Earlier this week, our nation honored the great civil rights leader, Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. It seems rather ironic that the Bush Administration has recently filed a brief denouncing the Affirmative Action admissions policy of the University of Michigan. What's up with that?

I mean, doesn't it seem like an insult when the ultra- conservative administration comes out in direct opposition to Affirmative Action and equal rights for black people?!

Well, at least that's what some people I work with seem to think. I'll be honest -- nah, I'll be blunt -- that's a bunch of hooey!

Why is it that when you speak out against a particular MEANS being employed, people just assume that it's the END you are opposed to? What sort of twisted logic is that?

If I don't want to take the bus to work, no one jumps to the conclusion that I hate my job.

When I pass on dessert, people don't assume I'm anorexic (of course, you can tell that just by looking at me).

Choosing not to swim at the beach does not mean I hate water.

So if someone says that certain admissions policies at U of M are unconstitutional, why do people interpret that as being opposed to Affirmative Action and equal rights? All it really signifies is that the person does not agree with the particular MEANS being employed in order to reach such a worthy END.

Similarly, I can be pro-life while strongly objecting to what I consider unnecessarily cruel and malicious tactics. Tactics that tend to undermine the inherent goodness of the pro-life movement. (You'll have a hard time convincing me that Jesus would stand on a sidewalk and scream "baby-killer, baby-killer" at a scared, confused, and pregnant young lady.)

The Church understands this concept of the ENDS not necessarily justifying the MEANS. And it is an understanding that helps define the responsibilities of both Church and State.

The Church holds God's truth. It is a truth that transcends everything in this world, including government and politics. God's truth is what helps us determine the appropriate ENDS we should try to achieve.

The State -- the government -- is tasked with the responsibility of creating many of the MEANS by which those ENDS can be met. And all of us, the people and the politicians, have a duty to constantly reexamine those MEANS, ensuring that they do not compromise the spirit of the ultimate goal.

Peace,
Brandon