In the opinion of those who are unjust, violent, and tyrannical, the existence of a judge who renders tyranny impossible is a most grievous thing … Similarly, anyone who is deficient in any respect considers that a hindrance in the way of the vice that he prefers because of his moral corruption is a great burden. Accordingly, the facility or difficulty of the Law should not be estimated with reference to the passions of all the wicked, vile, morally corrupt men, but should be considered with reference to the man who is perfect among the people. For it is the aim of the Law that everyone should be such a man.
— Rabbi Moses Maimonides
These words of Rabbi Moses Maimonides come across the centuries as a bracing blast. More than 800 years after his words were written, we are enmired in the sad life of a one such “wicked, vile, morally corrupt” man whose moral corruption has blasted a great many lives. Not only the lives of the many girls and underage women whom Mr. Epstein sullied in the vain enterprise of satisfying an appetite that only gets more insatiable by feeding it. It pollutes as well the lives of those who sought to take advantage directly of the man and his money and his benefits. And it even grasps and sullies those who have used him and his case in establishing their political or cultural bona fides.
We recognize, though, that we have more power than the victims of Epstein and willingly defer to their need to be protected.
Modern political thinkers don’t talk so much about the perfect man. They leave that to religion. Madison famously wrote that were we angels, we wouldn’t need a constitution. However, Adams reminded us that without accepting religion’s goad to perfection and without a dedication to morality, our Constitution could not work.
If we integrate those two views, we could say that when we accept the goads of religion and morality, we can understand the limitations of what government and its laws can rightfully do, and what must be left to the realm of our conscience, immune from governmental coercion. Thus, religious liberty: no matter how much I feel that my religious belief system is the best (why else would I practice it and not another?), I cannot get my government to outlaw other beliefs and teachings.
It has been a very recent conceit that governments should no more intrude into sexuality than they do into religion and speech. This was not the attitude of the American law until very recently. Similarly, incitement, criminal conspiracy, slander, and defamation were not considered unconstitutional despite their limitations on speech. For that matter, no one makes the case that offering humans for sacrifice is protected by the First Amendment.
Yet the last century has seen the elimination of most laws that govern sexual expression. Divorce is pretty much on demand everywhere. Neither law nor society expects sex to wait for marriage as they once did; restrictions on recognizing homosexual marriage are deemed unconstitutional. The last frontier seemed to be the acceptance of gender fluidity and allowing the sterilization and mutilation of minors in the name of that dubious belief system.
All this liberation was defended by saying that forcing the old kind of conformity was tantamount to forcing a religious doctrine on those who do not believe in it. Yet immediately on gaining power, the believers in the religion of anything goes sex set up their own Inquisition, not only canceling and boycotting those who do not believe as they do, but using the law to enforce their religious view in an active way, as in the infamous Colorado cake case, in which the bakery’s crime was not baking a cake that celebrated a view of sexuality the bakers believed to be sinful.
The bakers won their case, though they had to go all the way to the Supreme Court to do so. But surgeons are still busy chopping off body parts of minors. People who hold what were bedrock, consensus beliefs only two decades ago still feel dizzy and unsure. Have we escaped turning our country into a modern The Satyricon, following Rome into a spiral of decadence and death?
The Epstein case hits people in this weak spot. The stories of Epstein’s debauchery, verified by thousands of videos and witness reports, are sickening. There seems to be solid evidence of what used to be called statutory rape, for the consent of a minor is no consent at all. The chances of lasting psychic damage to the victims of Epstein’s appetite are large and horrifying. This is a grave abuse of power over the helpless and weak, violently immoral by the rules we have played by for a very long time. People want to see justice.
The current frustration of Americans with their public institutions combines with our anger and disgust about Epstein. Whether because of its embracing DEI racism with its Orwellian inversion of language, or its inflicting vast harm through the numerous COVID lies empowered by the state which inflicted harm upon millions, or its serial lying in the unending campaign to destroy Donald Trump and his populist counter-revolution — very many Americans are not willing to take government at its word about much of anything.
And when these two apprehensions of chaotic forces on the loose combine, it is no surprise that it leads to a spike in rebellious uneasiness. For we know that Epstein’s Rolodex was a Who’s Who of the rich and the powerful, whether presidents, royals, billionaires, or merely famous. We the people do not owe allegiance to anyone who is connected to this sorry story in any meaningful way.
Epstein’s sudden emergence as a fabulously wealthy hyperconnected man is a story whose details are fuzzy at best. It is reasonable to think that forensic accounting should be able to dispel the mysteries. Why hasn’t the government done so? Perhaps some powerful adults will be embarrassed. If crimes are involved, so what? Respect due process and uphold the law. The powerful do not need any more protection than that. They have fended for themselves very well and need no extra consideration.
The sexual depravity fascinates and disgusts at once. And when it comes to the sexual acts alleged here, we still have criminal law, which has not been removed by the cultural storms. It’s still a crime to have sex with minors, and the penalties are severe.
So, it is not surprising that there was simmering outrage after Epstein got off with a sweetheart plea deal some years ago, pleading only to prostitution violations — as if sex with minors could be called prostitution and not rape. Outrageous! How and why did the government allow that? In the absence of answers, and with the government proving itself untrustworthy in so many areas, the seeds of conspiracy theories took root and flourished in rich compost.
People yearn for the cleansing hand of the mighty Swamp Drainer to come in and drain the sewage. Dredging out the sludge is certainly a good idea. But there are more complications here than in finding the sources of Epstein’s mysterious wealth. We have very real victims of traumatic abuse who stand a very real chance of being abused once more, their own yearning to be spared further indignity as ruthlessly disregarded as their innocence was by Epstein. They are not rich or powerful. They are the ones whom governments are created to protect.
The protection of the powerless is a major biblical theme. Again and again, we are told to care for the stranger, the orphan, and the widow. These three categories stand for all the powerless. The moral health of the nation, the prophets say again and again, is measured by how these powerless are treated. And as Adams averred about our republic, without morality or religion, our Constitution will not work.
As for Maimonides, he was a leading physician as well as a jurist of monumental stature. He used medical models to help understand how law is meant to serve the health of the community. When the blood flows throughout the body, well and good. But if the flow is cut off from an organ, the organ will fail, and it can bring down the whole body with it.
Applied to our case at hand, then: first, do no harm to those most vulnerable — the violated women whose souls and hearts bear the wounds of their abusive treatment. The health of our nation will suffer if we place our private interest to know more (and certainly, any prurient interest) ahead of their interest not to suffer again. Despite the toleration of obscenity under our law, we hold the line still at child pornography. It is still a felony. We still agree it is heinous. Let that stand. These people cannot be further victimized.
But we also owe it to the victims to help them grow in strength. So many victims of sexual abuse find it empowering to help others avoid what they suffered. They testify in court; they speak in public. They transform their pain.
But that cannot be forced upon them. Their agency in this process must be protected to the highest degree.
As for curing us of distrust of our institutions, it is up to the institutions to regain that trust. Private people who have accepted governmental office are now subject to greater scrutiny. That’s fair. The only way the institutions can regain credibility is through the people who run them accepting that increased responsibility on themselves, and to welcome that increased scrutiny.
That, we may fairly say, has been lacking. While it is still unfair and counterproductive to assume that a person has gone from a champion of transparency to an active conspirator to protect a child-sex trafficking racket, it is entirely proper to ask for a thorough accounting of how officials make their decisions about this vexing issue. Just saying move on, trust me, is not enough for the millions who have felt themselves victims of an unaccountable government machine that cares little if anything about the people in whose name it operates. As people with greater power, with access to the critical information, they have increased responsibility. They need to explain their reasoning.
Those with more power have more responsibility. Officials have the most. We private citizens do not have the access to much of the information that would demystify what happened and make possible a thorough cleansing of the mess.
We recognize, though, that we have more power than the victims of Epstein and willingly defer to their need to be protected. Let our government officials realize their duty to take the time and make the effort to persuade us that they are doing what needs to be done, first for the victims and then for us all. And that we listen with an open ear to what they say, not forgetting that we are the true sovereigns of this Republic, accountable before God who permits us to hold power.
READ MORE from Shmuel Klatzkin:
A Postcard From America’s Past