SD Judges can be sent to jail
-
Sounds like an Espeir plan to me. Replace judges with a panel of local yokels who are clueless as to what the constitution means as long as they get to pass their religious oriented legislation.
The evolution of the human genome is too important to be left to chance.
Tim Craig wrote:
Replace judges with a panel of local yokels who are clueless as to what the constitution means as long as they get to pass their religious oriented legislation.
If the "local yokels" want to live a certain way, let them. It is well within their rights under the Constitution to define laws they deam appropriate. And holding judges accountable for their decisions forces them to keep to the letter of hte law instead of trying to interpret it in such a way that it means nothing.
If you decide to become a software engineer, you are signing up to have a 1/2" piece of silicon tell you exactly how stupid you really are for 8 hours a day, 5 days a week Zac
-
Tim Craig wrote:
a panel of local yokels
AKA : "We, the People". Oh, but you're no "lefty". :rolleyes:
Thank God for disproportional force.
Stan Shannon wrote:
AKA : "We, the People".
Yes, we the people put into place a representative government with executive, legislative, and judicial branches. You "righties" X| are unhappy when the judiciary does their job and places uses their checks and balances on your outlandish legislation. Now want to put yet another pseudolegislative branch above the judiciary.
The evolution of the human genome is too important to be left to chance.
-
Tim Craig wrote:
Replace judges with a panel of local yokels who are clueless as to what the constitution means as long as they get to pass their religious oriented legislation.
That's probably why they're now being held to a standard. Numerous judges have been passing down decisions that are contrary to the constitution in order to inflict their personal religious beliefs on the population.
"You act like jew." -Score: 1.0 (3 votes).
Red Stateler wrote:
That's probably why they're now being held to a standard.
Ah, so you want to impose "standards" here but yesterday you were against standards. Your ususal flip flop? http://www.codeproject.com/script/comments/forums.asp?msg=1684040&forumid=2605#xx1684040xx[^]
The evolution of the human genome is too important to be left to chance.
-
Stan Shannon wrote:
AKA : "We, the People".
Yes, we the people put into place a representative government with executive, legislative, and judicial branches. You "righties" X| are unhappy when the judiciary does their job and places uses their checks and balances on your outlandish legislation. Now want to put yet another pseudolegislative branch above the judiciary.
The evolution of the human genome is too important to be left to chance.
Tim Craig wrote:
Yes, we the people put into place a representative government with executive, legislative, and judicial branches. You "righties" are unhappy when the judiciary does their job and places uses their checks and balances on your outlandish legislation. Now want to put yet another pseudolegislative branch above the judiciary.
The judiciary was never intended to be empowered to "interpret the constitution". That power gives them exclusive power to interpret away all checks and balances upon themselves. The constitution belongs to we the people not to the courts. It is entirely appropriate for us to take it back from an out of control judiciary acting as a dictatorshiop imposing its leftist will upon a people who do not wish to be ruled in that way. If the courts were promoting a religious world view rather than a leftist one, I suspect you would feel exactly the same way.
Thank God for disproportional force.
-
Tim Craig wrote:
Replace judges with a panel of local yokels who are clueless as to what the constitution means as long as they get to pass their religious oriented legislation.
If the "local yokels" want to live a certain way, let them. It is well within their rights under the Constitution to define laws they deam appropriate. And holding judges accountable for their decisions forces them to keep to the letter of hte law instead of trying to interpret it in such a way that it means nothing.
If you decide to become a software engineer, you are signing up to have a 1/2" piece of silicon tell you exactly how stupid you really are for 8 hours a day, 5 days a week Zac
Zac Howland wrote:
If the "local yokels" want to live a certain way, let them.
Sure, why should they let little things like the constitution get in their way? I just love the way you, Stan, and Espeir discount the Federal constitution and want a system where stepping across the wrong state line is worse than being caught in North Korea or Pakistan.
The evolution of the human genome is too important to be left to chance.
-
Zac Howland wrote:
If the "local yokels" want to live a certain way, let them.
Sure, why should they let little things like the constitution get in their way? I just love the way you, Stan, and Espeir discount the Federal constitution and want a system where stepping across the wrong state line is worse than being caught in North Korea or Pakistan.
The evolution of the human genome is too important to be left to chance.
Tim Craig wrote:
Sure, why should they let little things like the constitution get in their way? I just love the way you, Stan, and Espeir discount the Federal constitution and want a system where stepping across the wrong state line is worse than being caught in North Korea or Pakistan.
Review your constitution. The federal constitution does not concern itself with state courts and even grants the legislative branch a significant amount of leeway in defining the federal court system.
"You act like jew." -Score: 1.0 (3 votes).
-
Zac Howland wrote:
If the "local yokels" want to live a certain way, let them.
Sure, why should they let little things like the constitution get in their way? I just love the way you, Stan, and Espeir discount the Federal constitution and want a system where stepping across the wrong state line is worse than being caught in North Korea or Pakistan.
The evolution of the human genome is too important to be left to chance.
Tim Craig wrote:
Sure, why should they let little things like the constitution get in their way? I just love the way you, Stan, and Espeir discount the Federal constitution and want a system where stepping across the wrong state line is worse than being caught in North Korea or Pakistan.
I love how you misquote me ... so let me make things a little more clear: The Constitution states that anything that is not defined/specified/etc in it, is left up to each individual state to decide. There is nothing in the federal consitution that discusses checks and balances on state judges, nor should their be.
If you decide to become a software engineer, you are signing up to have a 1/2" piece of silicon tell you exactly how stupid you really are for 8 hours a day, 5 days a week Zac
-
Red Stateler wrote:
That's probably why they're now being held to a standard.
Ah, so you want to impose "standards" here but yesterday you were against standards. Your ususal flip flop? http://www.codeproject.com/script/comments/forums.asp?msg=1684040&forumid=2605#xx1684040xx[^]
The evolution of the human genome is too important to be left to chance.
Tim Craig wrote:
Ah, so you want to impose "standards" here but yesterday you were against standards. Your ususal flip flop? http://www.codeproject.com/script/comments/forums.asp?msg=1684040&forumid=2605#xx1684040xx\[^\]
I wouldn't exactly call that a flip-flop. That comment basically said that if they want to keep flawed standards, it is their own business.
If you decide to become a software engineer, you are signing up to have a 1/2" piece of silicon tell you exactly how stupid you really are for 8 hours a day, 5 days a week Zac
-
Sounds like an Espeir plan to me. Replace judges with a panel of local yokels who are clueless as to what the constitution means as long as they get to pass their religious oriented legislation.
The evolution of the human genome is too important to be left to chance.
-
Tim Craig wrote:
Yes, we the people put into place a representative government with executive, legislative, and judicial branches. You "righties" are unhappy when the judiciary does their job and places uses their checks and balances on your outlandish legislation. Now want to put yet another pseudolegislative branch above the judiciary.
The judiciary was never intended to be empowered to "interpret the constitution". That power gives them exclusive power to interpret away all checks and balances upon themselves. The constitution belongs to we the people not to the courts. It is entirely appropriate for us to take it back from an out of control judiciary acting as a dictatorshiop imposing its leftist will upon a people who do not wish to be ruled in that way. If the courts were promoting a religious world view rather than a leftist one, I suspect you would feel exactly the same way.
Thank God for disproportional force.
Article III Section 2. The judicial power shall extend to all cases, in law and equity, arising under this Constitution, the laws of the United States, and treaties made, or which shall be made, under their authority.
-
Tim Craig wrote:
Sure, why should they let little things like the constitution get in their way? I just love the way you, Stan, and Espeir discount the Federal constitution and want a system where stepping across the wrong state line is worse than being caught in North Korea or Pakistan.
I love how you misquote me ... so let me make things a little more clear: The Constitution states that anything that is not defined/specified/etc in it, is left up to each individual state to decide. There is nothing in the federal consitution that discusses checks and balances on state judges, nor should their be.
If you decide to become a software engineer, you are signing up to have a 1/2" piece of silicon tell you exactly how stupid you really are for 8 hours a day, 5 days a week Zac
-
Ed Gadziemski wrote:
Are you home schooled?
ROFL. No, but it appears you must have failed Civics and government in grade school. Here you go.
If you decide to become a software engineer, you are signing up to have a 1/2" piece of silicon tell you exactly how stupid you really are for 8 hours a day, 5 days a week Zac
-
Article III Section 2. The judicial power shall extend to all cases, in law and equity, arising under this Constitution, the laws of the United States, and treaties made, or which shall be made, under their authority.
Ed Gadziemski wrote:
Article III Section 2. The judicial power shall extend
how does that contradict anything Stan or Red said in the above?
Mike Dear NYT - the fact is, the founding fathers hung traitors. Vincent Reynolds: My opposition is as enlightened as your support, jackass. dennisd45: My view of the world is slightly more nuanced dennisd45 (the NAMBLA supporter) wrote: I know exactly what it means. So shut up you mother killing baby raper.
-
Ed Gadziemski wrote:
Are you home schooled?
ROFL. No, but it appears you must have failed Civics and government in grade school. Here you go.
If you decide to become a software engineer, you are signing up to have a 1/2" piece of silicon tell you exactly how stupid you really are for 8 hours a day, 5 days a week Zac
Zac Howland wrote:
Here you go.
crap. no pictures. just words.
Mike Dear NYT - the fact is, the founding fathers hung traitors. Vincent Reynolds: My opposition is as enlightened as your support, jackass. dennisd45: My view of the world is slightly more nuanced dennisd45 (the NAMBLA supporter) wrote: I know exactly what it means. So shut up you mother killing baby raper.
-
Zac Howland wrote:
Here you go.
crap. no pictures. just words.
Mike Dear NYT - the fact is, the founding fathers hung traitors. Vincent Reynolds: My opposition is as enlightened as your support, jackass. dennisd45: My view of the world is slightly more nuanced dennisd45 (the NAMBLA supporter) wrote: I know exactly what it means. So shut up you mother killing baby raper.
Sorry, I'd send the coloring book version, but I'm afaid some people don't know how to stay within the lines.
If you decide to become a software engineer, you are signing up to have a 1/2" piece of silicon tell you exactly how stupid you really are for 8 hours a day, 5 days a week Zac
-
Red Stateler wrote:
That's probably why they're now being held to a standard.
Ah, so you want to impose "standards" here but yesterday you were against standards. Your ususal flip flop? http://www.codeproject.com/script/comments/forums.asp?msg=1684040&forumid=2605#xx1684040xx[^]
The evolution of the human genome is too important to be left to chance.
Tim Craig wrote:
Ah, so you want to impose "standards" here but yesterday you were against standards. Your ususal flip flop?
Firstly my post yesterday was a description of the judicial system and not an endorsement. Secondly, the "standard" I'm referring to is clearly the one set forth by the residents of that state, which is consistent with the post you specified. You apparently want standards, but you believe they should be set by a power beyond the reach of the people. We call that a "despot".
"You act like jew." -Score: 1.0 (3 votes).
-
Article III Section 2. The judicial power shall extend to all cases, in law and equity, arising under this Constitution, the laws of the United States, and treaties made, or which shall be made, under their authority.
Ed Gadziemski wrote:
under this Constitution
This means the courts interpret the constitutionality of law - as the constitution is written. It does not empower them to re-interpret the constitution at will to cherry pick which laws they like and which they do not like. If any of the three branches of government should have the power to interpret the constitution it should be the legislative branch, not the judicial.
Thank God for disproportional force.
-
Ed Gadziemski wrote:
under this Constitution
This means the courts interpret the constitutionality of law - as the constitution is written. It does not empower them to re-interpret the constitution at will to cherry pick which laws they like and which they do not like. If any of the three branches of government should have the power to interpret the constitution it should be the legislative branch, not the judicial.
Thank God for disproportional force.
It is very clear, Stan. I cannot fathom why you don't understand what it says. To reiterate: Judicial power extends to all cases civil and criminal, including, 1. the Constitution 2. laws written by Congress 3. treaties The framers of the Constitution knew what they were doing. They specifically empowered the judiciary as a counterweight against a rubber-stamp legislature, an over-reaching executive, or both.
-
Tim Craig wrote:
religious oriented legislation.
PC version is "social conservative". :-D
led mike