User Tag List

First 1234 Last

Results 11 to 20 of 65

  1. #11
    ^He pronks, too! Magic Poriferan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    MBTI
    Yin
    Enneagram
    One sx/sp
    Posts
    13,909

    Default

    There are two kinds of judge:

    Those who use personal discrimination and contemporary context to make their rulings, and those who do the exact same thing but pretend not to.
    Go to sleep, iguana.


    _________________________________
    INTP. Type 1>6>5. sx/sp.
    Live and let live will just amount to might makes right

  2. #12
    Reigning Bologna Princess Rajah's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    ENTP
    Enneagram
    7
    Posts
    1,774

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by lowtech redneck View Post
    What is the point of the Constitution if it is a "living document"!? That odious doctrine has made what was the most important and beautiful accomplishment in American history worse than worthless-it has made it a detriment to the rule of law itself (and all long-term liberties as a consequence). Countries without a Constitution, at least, depend on the arbitray judgement of elected (and accountable) representatives rather than the arbitrary judgements of a supposedly enlightentened elite-the former is better in the long-term for the same reasons that a procedural democracy is better than a liberal dictatorship in the long-term.
    There's an ideal in a vacuum, and there's reality. And your position doesn't much account for reality.

    Lateralus, why do you think fed judges aren't elected? I'll tell you. Because it's a pretty shitty idea. Especially when it comes to the Supreme Court, the members of which appointed for life. The Court is often called upon to make very tricky, unpopular decisions. Often, these inure to the benefit of the people, because the Court is - or should be - forward-thinking. You don't want these judges working the will of the people so directly - their job is to analyze and interpret the Constitution.

    That said, judges are people who recognize the Constitution governs an ever-changing world. Therefore, reading the Constitution must be a flexible exercise. That's one of the reasons our Constitution still exists in its original form (amended, natch) - because it was built to accommodate a changing world. It's a very beautiful design.


    I... suppose. Yeah!

  3. #13
    Senior Member lowtech redneck's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    MBTI
    INTP
    Posts
    3,705

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Rajah View Post
    There's an ideal in a vacuum, and there's reality. And your position doesn't much account for reality.
    I accounted for reality within the second paragraph. As for elections versus appointments, in an "ideal" world I would agree with you-unfortunately, the judiciary is dominated by jurists who seek to impose their own arbitrary desires on the Constitution, making appointments counterproductive under existing conditions. If a jurist makes an unpopular decision based on actual Constitutional parameters as originally instituted (especially if they themselves dislike the consequences of such a decision), then they are doing their duty. To do otherwise (especially to ensure an outcome one desires) is usually a criminally irresponsible abuse of authority. In short, when the jurists themselves blur the lines between the legislative and judicial branch to such an extreme degree, then legislative safeguards must be imposed. Otherwise, you're effectively left with an "enlightened" despotism, with all the problems associated with that. I ask you again, what is the point of having a Constitution if you treat it the same as statutory Common Law? You might as well give a statement of "general principles" and be done with it.

  4. #14
    Senior Member Lateralus's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    MBTI
    ENTJ
    Enneagram
    3w4
    Posts
    6,276

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Rajah View Post
    Lateralus, why do you think fed judges aren't elected? I'll tell you. Because it's a pretty shitty idea. Especially when it comes to the Supreme Court, the members of which appointed for life. The Court is often called upon to make very tricky, unpopular decisions. Often, these inure to the benefit of the people, because the Court is - or should be - forward-thinking. You don't want these judges working the will of the people so directly - their job is to analyze and interpret the Constitution.

    That said, judges are people who recognize the Constitution governs an ever-changing world. Therefore, reading the Constitution must be a flexible exercise. That's one of the reasons our Constitution still exists in its original form (amended, natch) - because it was built to accommodate a changing world. It's a very beautiful design.
    There are already procedures in place to handle this. We can pass new laws. We can repeal old laws. We can amend the Constitution. Congress has always been able to do all of this. Yet some people want to leave this up to a select group of unelected individuals.

    Lawyers...
    "We grow up thinking that beliefs are something to be proud of, but they're really nothing but opinions one refuses to reconsider. Beliefs are easy. The stronger your beliefs are, the less open you are to growth and wisdom, because "strength of belief" is only the intensity with which you resist questioning yourself. As soon as you are proud of a belief, as soon as you think it adds something to who you are, then you've made it a part of your ego."

  5. #15
    Reigning Bologna Princess Rajah's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    ENTP
    Enneagram
    7
    Posts
    1,774

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Lateralus View Post
    There are already procedures in place to handle this. We can pass new laws. We can repeal old laws. We can amend the Constitution. Congress has always been able to do all of this. Yet some people want to leave this up to a select group of unelected individuals.

    Lawyers...
    Congress is not the correct authority to be interpreting Constitutional law! The Court interprets the law, and its interpretation has the force of law.


    I... suppose. Yeah!

  6. #16
    Reigning Bologna Princess Rajah's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    ENTP
    Enneagram
    7
    Posts
    1,774

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by lowtech redneck View Post
    I accounted for reality within the second paragraph. As for elections versus appointments, in an "ideal" world I would agree with you-unfortunately, the judiciary is dominated by jurists who seek to impose their own arbitrary desires on the Constitution, making appointments counterproductive under existing conditions. If a jurist makes an unpopular decision based on actual Constitutional parameters as originally instituted (especially if they themselves dislike the consequences of such a decision), then they are doing their duty. To do otherwise (especially to ensure an outcome one desires) is usually a criminally irresponsible abuse of authority. In short, when the jurists themselves blur the lines between the legislative and judicial branch to such an extreme degree, then legislative safeguards must be imposed. Otherwise, you're effectively left with an "enlightened" despotism, with all the problems associated with that. I ask you again, what is the point of having a Constitution if you treat it the same as statutory Common Law? You might as well give a statement of "general principles" and be done with it.
    What's the point of having a document that can't accommodate modern developments?

    I didn't say it's a perfect solution; it's the best we have.


    I... suppose. Yeah!

  7. #17
    Senior Member lowtech redneck's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    MBTI
    INTP
    Posts
    3,705

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Rajah View Post
    What's the point of having a document that can't accommodate modern developments?

    I didn't say it's a perfect solution; it's the best we have.
    The solution to that problem (so far as it exist) is Constitutional amendments.

  8. #18
    Member Xenofile's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    MBTI
    INTx
    Enneagram
    5w4
    Posts
    41

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Rajah View Post
    What's the point of having a document that can't accommodate modern developments?

    I didn't say it's a perfect solution; it's the best we have.
    We do have a document that can accommodate modern developments. Our constitution is amendable. Its not easy to change it, but then that's the point. The national constitution was supposed to maintain a small federal government that would tie the states together. The real power of the nation should lie with the states, which would have the freedom to go in different directions. In this way, you could have states that would allow for social activism and those that wouldn't. This also would have allowed some states to stay more conservative, and others to move in a liberal direction.

    EDIT: ah LR beat me to it, oh well.
    I - 67%
    N - 62%
    T - 75%
    J - 1%

  9. #19
    Reigning Bologna Princess Rajah's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    ENTP
    Enneagram
    7
    Posts
    1,774

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by lowtech redneck View Post
    The solution to that problem (so far as it exist) is Constitutional amendments.
    So every single time the Constitution is interpreted it has to go through an amendment?

    That's absurd.


    I... suppose. Yeah!

  10. #20
    ^He pronks, too! Magic Poriferan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    MBTI
    Yin
    Enneagram
    One sx/sp
    Posts
    13,909

    Default

    Hah. Even the process behind making amendments itself is interpretable. The reality is that there is no way for law to control interpretation.
    Go to sleep, iguana.


    _________________________________
    INTP. Type 1>6>5. sx/sp.
    Live and let live will just amount to might makes right

Similar Threads

  1. Older retired male INTP
    By zelo1954 in forum Welcomes and Introductions
    Replies: 48
    Last Post: 05-08-2013, 04:18 PM
  2. Paul Otellini to retire in May
    By ygolo in forum Science, Technology, and Future Tech
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 11-19-2012, 04:56 PM
  3. Ivy's (Sheepishly Coming Out Of) Retirement Thread
    By Kasper in forum Official Decrees
    Replies: 113
    Last Post: 09-15-2012, 10:11 AM
  4. Retirement savings
    By Randomnity in forum The Bonfire
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: 08-27-2010, 02:25 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO