I’d rather have a discussion with a brick wall ... at least, a brick wall will not drive you crazy with illogic.. and it does serve at least one useful service.
Libs like Breyer, however ....
Compassion for the guilty is treason to the innocent.
The death penalty is certainly not cruel and unusual by the standards of the time when the phrase was used, which is the original meaning of the term — and just what Breyer seems to argue is the standard.
The prohibition on cruel and unusual punishment, like most things in the US Constitution, com,es from British experience. The Americans emulated the English Bill of Rights (cribbing from it word for word in many instances!), and wanted badly to avoid such things as drawing and quartering, and burning at the stake, and other atrocities.
Never was simple capital punishment considered cruel and unusual.
Of course, capital punishment is undesirable from the standpoint of the condemned criminal: it is definitely a source of fear for most convicts. However, most of the arguments against capital punishment are arguments which apply to ANY form of punishment. Think about it!
Why is it that only Republican Presidents get suckered into appointing liberal Supreme Court Justices? I can’t see a conservative Justice ever getting past Clinton’s or Obama’s screening process.
Scalia called the writing of the Constitution “providential,” and the birth of political science.
“There’s very little that I would change,” he said. “I would change it back to what they wrote, in some respects. The 17th Amendment has changed things enormously.”
That amendment allowed for U.S. Senators to be elected by the people, rather than by individual state legislatures.
“We changed that in a burst of progressivism in 1913, and you can trace the decline of so-called states’ rights throughout the rest of the 20th century. So, don’t mess with the Constitution.”
Isn't he awesome?
People who don’t understand the difference between justified killing, and murder, you cannot reason with them. They simply must not be allowed to hold positions that can impact such decisions.
It’s society’s duty to protect the innocent from the guilty and when the guilty take another person’s life, society has a duty to ensure they an never do it again. Murder someone, you forfeit your right to live. Kill someone defending your life they are trying to steal from you, THAT is not murder (and no this doesn’t make thieves or murderers ‘defending themselves’ trying to defend their lives from police).
Stay healthy, Scalia. That’s all I have to say.
If the plain language has no specific meaning, if rights can be found where none are specifically articulated, if federal judges can usurp state powers and claim a Constitutional basis, if you can interpret the language of the Constitution any way you want ... where is the need to change anything?
War is peace, Freedom is slavery, and Ignorance is strength...George Orwell, 1984
We are a long way down the slippery slope to the demise of the Republic and most of us, even my conservative friends don't or perhaps refuse to recognize it. Tyranny to revolution to liberty to democracy back to tyranny is always the continium. There is no stasis.
Breyer against the death penalty but for abortion.
I presume he will answer for that some day when he meets his maker.