[NutCrackerBoy]

Well, I agree there are tyrannical governments. For example, one which takes away the right of the people to self-govern on the basis of social reality. One which, under the guise of protecting individual rights, elevates judges to super-legislators.

[RHINO369]

"Well, I agree there are tyrannical governments. For example, one which takes away the right of the people to self-govern on the basis of social reality. One which, under the guise of protecting individual rights, elevates judges to super-legislators."

I agree. However a judge doesn't legislate if he finds that a law is unconstitutional because the law violates a right. Roe V Wade is one of the super legislator laws because harming another person isn't a right because there are two people.

[timm22]

Well, I agree there are tyrannical governments. For example, one which takes away the right of the people to self-govern on the basis of social reality.

What do you mean by "self-govern on the basis of social reality"?

One which, under the guise of protecting individual rights, elevates judges to super-legislators.

Why would that be tyrannical? It might be somewhat less democratic than what we have now, but it wouldn't confer sole or absolute power on the judiciary, now would that system have to be particularly harsh or cruel.

Tyranny and lack of democracy are not always the same thing, nor is democracy a guaranteed preventive for tyranny.