Trump's SCOTUS

User avatar
Speaker to Animals
Posts: 38685
Joined: Wed Nov 30, 2016 5:59 pm

Re: Trump's SCOTUS

Post by Speaker to Animals » Sun Apr 09, 2017 11:57 am

Maybe go tell an abortion survivor they were not a human being when the abortionist tried to kill them.

User avatar
StCapps
Posts: 16879
Joined: Wed Nov 30, 2016 10:59 am
Location: Hamilton, Ontario

Re: Trump's SCOTUS

Post by StCapps » Sun Apr 09, 2017 12:21 pm

Yeah, I'm a socialist Hash, you got me.
:lol:
*yip*

User avatar
de officiis
Posts: 2528
Joined: Wed Nov 30, 2016 11:09 am

Re: Trump's SCOTUS

Post by de officiis » Sun Apr 09, 2017 12:24 pm

I think what the Roe Court was trying to do was balance the woman's liberty interest in controlling her own body with the states' interest in protecting human life. So it's not all one or the other.
Image

User avatar
Martin Hash
Posts: 18588
Joined: Wed Jan 20, 2010 2:02 pm

Re: Trump's SCOTUS

Post by Martin Hash » Sun Apr 09, 2017 12:37 pm

de officiis wrote:I think what the Roe Court was trying to do was balance the woman's liberty interest in controlling her own body with the states' interest in protecting human life. So it's not all one or the other.
That's 2 lawyers. I don't actually know what Fife would say? Fife, what's up?
Shamedia, Shamdemic, Shamucation, Shamlection, Shamconomy & Shamate Change

User avatar
Martin Hash
Posts: 18588
Joined: Wed Jan 20, 2010 2:02 pm

Re: Trump's SCOTUS

Post by Martin Hash » Sun Apr 09, 2017 12:42 pm

This does bring up an interesting, possibly podcast material, topic...

Which indoctrination wins out: State sponsored in the public schools, etc., or Church sponsored at home, etc.? Lots of socialism in mysticism but liberty in the schools. Give me some gist for the mill guys.
Shamedia, Shamdemic, Shamucation, Shamlection, Shamconomy & Shamate Change

User avatar
StCapps
Posts: 16879
Joined: Wed Nov 30, 2016 10:59 am
Location: Hamilton, Ontario

Re: Trump's SCOTUS

Post by StCapps » Sun Apr 09, 2017 1:15 pm

Martin Hash wrote:
de officiis wrote:I think what the Roe Court was trying to do was balance the woman's liberty interest in controlling her own body with the states' interest in protecting human life. So it's not all one or the other.
That's 2 lawyers. I don't actually know what Fife would say? Fife, what's up?
de officiis didn't side with you in this remark. Nothing he said refutes anything that I have said.
*yip*

User avatar
jediuser598
Posts: 1347
Joined: Thu Mar 23, 2017 3:00 am

Re: Trump's SCOTUS

Post by jediuser598 » Sun Apr 09, 2017 1:24 pm

I don't know that the state prizes liberty over life in all cases. If I try to take my life, they'll restrain me and try to prevent me from practicing my liberty in such a way, or if someone asks for my assistance in taking their life (Kavorkian) the state prevents that.

Hash, that's the state choosing life over liberty.
Thy praise or dispraise is to me alike:
One doth not stroke me, nor the other strike.
-Ben Johnson

User avatar
Martin Hash
Posts: 18588
Joined: Wed Jan 20, 2010 2:02 pm

Re: Trump's SCOTUS

Post by Martin Hash » Sun Apr 09, 2017 1:32 pm

jediuser598 wrote:I don't know that the state prizes liberty over life in all cases. If I try to take my life, they'll restrain me and try to prevent me from practicing my liberty in such a way, or if someone asks for my assistance in taking their life (Kavorkian) the state prevents that.

Hash, that's the state choosing life over liberty.
Washington (my State) & Oregon allow physician assisted suicide. (Liberty over life.)

But go on, I want something to chew on.
Shamedia, Shamdemic, Shamucation, Shamlection, Shamconomy & Shamate Change

User avatar
C-Mag
Posts: 28232
Joined: Tue Nov 29, 2016 10:48 pm

Re: Trump's SCOTUS

Post by C-Mag » Sun Apr 09, 2017 1:51 pm

Martin Hash wrote:
C-Mag wrote:Looking to the possible future of the SCOTUS.

Trump could potentially fill 5 spots on the SCOTUS merely based on age. Most Justices retire/die by 80. Scalia was 79

Red Ruth Ginsburg 85
Anthony Kennedy 82
Stephen Breyer 81
Clarence Thomas 71

Few Presidents get the opportunity to shape the court and America Law this way, and when they do, it leaves a legacy. Presidents like Washington, Lincoln and FDR got this opportunity. People for or against a Trump America need to understand a very real Legacy that impacts the US for decades could easily be made in this way.
A Trump appointment would get rid of the hateful Ginsburg, and replace her with someone more liberty-minded. (I went to hear her speak at the U of Idaho Law School while I was teaching CompSci there.)
Kennedy & Breyer would probably be replaced with people like themselves.
Get rid of the imbecile Thomas, and replace him with someone smarter.

p.s. Scalia spoke at my Law School & I went... Didn't like him.
You seem to like the current balance on the court, which doesn't bother me. I would prefer more liberty minded Justices all around. I think it's the only way to start to back off the intrusive government we have now.

This aspect of Trump being POTUS is very interesting and how it can have long ranging affects on our society. As everyone knows, but probably don't think about that much is all the lower court appointments and how they will affect that law as well. More and more I'm just seeing this as how legacy's are made.
PLATA O PLOMO


Image


Don't fear authority, Fear Obedience

User avatar
Martin Hash
Posts: 18588
Joined: Wed Jan 20, 2010 2:02 pm

Re: Trump's SCOTUS

Post by Martin Hash » Sun Apr 09, 2017 1:56 pm

C-Mag wrote:This aspect of Trump being POTUS is very interesting and how it can have long ranging affects on our society. As everyone knows, but probably don't think about that much is all the lower court appointments and how they will affect that law as well. More and more I'm just seeing this as how legacy's are made.
I don't think most people make the connection but if nothing else, Trump could save the nation just by keeping Ginsburg types off The Court.
Shamedia, Shamdemic, Shamucation, Shamlection, Shamconomy & Shamate Change