Did you receive this in the mail grandpa? I spy a trifold.
joseph stiglitz wife passed it out at Davos
Did you receive this in the mail grandpa? I spy a trifold.
The Aztec used to eat shrooms in the dark
But the judge should not be a activist he or she should follow the law. If you don't follow the law you get dictators. If you don't like the laws get people elected to change the law don't make it up in the courts.
If you make up the law in the court then the court rules the people. This gives the power to a few people and negates the peoples vioce threw voting. In other words you end up with a small controlling group in the courts.
How is filling the courts with the most extreme conservative right wing judges and different? Except the majority of the population actually voted against someone with those values?
lmao what does this even mean?
care to give an example?
and abortion is constitutionally legal. hence my comment on the GOP wanting to stack the courts because they can't overturn abortion (or really anything else they want to overturn) any other way because they have no support to do so.
you sure love putting words into my mouth.
does a constitutionally limited representative government have anything to say about assassinating foreign generals illegally, in a country which we also invaded illegally?
i didn't bother to look this up but i can almost guarantee there is no country that practices 100% direct democracy lol.
So you can't give an example?
Because they follow the law they don't make the law like the dems judges.
I guess the problem is with perspective. From my perspective judges chosen by liberals are more likely to make choices that fall in line with what I believe. And conservatives choose judges that in my opinion make thing worse.
There are so many cases where the dems have used the courts to get what they want it is a joke you would even ask such a question.
There are so many cases where the dems have used the courts to get what they want it is a joke you would even ask such a question.
yeah, i see your point. advancing our civilizations treatment of the poor & disadvantaged is SO against "conservative" values. why won't those irritating little people just go away & do their suffering & dying where we don't have to look at them?
But the judge should not be a activist he or she should follow the law. If you don't follow the law you get dictators. If you don't like the laws get people elected to change the law don't make it up in the courts.
If you make up the law in the court then the court rules the people. This gives the power to a few people and negates the peoples vioce threw voting. In other words you end up with a small controlling group in the courts.
Bear in mind that courts decide if laws were correctly written and applied in accordance with foundational documents, including the constitution and laws which spell out how new laws and regulations must be construed. It is often through this avenue that laws are overturned or altered.
This is an aspect of common law [as far as I understand] which governs most of the western world.
Laws against such things as abortion have no place whatsoever. Also be prepared for the massive increase in government and policing with implementation of such 'laws' creates. For a simile look to the drug laws and war on drugs, amidst many.
Note; please try for 'through'
I think I will leave for a bit since I am arguing with intellectual midgets who cant even follow basic logic.
yeah, i see your point. advancing our civilizations treatment of the poor & disadvantaged is SO against "conservative" values. why won't those irritating little people just go away & do their suffering & dying where we don't have to look at them?
Finally some one who can offer a valid argument.
The basic function of the courts is to follow the law and not make. Making laws is done by elected officials and not the court. When the courts make laws it negates the voters choice. It also invest to much power in the courts and allows some group to force their view onto others. This is how you get something like Iran has where the clerics have say and not the people.