Retire already!
1 posted on
07/07/2003 7:00:07 AM PDT by
mrobison
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 41-60, 61-80, 81-100 ... 121-125 next last
To: mrobison
bump
180 posted on
07/07/2003 8:55:05 AM PDT by
lowbridge
(Rob: "I see a five letter word. F-R-E-E-P. Freep." Jerry: "Freep? What's that?" - Dick Van Dyke Show)
To: mrobison
In the Lawrence v Texas case decided June 26, Justice Anthony Kennedy gave as a reason for overturning a Supreme Court ruling of 17 years earlier upholding sodomy laws that it was devoid of any reliance on the views of a "wider civilization." What about the death penalty? Is that the next to go?
184 posted on
07/07/2003 8:58:02 AM PDT by
SunStar
(Democrats piss me off!)
To: mrobison
Breyer didn't say anything people here are saying he said. He said that figuring out how the Constitution governs our relationships with other countries and their constitutions will be a challenge. He also said that while the values in the Constitution are constant we are always faced with new technology and new situtations that the Founders never dreamed of that we must apply the Constitution to. That's nothing terribly controversial.
Now if you're going to argue that sodomy laws represent the view of society it's helpful to look at what society actually thinks. Now it's dumb to look to the Netherlands to figure this out, but it's a line of thought I can follow and it's rather different than declareing the Constitution subordinate to the whims of Europe.
190 posted on
07/07/2003 9:10:39 AM PDT by
MattAMiller
(Down with the Mullahs! Peace, freedom, and prosperity for Iran.)
To: mrobison
Dear Lord, Help us!
To: mrobison
The current court is split between Chief Justice William Rehnquist, Clarence Thomas and Scalia, who tend to hold the traditional constitutionalist approach to rulings, and the majority of O'Connor, Breyer, Kennedy, Ruth Bader Ginzburg, David H. Souter and John Paul Stevens, who tend to believe in the concept of a "living Constitution" subject to changes in public opinion and interpretation. The "living Constitution" crowd is very harmful to the document......
194 posted on
07/07/2003 9:22:26 AM PDT by
b4its2late
(FOOTBALL REFEREES - Sure, it's tough to play with us, but there's no game without us.)
To: mrobison
The SCOTUS has been overstepping is Constitutional authority for a very long time. In their twisted minds the Constitution is already dead.
For now, the only thing any of us can really do about it is vote. For now.
212 posted on
07/07/2003 9:42:17 AM PDT by
appalachian_dweller
(Character is doing the right thing when nobody is looking. – JC Watts)
To: mrobison
"In an unrelated matter, O'Connor indicated on "This Week" that she would likely serve out the next term on the court, dismssing speculation that she was about to retire."Or, maybe she'll just die.
Just before the last election, O'Connor was saying publicly that she was only staying on until Bush was elected. Now it looks as if Bush is "too conservative" for her, so she plans to stick it out.
214 posted on
07/07/2003 9:45:57 AM PDT by
Redbob
To: mrobison
The left wants the Constitution to be a "living, breathing" document so that they can kill it. You cannot kill that which is not living (or breathing...).
To: mrobison
IMPEACH THE IDIOT.
Let him hold court with an outhouse full of mosquitoes in the deep hinterlands of Alaska.
Rather Siberia. Alaska doesn't deserve the insult.
223 posted on
07/07/2003 9:54:07 AM PDT by
Quix
(LIVE THREAD NOW STARTED. UFO special Tues eve & share opinions)
To: mrobison
Stephen G. Breyer
BiographyPresident Clinton's second nomination to the Supreme Court is a man of difficult descriptions. Contradictory in many ways, Stephen Gerald Breyer defied simple classification, as a man and as a judge.
232 posted on
07/07/2003 10:05:09 AM PDT by
swampfx
To: mrobison
You realize that the framers intended those words to maintain constant values, but values that would change in their application as society changed." Philosophy of Language, if there is such a thing. Words are taken as subject, and then are predicated. The same word can have any number of predicates, that is, the word does not contain its function. Another odd twist is that words can have multiple meanings--especially older words that have been in use for a time. We constantly add new words to the language, but we also add meanings to existing words, and not just by new functions, but to the word itself. It would be a mistake, most unscholarly, to interpret the Constitution by using new meanings or predicates that didn't exist when the Constitution was adopted.
233 posted on
07/07/2003 10:05:45 AM PDT by
RightWhale
(gazing at shadows)
To: mrobison
Breyer.....
He may act like an idiot and talk like an idiot, but he really is an idiot!
Isn't he sworn to uphold the United States Constitution and not the sentiments of the 'world'?
To: mrobison
TREASON
To: BlackElk
Ping
249 posted on
07/07/2003 10:24:37 AM PDT by
ninenot
(Joe McCarthy was RIGHT, but Drank Too Much)
To: mrobison
bump for later read
259 posted on
07/07/2003 10:37:48 AM PDT by
AK2KX
To: mrobison
How in the world does anyone think the USA would give up it's constitutional rights without going into a global civil war??? The nation was almost destroyed 140 years ago when the Union took away Southern liberties.... The only choice is for the world to join our constitution or be crushed...their is no other way; Bryer sees the world backwards, I bet he has only travelled to Europe and Canada and really has no concept at just how impossibly correct the USA's constitution is towards individualistic human liberties.
269 posted on
07/07/2003 10:49:13 AM PDT by
Porterville
(I support US total global, world domination; how's that for sensitive??)
To: mrobison
Breyer had held that a ruling by the European Court of Human Rights that homosexuals had a fundamental right to privacy in their sexual behavior showed that the Supreme Court's earlier decision to the contrary was unfounded in the Western tradition.
IMPEACH this judge!!!
271 posted on
07/07/2003 10:51:05 AM PDT by
DannyTN
(Note left on my door by a pack of neighborhood dogs.)
To: mrobison
The real face of judicial activism rears it's ugly head.
272 posted on
07/07/2003 10:51:13 AM PDT by
wasp69
(The time has come.......)
To: mrobison
No wonder Scalia was incensed; he has to deal with idiots on a daily basis.
I'd rather do without the court than to do without the Constitution.
Breyer needs to be removed.
To: mrobison
bump
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 41-60, 61-80, 81-100 ... 121-125 next last
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson