In the last two weeks, I’ve been called:

a) As cruel as a roaring 1920s mobster.

b) As heartless as the pre-Oz tin man.

c) As noncompassionate as an MSU math TA.

You see, this parade of insults began May 29, when the U.S. Supreme Court chose to support the alteration of the sacred rules of the tradition-rich PGA Tour.

Casey Martin, a 29-year-old lanky golfer with undisputed talent, was granted - in a 7-2 highest court decision - the right to use a power cart while competing with golf’s elite.

And to the average follower of news, this ruling seems only compassionate and clearly fair for a man who without these wheels wouldn’t be able to accomplish his lifelong dream of playing on the same level as greats like Jack Nicklaus and Tiger Woods.

Martin suffers from Klippel-Trenaunay-Weber Syndrome, a rare circulatory disorder that obstructs the blood flow from his right leg to his heart. To walk on the golf course causes him severe pain, not to mention the risk of fractures, hemorrhaging and potential amputation. Thus to walk the length of a course would not just be impossible - but dangerous.

The problem with me lies not in his abilities. He’s qualified for the tour once, outdueling hundreds of others in the tour’s Q-school - a forum that allows only the select few who shine on the course at the right time a coveted invitation to the PGA Tour.

He’s already had a taste of the highest tour, even racking up a tie for 17th in the 2000 Touchstone Energy Tucson Open. And he has one victory to his credit, a 1998 triumph at the NIKE Lakeland Classic on the Buy.com Tour (formerly the NIKE Tour). This tour is a step below the PGA, filled mostly with younger golfers working tirelessly to perform well in hopes of securing a career on the higher forum.

So, talent - and desire - Martin lacks not.

But as a golf enthusiast and a traditionalist, I still find it hard to swallow these court decisions that continuously choose to uproot the rules of a tour that for decades and decades has had little problem governing its own organization.

Where do my problems lie?

Simple: The majority opinion seems to rely more on compassion than forming a legitimate argument.

The opinion, authored by Justice John Paul Stevens, possesses some fatal flaws insulting to the sport.

First, it claims that even with a cart, Martin will carry with him no more an advantage than any of his fellow competitors who are forced to trek the entire course. This is a bogus statement that certainly doesn’t fly with me - someone who has walked courses on several occasions in 95-degree heat.

Try getting that statement by past PGA star Ken Venturi, who was victorious in the 1964 U.S. Open (one of four annual majors) despite nearly collapsing from heat exhaustion during the tournament’s final round at Congressional Country Club in Bethesda, Md.

Stevens continues to write that golf is a sport that’s element is shot-making, and that alone. In other words, the golfer who executes the best shots shall win the week’s competition. But Venturi, who testified before the court, disagrees:

“