Sandra O’Connor Undeserving of Malicious Criticism

The Rev. Jerry Falwell leaves the uneasy impression that he believes the center of the ethical and intellectual universe rests between hia two ears. He – as well as others of the Moral Majority who have collapsed into uncontrolled hysteria over the nomination of Sandra O’Connor to the U.S. Supreme Court – has said asmuch. The unctuous Falwellian belief rests on the proposition that there is but a single correct and infallible litmus test for anyone nominated to the Supreme Court. And that test is whether Sandra O’Connor in fact, or in appearance, fits the philosophical mold fashioned by Falwellians. Judge O’Connor obviously does not fit their test. So she now will suffer righteous Hell as she heads for confirmation in the U.S. Senate as the nation’s first woman justice on the high court . The Rev. Falwell has acquired handsome personal rewards and built a powerful national political base while moralizing from his pulpit. But he reflects the troubling narrowness of selfish one-issue politics that has become a plague. Increasingly, we are asked to judge a candidate or an issue on how they benefit or deprive a single interest group. Pensioners cry out against any Social Security reform because they may have to sacrifice, although the fund is bankrupt and the increased tu load on workers is becoming unbearable. Organized labor denounces candidates and legislation that do not meet labor’s demands. Blacks look for pro-black candi- dates and pro-black laws. Hispanics ditto. Indians