an ignoble mess

“O Lord…  we know that… that we are unworthy before thee; because of the fall our natures have become evil continually…” (Ether 3.2)

​What an ignoble mess we have made of our government! Truly, truly, a thousand times, truly; more truly than even I knew when some two years ago I placed it in the header of this Mad State of Rebellion page,
 
The heart of the sons of men
   is full of evil,
and madness is in their heart
   while they live…”
 
As long as they live. Every day that they live. Day in and day out until there are no more days.
 
I think that I can hear the same mournful voice that Enoch heard so many thousands of years ago.
 
“…A voice from the bowels [of the earth], saying: ‘Wo, wo is me, the mother of men; I am pained, I am weary, because of the wickedness of my children. When shall I rest, and be cleansed from the filthiness which is gone forth out of me?” (Moses 7.48)
 
For what mad wickedness and filthiness does mother earth now weep? Let me count the ways. Any number of evils. But, for today’s Mad State of Rebellion post, we have one particularly in mind.
 
First, the naked emperor, Caligula, almost certainly nominated a man for supreme court with an eye toward having a corrupt judge in place that would protect the president from being held accountable for any number—literally, take your pick, any number, we’ll find crimes to match it— of crimes, both personal and societal.
 
Then that nominee sits behind an executive desk facing representatives of the people and lies through his teeth, over, over, and over, and… well, pick your number, again, any number; we’ll find lies to match it.
 
Then there’s the latest mess.
 
Lindsey Graham complains through that most noble and concise means of communication, Tweeter, that requesting an FBI investigation “is more about stalling the process until after November's elections than getting to the truth.” He is very likely correct in his assessment of Democratic intentions.
 
Of course, he neglects to say that, with near certainty and equal accuracy, the GOP’s unwillingness to await the results of an impartial FBI investigation is more about getting a corrupt man in place on the supreme court before “November’s election than getting to the truth.”
 
It other words, no one gives a hoot about the truth— not on either side of the aisle. And everyone gives even less than a hoot about the dignity of either individual personally impacted by the scandal.
 
Disgraceful, is too kind a word for what our elected officials have become.
 
But, of course, they were elected! So, disgraceful is equally insufficient to describe what the American electorate has become.
 
Now, no process, however wise, can make up for the madness that resides in the human heart. And, I wouldn’t want to suggest that the “governing” process of the LDS Church is perfect. There is plenty there to given one pause. And yet, there truly is something to be said for its core principle: “unanimity” (It is often said that the Church is led by ‘a’ prophet. But this is inaccurate. We are led by prophetsssssssssssssss. Nothing happens, whatever the head prophet’s wishes, without the other 14 agreeing— unanimously).
 
So, here’s my pie-in-the-sky suggestion. Write it into the constitution, which ought to be, I feel, as you know, a living rather than dead document.
 
Let the president, of whatever political persuasion, make his nomination for the supreme court.
 
Let a judiciary committee of republicans and democrats—pick your number and ratio—  review the nominee. Let them make their recommendation to the full senate. BUT THEIR RECOMMENDATION MUST BE UNANIMOUS. No, 6 to 5 votes. No 11 to 1 decisions. Nope. Its 12 to 0, or bust.
 
Impossible, you say? Never get unanimity, you say? Maybe.
 
But, I don’t think so.
 
A policy of unanimity serves as a check on the power of the individual madman, especially one inclined towards despotism, and checks societal madness by forcing cooperation and compromise. What it would mean is that presidents would understand the need to nominate, to begin with, someone qualified, but politically middle of the road. It would mean that we would be getting middle of the road judges. It would mean that judges could go either way, indeed, they would go either way from case to case. No more swings right to left and left to right. Just stay in the center. Steady as she goes.
 
It seems clear to me that in governance, “unanimity” of some sort is of God. It may very well be the divine means of governance in eternity. It is the only protection that is even remotely strong enough to counteract the madness that is in the human heart, and the madness that is the driving force in society at large.

“And every decision made by either of these quorums must be by the unanimous voice of the same; that is, every member in each quorum must be agreed to its decisions, in order to make their decisions of the same power or validity one with the other— (DC 107.27)