Another couple denied marriage license...

[ResearchMonkey]

Making a point that directing them to another JoP doesn't excuse it.

Apples/oranges

flailing at windmills.

Judges recuse themselves all the time.

 

[paul_valaru]

Apples/oranges

flailing at windmills.

Judges recuse themselves all the time.

don't they need a valid reason to recuse themselves?

 

[spike]

Yeah, more regulations is exactly what China needs, as if drowning your infant daughters in a rice paddy isn't enough.

I'm not sure how that relates to their economics, but sure...there should be laws against that.

If by capitalistic you mean entering the 20th century.

No, I mean their moving towards capitalism.

Why can't china solve these issue with communism? -- because they do not care to, its about the party not the people.

They could solve them with capitalism or communism. However their about profit right now and not so much the other things.

Yeah that is happening at every turn with blanket laws from the federal government.

Good, we the people should have these protections.

You cannot control other without force, you are forcing others to accept your ideaologies.

I could give a shit if he's a racist and I have no interest in forcing him not to be. But if his racism effects his JoP job he needs to go.

No, what you said is this:"Pure free market doesn't work in the least....... and it sure as hell didn't work to keep racial discrimination at bay."

Wow, how did you get "are you saying that a black person can only achieve if he is sponsored by laws?" from that? Nice try though.

You're saying free market does nothing to to over come discrimination.

I'm saying it didn't keep racial discrimination at bay...and it didn't. It took a civil rights movement and laws.

but you seem to believe that black people need an extra boost to be hired

I didn't say anything of the sort. This is a common tactic of yours where you make up some crap and claim I said it. Yet i didn't. It's easy to see through.

-- Mao racist of you.

There's the trolling.

You are forcing to JoP to personally accept your ideologies or suffer for it

Again, making up things. I don't care what his ideologies are. It is illegal for him to racial discriminate. Same as would be a judge who won't hear cases from minorities against white people. Doesn't matter if another judge or JoP will do it. They need to keep their ideologies out of their work or go do something else.

 

[ResearchMonkey]

don't they need a valid reason to recuse themselves?

Yes, they are judges, they make a judgments.

If judge feels his personal ideologies may influence his ability to offer proper judicature to a case, he is free to deny his judgment of the case. -- next judge please.

interesting concept eh?

 

[spike]

Yes, they are judges, they make a judgments.

If judge feels his personal ideologies may influence his ability to offer proper judicature to a case, he is free to deny his judgment of the case. -- next judge please.

interesting concept eh?

They take an oath to be impartial. They cannot say for example "I recuse myself from any case brought against a white man by minorities". They would be removed.

 

[ResearchMonkey]

I'm not sure how that relates to their economics, but sure...there should be laws against that.

I'm certain some cannot see the relationship, its a big picture.

No, I mean their moving towards capitalism.

So there was never any child labor in China until they became Capltalist .....un, OK.

They could solve them with capitalism or communism. However their about profit right now and not so much the other things.

No they are about power at the expense of their people. Like Obama.

Good, we the people should have these protections.

Again, it may beyond some peoples short perspective..

I could give a shit if he's a racist and I have no interest in forcing him not to be. But if his racism effects his JoP job he needs to go.

Oxymoron.

How do you know its racism? He may be married to a mix raced wife that was negatively affected as a child becuase of it. He said his concern was for the children. -- you are only assume he's a racist.

Wow, how did you get "are you saying that a black person can only achieve if he is sponsored by laws?" from that? Nice try though.

I'm saying it didn't keep racial discrimination at bay...and it didn't. It took a civil rights movement and laws.

So there were no non-racist before the civil rights laws? -- and which party's supported civil right to make men equal, yours?

I didn't say anything of the sort. This is a common tactic of yours where you make up some crap and claim I said it. Yet i didn't. It's easy to see through.

You say we need laws to force equality, that it doesn't exist with out it. That without civil rights laws men are not equal, how racist of you. Your position is clear.

There's the trolling.

lolol you don't even know what trolling is. LMAO

Again, making up things. I don't care what his ideologies are. It is illegal for him to racial discriminate. Same as would be a judge who won't hear cases from minorities against white people. Doesn't matter if another judge or JoP will do it. They need to keep their ideologies out of their work or go do something else.

See above.

 

[ResearchMonkey]

They take an oath to be impartial. They cannot say for example "I recuse myself from any case brought against a white man by minorities". They would be removed.

Most certainly they can if the Judge feels the specifics of the case might affect his judgment.

lol @ Don Quixote

 

[paul_valaru]

Yes, they are judges, they make a judgments.

If judge feels his personal ideologies may influence his ability to offer proper judicature to a case, he is free to deny his judgment of the case. -- next judge please.

interesting concept eh?

A known concept, but if a judge recused himself on the grounds that he believes black people are sub-human (the extreme example) wouldn't he be removed from the bench?

 

[ResearchMonkey]

A known concept, but if a judge recused himself on the grounds that he believes black people are sub-human (the extreme example) wouldn't he be removed from the bench?

nonsensical point.

If the judge was reptilian would not he also be removed?

 

[spike]

I'm certain some cannot see the relationship, its a big picture.

Enlighten us on how the low value of female children is related to their emerging capitalism.

So there was never any child labor in China until they became Capltalist .....un, OK.

Another thing you made up that I did not say. However the child labor problem grows with their new found capitalism.

No they are about power at the expense of their people. Like Obama.

No, Bush was about power at the expense of the people. Obama is more the opposite.

Again, it may beyond some peoples short perspective..

Again a copout because you have no argument. Also some trolling.

Oxymoron.

How do you know its racism? He may be married to a mix raced wife that was negatively affected as a child becuase of it. He said his concern was for the children. -- you are only assume he's a racist.

It's discrimination based on race. It's actually the definition of racism.

So there were no non-racist before the civil rights laws?

Interesting, you made up something else that I did not say. Civil rights laws did make a drastic improvement though.

-- and which party's supported civil right to make men equal, yours?

Rational people from both parties believe in civil rights.

You say we need laws to force equality, that it doesn't exist with out it. That without civil rights laws men are not equal, how racist of you. Your position is clear.

Actually I didn't say any of that. Any chance you could stick to things I really said?

lolol you don't even know what trolling is. LMAO

No, I recognize your trolling pretty easily.

See above.

What above addresses this issue.

 

[paul_valaru]

nonsensical point.

If the judge was reptilian would not he also be removed?

how is it nonsensical, isn't there a set of guidelines that judges (or JoP) are supposed to follow?

you need a valid reason to recuse yourself.

 

[spike]

Most certainly they can if the Judge feels the specifics of the case might affect his judgment.

No, judges take an oath of impartiality. So they could not recuse themselves from all cases against white men by minorities. That would show them to not be impartial and they would be removed.

 

[ResearchMonkey]

Yeah, more regulations is exactly what China needs, as if drowning your infant daughters in a rice paddy isn't enough.

Enlighten us on how the low value of female children is related to their emerging capitalism.

The Chinees communist government has laws to limit population to manage resources. Boys work harder and produce more while baby girls are murdered, not just in industrial areas, but in remote farmlands and all of rural China. -- most certainly related to communist economics but not capitalism.

Its all about the government power and control, not the people. Like it is with Obama and his administration.

... - Leslie

Enjoy your victory

 

[ResearchMonkey]

No, judges take an oath of impartiality. So they could not recuse themselves from all cases against white men by minorities. That would show them to not be impartial and they would be removed.

 

[spike]

The Chinees communist government has laws to limit population to manage resources. Boys work harder and produce more while baby girls are murdered, not just in industrial areas, but in remote farmlands and all of rural China. -- most certainly related to communist economics but not capitalism.

Yes, their population is huge and resources are limited. You have not yet showed anything that ties baby killing more or less to communism/capitalism though. Your "most certainly" is just wishful thinking.

Its all about the government power and control, not the people. Like it is with Obama and his administration.

Actually Bush was about government power, not the people. Obama is more the opposite.

... Leslie

 

[spike]

It's time to stop posting

Good move.

 

[paul_valaru]

so this thread has been derailed due to bickering

 

[spike]

It can probably be salvaged.

 

[Gonz]

Actually Bush was about government power, not the people. Obama is more the opposite.

You have seen the people that he's put in power have you not? He's all about mega-power. Bush had one agenda, outside his progressive tendencies. That was keeping us safe. Whether you agree with his methods is irrelevent, he did have the nations best interest ion mind.

 

[spike]

You have seen the people that he's put in power have you not? He's all about mega-power.

Yes, I saw the people Bush put in power for his mega-power.

Bush had one agenda, outside his progressive tendencies. That was keeping us safe.

Bush made us less safe while reducing American freedoms. Obama has the nations best interest in mind and is all about keeping us safe. If we get everybody healthcare a lot more Americans's will be kept safe than possibly ever before.

Whether you agree with his methods is irrelevent

Ok then, whether or not you agree with Obama's methods is irrelevant.