|
|
Joined: Mar 2005
Posts: 920
500+ posts
|
|
500+ posts
Joined: Mar 2005
Posts: 920 |
Quote:
MisterJLA said:
Thanks.
Everything is funny as long as it is happening to somebody else. --Will Rogers
"I don't think anyone anticipated the breach of the levees." - George W. Bush
I don't think anybody could have predicted that these people would .. try to use an airplane as a missile, a hijacked airplane as a missile. - Condoleeza Rice
Barbara Bush: It's Good Enough for the Poor
To comfort the powerless and make the powerful uncomfortable.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 43,958 Likes: 6
Officially "too old for this shit" 15000+ posts
|
|
Officially "too old for this shit" 15000+ posts
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 43,958 Likes: 6 |
Anyway, trying to get back on topic.
A few posts ago, PAUL MANDREL, implied that anyone who used the phrase "judicial tyranny" was revealing themselves to be an extremist.
In point of fact, the concept of "judicial tyranny" was one that was very much on the minds of the framers of the constitution. The founders had experienced the excessives of British colonial law, in which judges often stepped on the rights of the citizenry. That's one of the reasons they put the right to juries in the U.S. constititon, along with the previously mentioned "separation of powers" and "checks and balances."
In fact, Thomas Jefferson believed that serving on a jury is more important than voting. He said, "I consider trial by jury as the only anchor yet imagined by man by which a government can be held to the principles of its constitution."
Jefferson also stated, in connection with the checks and balances concept, “Nothing in the Constitution has given them [the federal judges] a right to decide for the Executive, more than to the Executive to decide for them. . . . The opinion which gives to the judges the right to decide what laws are constitutional and what not, not only for themselves, in their own sphere of action, but for the Legislature and Executive also in their spheres, would make the Judiciary a despotic branch.”
So fears of "judicial tyranny," far from being extremist per se, are actually very much part of the concept our constitution was based on.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 4,205
fudge 4000+ posts
|
|
fudge 4000+ posts
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 4,205 |
Quote:
the G-man said:
Quote:
Chant said:
Your Supreme Court's purpose, among other things, is to enforce your constitution on state and people, yes?
So, the rulings made by said court should initially be considered constitutional (further scrutiny of a ruling comes after the ruling has made methinks)
So people who disagree with the rulings of the SP without reasonable grounds are infact disagreeing with the constitution, right?
Not exactly. We are, as the cliche goes, a nation of laws, not men.
The Supreme Court is charged with interepreting the existing law, not so much making it or being it.
It is quite possible, in fact, it is encouraged in a free society, to be able to disagree or criticize our leaders, even judges when we think they are wrong in their interpretations. We also expect, as part of the checks and balances built into our form of government, that if the legislature, the body considered most accountable to the people in theory, believes that a court has interepreted a law incorrectly, that the legislature will clarify or amend the law to correct the court's mistake.
Even the constitution is subject to an amendment process, though, thankfully, it is a long and reasonably difficult one, so as to avoid snap changes.
yes, that's more or less, what I meant 
 Racks be to MisterJLA
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2003
Posts: 7,251
6000+ posts
|
|
6000+ posts
Joined: Oct 2003
Posts: 7,251 |
Hey Unrestrained Alt. I would like to point out that Paraih if anything else has raised to a level wherein he refrains from posting his perv pics in this forum. This forum is one of the few forums I don't mind perusing while other people are in teh room (kids included) So I would ask you do demonstrate the highmindedness you preach and remove that picture from this thread ASAP. Thanks..... I know you'll make the right decision.
Putting the "fun" back in Fundamentalist Christian Dogma.
" I know God exists because WBAM told me so. " - theory9
JLA brand RACK points = 514k 
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 4,205
fudge 4000+ posts
|
|
fudge 4000+ posts
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 4,205 |
Quote:
wannabuyamonkey said:
Hey Unrestrained Alt. I would like to point out that Paraih if anything else has raised to a level wherein he refrains from posting his perv pics in this forum. This forum is one of the few forums I don't mind perusing while other people are in teh room (kids included) So I would ask you do demonstrate the highmindedness you preach and remove that picture from this thread ASAP. Thanks..... I know you'll make the right decision.
Second!
Racks be to MisterJLA
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2003
Posts: 7,251
6000+ posts
|
|
6000+ posts
Joined: Oct 2003
Posts: 7,251 |
Quote:
Chant said:
Quote:
wannabuyamonkey said:
Hey Unrestrained Alt. I would like to point out that Paraih if anything else has raised to a level wherein he refrains from posting his perv pics in this forum. This forum is one of the few forums I don't mind perusing while other people are in teh room (kids included) So I would ask you do demonstrate the highmindedness you preach and remove that picture from this thread ASAP. Thanks..... I know you'll make the right decision.
Second!
I like the new Avatar 
Putting the "fun" back in Fundamentalist Christian Dogma.
" I know God exists because WBAM told me so. " - theory9
JLA brand RACK points = 514k
|
|
|
|
|
