadily is leaving his philosophical stamp The federal bench includes 741 judges in alL By the end of 1988 Reagan had named 290 of them Sheldon Goldman professor of political science at the University of Massachusetts in Amherst is the nation’s leading authority on federal judgeships Writing in the current issue of Judicature Goldman sums up the situation: “By the end of his second term President Reagan will have left an impressive and enduring judicial legacy” Goldman’s article analyses Reagan’s nominations in 1985 and 1988 During those two years the president won confirmation of 95 district judges and 32 circuit judges Their average age is 48 but some are much younger Sidney Fitiwater was named to a federal district court in Texas at 32 Alex Koxlnskl at 34 Joined the US Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit They will be shaping the law for a long time to come Looking at Reagan’s second-ternominees Goldman finds them generally in line with traditional patterns Starting with George Washington every president has nominated federal judges in his own political and philosophical image Lyndon Johnson named 122 district judges 943 percent of them were Democrats Jimmy Carter put 202 persons on the district courts 928 percent were Demom in 1985 and 1988 85 (or 859 percent) were Republicans The Reagan nominees in these two years overwhelmingly where white and male The 95 new district judges include only eight women four Hlspanics and three blacks Surprisingly this compares remarkably well with Lyndon Johnson’s record over five years: two women three Hlspanics five blacks Carter in four years named eixhtWomei14 Hlspanics and 28 blacks When it comes to shaping the Constitution the circuit courts nave far greater influence that the district courts Reagan won confirmation of 32 appellate are Judges in 1985 and 1988 Thirty-on- e Republicans 29 are male all are white Johnson had 40 such nominations in all: 38 Democrats one woman two blacks nominees to the Reagan's second-tercircuit courts were significantly younger than his first-ternominees Goldman suggests that “a new pattern may be emerging” Forty percent of the Reagan judges were under the age of 45 It is evident from Goldman's analysis that the president working closely with Attorney General Ed Meese is determined to get conservatives on the federal bench The president understands the theory of the lengthened shadow he himself leaves office in January of 1989 but his judicial legacy will remain for 30 years after he’s crats Ronald Reagan is no exception though he has grown less partUan his second term Of his 95 district court nominations u m m well-qualifi- ed gone This is the way the system is supposed to work as one president’s judges are checked and balanched by other judges named before and after Time may be running out for a “Reagan Court” across the street from the Capitol but elsewhere in the land the Reagan mark is plain to see 0 19S7 Unlvtnal Prm Syndicate Genetic tinkering may produce trouble ’ The courts have ruled that you may patent an animal You can take an ordinary pig for instance muck around with its DNA and the resultant super-piis your property or of the whose body weight will be the more desirable white meat and pigs composed of vast amounts of bacon and precious little squeak Thus far the patented animal is envisioned most for agriculture But soon entrepreneuring pioneers will be at work with inventing and marketing animals we can’t even imagine today In the years to come pet stores will offer a variety of beasts which will make the family dog or cat as we know them now completely obsolete People will no more have an ordinary dachshund than they would be satisfied with a black and white TV The pets of the future will be so much more convenient and adapted to the demands of contemporaneous life that in a few short years we will lode back on the outmoded pussycat of 1987 and wonder how we every got by with such an inadequate beast To Americans of the year 2000 today’s Ford Model T the look like will goldfish does to 1987 drivers By the year 2000 goldfish will swim £££ around their tanks in formation like the Air Force’s precision flight squadrr which have names like The Blue Dr and which even fhr straight into mov ain sides without breaking formation The goldfish of the future will ha as standard equipment so they 3 eyes won’t on the glass walls of their tanks as do their genetically engineered and patented Busby Berkeley numbers For people who like music with their dancing goldfish quartets will be available to sing polkas and other popular tunes Since the fish will of course be singing underwater they may sound a ttieuke Alvin and the Chipmunks but they have their fans too American consumers will have a breaktaking choice of dogs For example there wffibe Tidy Tenter a cute little fellow who Is designed to relieve himself once a week For millions of single working people who’ve always wanted a dog but are too tired when they get home to take him out for his walk Tidy Terrier will be the answer A lot of people lose interest in their dog when he grows up for them a surefire winner will be Mr Cutie Pie the dog designed to remain a puppy for life No signs of aging can be detected In this self-destru- ct cm for an designed pooch born with a waddle a slow gait a propensity for sleeping on rugs and no sign of life other than two tail thumps per hour Mad ’n' Lively is the name for the perma-kltte- n Ii there anything more adorable than a little kitten? fiad'n’ Lively wffi however be add with a stipulation for people who don’t realise what living with a kitten is like until they’ve done itfor a coupleof weeks and it dawns on them that the little beast will never not ever grow up One of the problems that animal welfare people face is the abandonment of and puppies by summer vacationers when they leave their rented cabins and seaihore homes in the fxlL The new genetics has taken cared that with the invention Your Summer Friend which comes in both the puppy and wlth 1 fMMBtee that within 13 weeks of purchase the snlmal will die a perfectly natural painless death Consumers the future win also be able to have domestic dwarf versions animals they enjoy seeing in the ioo The home elephant is still a few years an away but Pseudo-Pand- a the original gwintaf replica Chinese rolypoly is already In tne test tube He's Just as cute as the one in the ioo only be bites small children puppies pharmaceuticalagricultural But with or without metaphor in short order we shall see chickens 80 percent of except for "ESSl Vacated ootanist mega-merge- d corporation which employs you We are as the science writers say just on the cutting edge of this emerging wave of zoological revolution puppy Nicholas Vtm Hoffman g that erer-youn- g no-retu-rn can have Old Grouch no-refu- d d d 18-in- ch d |