Announcement

Collapse

Civics 101 Guidelines

Want to argue about politics? Healthcare reform? Taxes? Governments? You've come to the right place!

Try to keep it civil though. The rules still apply here.
See more
See less

Why I Voted For Trump...

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Originally posted by Starlight View Post
    Um... so you're saying it would be a great system if humans were perfect and America wasn't America? Pity the "great system" wasn't designed properly to handle real life.
    As the saying goes: "So much the worse for the facts."
    "Yes. President Trump is a huge embarrassment. And it’s an embarrassment to evangelical Christianity that there appear to be so many who will celebrate precisely the aspects that I see Biblically as most lamentable and embarrassing." Southern Baptist leader Albert Mohler Jr.

    Comment


    • Originally posted by Starlight View Post
      Um... so you're saying it would be a great system if humans were perfect and America wasn't America?
      Are you experiencing a difficult time in your life right now? No, that's not what I said.

      Pity the "great system" wasn't designed properly to handle real life.
      You can "ahem" all you want (Do you do that in real life?) but the best system in the world is only as good as the people who run it.

      Currently, we have a whole bunch of power-hungry self-centered politically divided people fighting for the lives of their own party instead of the good of the nation.
      "Neighbor, how long has it been since you’ve had a big, thick, steaming bowl of Wolf Brand Chili?”

      Comment


      • Originally posted by Tassman View Post
        Regardless of what Tribe has to say, a recent NPR/PBS NewsHour/Marist poll found that 77 percent of respondents said the Supreme Court should uphold the landmark decision that established a woman's right to abortion in some form.

        https://thehill.com/policy/healthcar...old-roe-v-wade
        That has ZERO to do with whether Roe v Wade was actually a proper decision. And SCOTUS should not make decisions based on opinion polls.

        Yet you seem to think you are entitled to enforce your minority, religion-based ideology upon everyone else via force of law.
        What a jackass. I never said any such thing. I'm merely pointing out that, if they were honest, even liberals would agree that Roe v Wade was a bad decision.


        Honest pro-choicers admit Roe v. Wade was a horrible decision


        Tribe was only one of a number of legal scholars who point that out.
        "Neighbor, how long has it been since you’ve had a big, thick, steaming bowl of Wolf Brand Chili?”

        Comment


        • Originally posted by Charles View Post
          As the saying goes: "So much the worse for the facts."
          This is the kind of crap for which you earn the reputation of "Nanny", Charles. Do you actually have something to contribute?
          "Neighbor, how long has it been since you’ve had a big, thick, steaming bowl of Wolf Brand Chili?”

          Comment


          • Originally posted by Cow Poke View Post
            That has ZERO to do with whether Roe v Wade was actually a proper decision. And SCOTUS should not make decisions based on opinion polls.



            What a jackass. I never said any such thing. I'm merely pointing out that, if they were honest, even liberals would agree that Roe v Wade was a bad decision.


            Honest pro-choicers admit Roe v. Wade was a horrible decision


            Tribe was only one of a number of legal scholars who point that out.
            Actually the Liberals you cited agree with the decision, in that it's the womens choice to make, they just don't agree with the reasoning given by the Court. And that's just some Liberals, there are plenty I'm sure who were in agreement with it.

            Comment


            • Originally posted by JimL View Post
              Actually the Liberals you cited agree with the decision,
              No, they agree with the outcome. The actual decision is cited as seriously flawed.

              in that it's the womens choice to make, they just don't agree with the reasoning given by the Court.
              They agree that it was a horrible decision not based on legitimate judicial process.

              And that's just some Liberals,
              Yes, the honest ones.

              there are plenty I'm sure who were in agreement with it.
              The outcome, sure - the process, no.

              Tassman loves to cite "because it's the law of the land" -- but it's ONLY "the law" because of a terrible abuse of judicial process. IF Roe v Wade were to be overturned, it would be on the basis of its flawed construction, not because of any opinion polls.
              "Neighbor, how long has it been since you’ve had a big, thick, steaming bowl of Wolf Brand Chili?”

              Comment


              • Originally posted by Cow Poke View Post
                It's a great system - unfortunately in the hands of terribly flawed people in an incredibly politically divided nation.
                This sounds a lot like what defenders of communism say: "It works, they just put the wrong people in charge of it!"

                Honestly, I think a lot of problems would be solved if it required 2/3 of the Supreme Court to strike down a law as unconstitutional rather than a simple majority. It wouldn't fully fix things (there were certainly very erroneous decisions striking down a law that had more than 2/3 on board), but it would at least protect a bit against it.

                (oh, and before, "but Roe v. Wade was a 7-2 decision and would have passed"--maybe, but it would have been effectively overturned subsequently)

                Originally posted by JimL View Post
                Actually the Liberals you cited agree with the decision, in that it's the womens choice to make, they just don't agree with the reasoning given by the Court.
                A few of them did, yes--but most of them were critical of both decision and result. And even "right conclusion, wrong reasoning" is being critical of the decision itself. And I question how many of them were fully in agreement with even the decision itself. Ginsburg may have agreed with "right to an abortion" but asserted that the majority went too far with it, for example.

                And that's just some Liberals, there are plenty I'm sure who were in agreement with it.
                Gee, I wonder why someone might be in favor of a decision that politically supports their preferred policies, regardless of the reasoning was good or not...

                Comment


                • Originally posted by Cow Poke View Post
                  That has ZERO to do with whether Roe v Wade was actually a proper decision.
                  Of course, it was a proper decision. Roe v Wade was made by a duly appointed body 'properly' fulfilling its role to adjudicate on the Constitutional issue brought before it. The fact that you dislike the decision is neither here nor there.

                  And SCOTUS should not make decisions based on opinion polls.
                  SCOTUS did NOT make a decision “based on opinion polls”, what a ludicrous suggestion.

                  Nevertheless, its landmark legal ruling was widely supported at the time, even by your lot e.g. W. A. Criswell, the Southern Baptist Convention’s former president and pastor of First Baptist Church in Dallas, Texas was very pleased at the ruling. No thought of ‘improper decisions’ back then.

                  What a jackass. I never said any such thing.
                  Come now. Your entire argument has been based on “saving innocent babies in the womb” NOT about perceived flawed decisions by SCOTUS.

                  I'm merely pointing out that, if they were honest, even liberals would agree that Roe v Wade was a bad decision.
                  No. The majority of scholars and the population “honestly” approve of Roe v Wade and will fight to retain the pro-choice position it protects. You, of course, will cherry-pick those that agree with your religion-based opinion and denigrate the rest as "dishonest".
                  “He felt that his whole life was a kind of dream and he sometimes wondered whose it was and whether they were enjoying it.” - Douglas Adams.

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by Terraceth View Post

                    Gee, I wonder why someone might be in favor of a decision that politically supports their preferred policies, regardless of the reasoning was good or not...
                    For much the same reason that someone might be opposed to a decision that politically undermines their preferred policies and religious ideology, by claiming that the decision was flawed.
                    “He felt that his whole life was a kind of dream and he sometimes wondered whose it was and whether they were enjoying it.” - Douglas Adams.

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by Cow Poke View Post
                      No, they agree with the outcome. The actual decision is cited as seriously flawed.
                      The decision is the outcome, even if the underlining reasoning was flawed.


                      They agree that it was a horrible decision not based on legitimate judicial process.
                      Nope, if they agree with the outcome, then they agree with the decision, even if they don't agree with the reasons given for it.


                      Yes, the honest ones.
                      Just because someone disagrees with you doesn't make them dishonest.


                      The outcome, sure - the process, no.
                      I have no idea why you are bringing up process, the process hasn't changed. I think it's the reasoning behind the decision that you have a problem with.
                      Tassman loves to cite "because it's the law of the land" -- but it's ONLY "the law" because of a terrible abuse of judicial process. IF Roe v Wade were to be overturned, it would be on the basis of its flawed construction, not because of any opinion polls.
                      Well, yeah, they would have to show not only why the underlining reasoning in the case by the previous SCOTUS was flawed, but they would have also to show that the decision/outcome itself was wrong.

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by Tassman View Post
                        Of course, it was a proper decision. Roe v Wade was made by a duly appointed body 'properly' fulfilling its role to adjudicate on the Constitutional issue brought before it.
                        This known as an opinion. I bet you have a belly button, too.
                        "Neighbor, how long has it been since you’ve had a big, thick, steaming bowl of Wolf Brand Chili?”

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by JimL View Post
                          The decision is the outcome, even if the underlining reasoning was flawed.
                          Court cases get overturned all the time on the basis of flawed reasoning, Jim.
                          "Neighbor, how long has it been since you’ve had a big, thick, steaming bowl of Wolf Brand Chili?”

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by Cow Poke View Post
                            Court cases get overturned all the time on the basis of flawed reasoning, Jim.
                            *cough* Plessy vs Ferguson
                            "The man from the yacht thought he was the first to find England; I thought I was the first to find Europe. I did try to found a heresy of my own; and when I had put the last touches to it, I discovered that it was orthodoxy."
                            GK Chesterton; Orthodoxy

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by lilpixieofterror View Post
                              *cough* Plessy vs Ferguson
                              EGGzackly -- I think the liberals want so badly for Roe v Wade to stand that they'll argue anything, ignore any facts, or maybe they're just plain ignorant of the law.

                              And to be clear, I'm not even pushing for RvW to be overturned, or holding out any serious hope that it will --- just pointing out that the weakness of RvW is that the decision itself was seriously flawed, and that in itself makes it vulnerable. And pretty much any honest liberal who knows anything about the law knows that and would admit it.
                              "Neighbor, how long has it been since you’ve had a big, thick, steaming bowl of Wolf Brand Chili?”

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by Cow Poke View Post
                                EGGzackly -- I think the liberals want so badly for Roe v Wade to stand that they'll argue anything, ignore any facts, or maybe they're just plain ignorant of the law.

                                And to be clear, I'm not even pushing for RvW to be overturned, or holding out any serious hope that it will --- just pointing out that the weakness of RvW is that the decision itself was seriously flawed, and that in itself makes it vulnerable. And pretty much any honest liberal who knows anything about the law knows that and would admit it.
                                If we ignored the obvious moral implications, of abortion, the court should have kicked the issue to congress or the states.
                                "The man from the yacht thought he was the first to find England; I thought I was the first to find Europe. I did try to found a heresy of my own; and when I had put the last touches to it, I discovered that it was orthodoxy."
                                GK Chesterton; Orthodoxy

                                Comment

                                Related Threads

                                Collapse

                                Topics Statistics Last Post
                                Started by Gondwanaland, Today, 01:42 PM
                                19 responses
                                52 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post seer
                                by seer
                                 
                                Started by Ronson, Today, 11:16 AM
                                0 responses
                                23 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post Ronson
                                by Ronson
                                 
                                Started by Juvenal, Today, 04:13 AM
                                10 responses
                                38 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post Juvenal
                                by Juvenal
                                 
                                Started by shunyadragon, Yesterday, 06:20 PM
                                22 responses
                                115 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post rogue06
                                by rogue06
                                 
                                Started by shunyadragon, Yesterday, 06:10 PM
                                5 responses
                                43 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post Ronson
                                by Ronson
                                 
                                Working...
                                X