|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
Thread ▼ Details |
|
|
Author | Topic: Oh No, The New Awesome Primary Thread | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Taq Member Posts: 10081 Joined: Member Rating: 5.1
|
So I guess if you are accustomed to picking and choosing which bible verses you live by, you would think you can do the same with the constitution? I have found that there is an indirect relationship between someone's claim of "sticking up for the Constitution" and their actual support for the Constitution. The same goes for their knowledge of the Constitution. Most conservatives think Article III should be removed entirely from the Constitution, or even worse, they are unaware that it exists.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
NoNukes Inactive Member
|
And that blacks are not really full US citizens because of the Supreme Court Dred Scott decision ... even though that decision has been rendered moot by actual congressional approved law -- the 14th amendment. To the best of my knowledge, the Dred Scott decision was never explicitly overruled. Some parts of its holding are quite obviously bad law. Namely the portions related to citizenship and the rights of black people are null and void in face of the 13-15th amendments. On the other hand, some parts are merely moot but not overruled, like the question of whether a slave becomes free when taken into a state outlawing the practice. Or the question of whether or not federal law allows the government to affect property rights in general the way slavery was affected with the Missouri Compromise. Every so often some one will cite Dred Scott in a legal brief but most lawyers have better sense than to do so. The few that will cite Scott generally will cite other law and decisions. Nobody worth listening to would seriously cite the case in an attempt to question the rights of black people in the US. That would be stupid. Dred Scott case was decided on a large number of grounds. One reason a colored person could not sue in US court was because he was not a citizen and because he could not demonstrate citizenship in a foreign country because records of his (or his parents) being "imported" from some country were never available. That holding may still be applicable to foreigners who find themselves in a similar situation. Edited by NoNukes, : No reason given. Edited by NoNukes, : No reason given. Under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also in prison. Thoreau: Civil Disobedience (1846) History will have to record that the greatest tragedy of this period of social transition was not the strident clamor of the bad people, but the appalling silence of the good people. Martin Luther King If there are no stupid questions, then what kind of questions do stupid people ask? Do they get smart just in time to ask questions? Scott Adams
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
RAZD Member (Idle past 1433 days) Posts: 20714 From: the other end of the sidewalk Joined: |
To the best of my knowledge, the Dred Scott decision was never explicitly overruled. Some parts of its holding are quite obviously bad law. Namely the portions related to citizenship and the rights of black people are null and void in face of the 13-15th amendments. So huckster Huckabee is blowing smoke for political gain (wotta surprise).
On the other hand, some parts are merely moot but not overruled, ... Once again it seems to me that there needs to be some system of "cleaning house" to specifically revoke laws and parts of laws that are no longer relevant, perhaps a 25 year review? Enjoyby our ability to understand Rebel☮American☆Zen☯Deist ... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ... to share. Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click)
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Omnivorous Member Posts: 3990 From: Adirondackia Joined: Member Rating: 6.9
|
Diomedes writes: A birther, a bigot and a moron all wrapped up in one package. And so is the guy asking the question. Trump We've long expected any fascist march in the U.S. to carry the Cross and the Flag. Now we can add the Trademark."If you can keep your head while those around you are losing theirs, you can collect a lot of heads." Homo sum, humani nihil a me alienum puto.-Terence
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
NoNukes Inactive Member
|
Once again it seems to me that there needs to be some system of "cleaning house" to specifically revoke laws and parts of laws that are no longer relevant, perhaps a 25 year review? What issue is raised by Dred Scott not being overruled? Some irrelevant idiot mouthing off about the constitution does not seem all that important to me. The fourteenth amendment says that all anyone needs to prove that they are a real citizen is their birth certificate. Beyond that, the way we overrule case law is by deciding new cases, and those cases can only overrule relevant parts of other case law. The assumption is that parts of a case that are not overruled are likely to be good law. You cannot remove case law by a simple review process in the same way you can clean up statutes. And even a statute review would be a waste of time and money. Under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also in prison. Thoreau: Civil Disobedience (1846) History will have to record that the greatest tragedy of this period of social transition was not the strident clamor of the bad people, but the appalling silence of the good people. Martin Luther King If there are no stupid questions, then what kind of questions do stupid people ask? Do they get smart just in time to ask questions? Scott Adams
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
MrHambre Member (Idle past 1421 days) Posts: 1495 From: Framingham, MA, USA Joined: |
Taq writes:
Sixty years ago, someone talking about the Constitution was likely to be advocating for the rights of marginalized populations, or broadening social discourse to include previously forbidden content. Nowadays, whenever someone mentions the Constitution, it's almost certain that the person is a gun-nut or a pissed-off white guy. I have found that there is an indirect relationship between someone's claim of "sticking up for the Constitution" and their actual support for the Constitution. And the line cuts both ways. It's not like the Constitution specifically mentions separation of Church and State, either. We atheists have just become used to the myth that the Constitution affords us freedom from religion in any form. Don't get me wrong, I don't think religion should have influence over public policy or education, and I don't believe for a minute that religion is "under siege"; but complaining about crches and crosses is tired stuff. And using the word Constitution as if it shuts down all discussion of the topic makes us sound like gun nuts. Edited by MrHambre, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Dr Adequate Member (Idle past 312 days) Posts: 16113 Joined: |
It's not like the Constitution specifically mentions separation of Church and State, either. But it is kinda like Jefferson and Madison did. And since James Madison wrote the First Amendment, it's nice to know what he thought it meant.
... but complaining about crches and crosses is tired stuff. Yeah, religious freedom is so ten years ago. Why don't atheists take up something that's more now? Edited by Dr Adequate, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
subbie Member (Idle past 1282 days) Posts: 3509 Joined: |
NoNukes writes: On the other hand, some parts are merely moot but not overruled, ... RAZD writes: Once again it seems to me that there needs to be some system of "cleaning house" to specifically revoke laws and parts of laws that are no longer relevant, perhaps a 25 year review? Dred Scott was not a law, but a Supreme Court decision. And there are very, VERY good reasons why we don't want those to have a sunset provision. Can you imagine how insane presidential elections would be if the continued validity of Brown v. Board of Education, Marbury v. Madison, Gideon v. Wainwright, Miranda v. Arizona, Mapp v. Ohio were in issue? I can understand the impetus behind sunset provisions generally, but the idea of applying them to matters of fundamental rights scares the hell out of me.Ridicule is the only weapon which can be used against unintelligible propositions. -- Thomas Jefferson We see monsters where science shows us windmills. -- Phat It has always struck me as odd that fundies devote so much time and effort into trying to find a naturalistic explanation for their mythical flood, while looking for magical explanations for things that actually happened. -- Dr. Adequate Howling about evidence is a conversation stopper, and it never stops to think if the claim could possibly be true -- foreveryoung
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Diomedes Member Posts: 996 From: Central Florida, USA Joined:
|
Scott Walker just dropped out of the Presidential race:
Scott Walker drops out of 2016 race | CNN Politics Should we start a 'Dead Pool' on who might be next?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
RAZD Member (Idle past 1433 days) Posts: 20714 From: the other end of the sidewalk Joined: |
Christie?
by our ability to understand Rebel☮American☆Zen☯Deist ... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ... to share. Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click)
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Asgara Member (Idle past 2330 days) Posts: 1783 From: Wisconsin, USA Joined:
|
Unfortunately he will now be back looking for bigger and better ways to screw over my lovely Wisconsin.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Theodoric Member Posts: 9197 From: Northwest, WI, USA Joined: Member Rating: 3.2
|
As a fellow Wisconsinite I know of which you speak.
Facts don't lie or have an agenda. Facts are just facts "God did it" is not an argument. It is an excuse for intellectual laziness.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
MrHambre Member (Idle past 1421 days) Posts: 1495 From: Framingham, MA, USA Joined:
|
Diomedes writes:
I'm relieved. I'd rather the Dem candidate have to run against an ineffectual blowhard like Trump or Christie than an opponent like Walker, who has enough actual union-busting cred to fire the imaginations of all the laissez-faire fantasists in the population of this former superpower. Scott Walker just dropped out of the Presidential race Edited by MrHambre, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Omnivorous Member Posts: 3990 From: Adirondackia Joined: Member Rating: 6.9
|
Asgara writes: Unfortunately he will now be back looking for bigger and better ways to screw over my lovely Wisconsin. But he did double-down on Wisconsin as the nation's leader in cheese. I think Lindsey Graham might go next. The Red Staters are calling him a sissy, and he can't muster enough crazy to get taken seriously. Cruz looks like Robert Mitchum with subtle chromosonal aberrations, so he'll probably survive a while due to the Southern base--I'd like to see him in a top hat and moustache: "If you don't give me the Constitution, I'm gonna blow y'all to bits!" Jindal hasn't looked into a mirror for 30 years, apparently, and denial always lasts longer than one thinks it possibly could. I'd like to see more GOP women run, but watching Fiorina calmly describe the recent Planned Parent hoax video as containing true scenes of aborted fetuses squirming on the table while doctors discussed harvesting its living brain (uh, no) makes me wonder--the bar for women is always higher, and they're just aren't that many rich, intensely sociopathic women in the U.S. Her personal success story is like Trump's: "I got rich bankrupting other people. So sue me." She can't maintain prominence without Trump's insults...so maybe a shared ticket? Lots of abusive relationships are like that. Graham has always interested me. Like John McCain, he has the look of a man desperately trying to figure out how to buy back his soul. But Graham is also a professional pol, and, like Walker, he'll be calculating the future cost of hanging there without support vs. "the good of the party". By the way, I think we could buy Trump out with a Kickstarter campaign. They've recently recast themselves as a public benefit corporation, and he loves to deal, so that could work. Remember, you heard it here first So, yeah, Lindsey, exit stage right: Nothing in his hat, and nothing up his sleeve. "If you can keep your head while those around you are losing theirs, you can collect a lot of heads." Homo sum, humani nihil a me alienum puto.-Terence
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Asgara Member (Idle past 2330 days) Posts: 1783 From: Wisconsin, USA Joined:
|
But he did double-down on Wisconsin as the nation's leader in cheese Side note... I've always hated the California Happy Cow campaign... Everyone knows the best cheese is born from adversity.
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024