Did you hear that thud?

Gonz

Gonz

molṑn labé
Staff member
That, my friends, was the founding fathers of the United States collectively turning over & over & over in their graves. It's happened before. In those instances, they only flipped once or twice.

Our Constitution is in peril. "Oh, there goes Gonz, overreating again" you might say. Sometimes I do & sometimes I don't. This time, it is not an over-reaction. If anything, it's an underreaction, mostly due to numbness from the last few years of absurdity.

The justices referred to the findings of foreign courts this summer in their own ruling that states may not punish gay couples for having sex.

And in 2002, the court said that executing mentally retarded people is unconstitutionally cruel. That ruling noted that the practice was opposed internationally.

Justices "are becoming more open to comparative and international law perspectives," said Ginsburg, who has supported a more global view of judicial decision making.

Ginsburg cited an international treaty in her vote in June to uphold the use of race in college admissions.
Click to expand...

They are sworn by oath to uphold the US Constitution. Not make some feel good horseshit illegal legislative move. They should all be fired, IMMEDIATELY. Starting with Ruth Bader Ginsburg

"I, [NAME], do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will administer justice without respect to persons, and do equal right to the poor and to the rich, and that I will faithfully and impartially discharge and perform all the duties incumbent upon me as [TITLE] under the Constitution and laws of the United States. So help me God.''
Click to expand...

AP on Yahoo

Gato, you & your fellow soldiers may as well come home now. The US is disintegrating befoer our eyes.
 
so they believe we have a right to privacy gay or straight and in following the eighth amendment that doesnt allow for excessive bail and cruel/unusual punishment. i dont think states should punish anyone for having sex. gay or straight you have a right to privacy and also the cruel unusual punishment is something i feel should be followed depending upon the crime.
 
Try to understand the point one more time Freak. I'll point you in teh right direction. The US SUPREME COURT is using INTERNATIONAL courts for research on US LAW.
 
Try to understand the point Gonz...We are using US law to determine what internationals deserve to be killed for not thinking like us...But thats ok with you.
 
Gonz said:
Try to understand the point one more time Freak. I'll point you in teh right direction. The US SUPREME COURT is using INTERNATIONAL courts for research on US LAW.
Click to expand...



so whats the problem? it just shows that maybe we dont want laws that arent influenced from other factors. not saying that i totally agree but it shows they are studying something and thinking that maybe other countries maybe doing something we should have done.
 
So, it appears that the national integrity & sovereignty of the United States is under attack from terrorists, the Judicial branch & our own liberal idealists.

Might I suggest reading up on Marxism. It will show you where we shall end up. Hopefully you'll garner enough information while reading to come to the realization that that is a place no free man wants to be. No free man who is a land owner and/or entrepeneur will stand by and willingly allow it to happen. No free man who disdains the idea of the fruits of his labor to be sold into bondage to the state shall stand by while you who do not believe continue to stick your heads in the sand.


Article III.

Section. 1.

The judicial Power of the United States shall be vested in one supreme Court, and in such inferior Courts as the Congress may from time to time ordain and establish. The Judges, both of the supreme and inferior Courts, shall hold their Offices during good Behaviour, and shall, at stated Times, receive for their Services a Compensation, which shall not be diminished during their Continuance in Office.

Section. 2.

The judicial Power shall extend to all Cases, in Law and Equity, arising under this Constitution, the Laws of the United States, and Treaties made, or which shall be made, under their Authority;--to all Cases affecting Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls;--to all Cases of admiralty and maritime Jurisdiction;--to Controversies to which the United States shall be a Party;--to Controversies between two or more States;-- between a State and Citizens of another State;--between Citizens of different States;--between Citizens of the same State claiming Lands under Grants of different States, and between a State, or the Citizens thereof, and foreign States, Citizens or Subjects.

In all Cases affecting Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls, and those in which a State shall be Party, the supreme Court shall have original Jurisdiction. In all the other Cases before mentioned, the supreme Court shall have appellate Jurisdiction, both as to Law and Fact, with such Exceptions, and under such Regulations as the Congress shall make.

The Trial of all Crimes, except in Cases of Impeachment, shall be by Jury; and such Trial shall be held in the State where the said Crimes shall have been committed; but when not committed within any State, the Trial shall be at such Place or Places as the Congress may by Law have directed.

Section. 3.

Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort. No Person shall be convicted of Treason unless on the Testimony of two Witnesses to the same overt Act, or on Confession in open Court.

The Congress shall have Power to declare the Punishment of Treason, but no Attainder of Treason shall work Corruption of Blood, or Forfeiture except during the Life of the Person attainted.
Click to expand...
 
our judicial system frequently looks at systems and rulings abroad as potential models and methods for integration if successful.

helps remind us that we aren't in a vacuum and that other models may provide useful ruling, the best bit being that if you don't like the ruling you can merely ignore it - there is no requirement to incorporate law unlike via the tort system.
 
Gonz said:
So, it appears that the national integrity & sovereignty of the United States is under attack from terrorists, the Judicial branch & our own liberal idealists.

Might I suggest reading up on Marxism. It will show you where we shall end up. Hopefully you'll garner enough information while reading to come to the realization that that is a place no free man wants to be. No free man who is a land owner and/or entrepeneur will stand by and willingly allow it to happen. No free man who disdains the idea of the fruits of his labor to be sold into bondage to the state shall stand by while you who do not believe continue to stick your heads in the sand.
Click to expand...

So where's the attack again and what does this have to do with Marxism? Do not Marxists not execute retarded people either?
 
Gonz said:
So, it appears that the national integrity & sovereignty of the United States is under attack from terrorists, the Judicial branch & our own liberal idealists.
Click to expand...

I like this idea that suggesting the US could possibly learn something from other countries is an attack on "national integrity and sovereignty". That's the most American thing I've heard in a long time and I thank you for it.

And yes I see your point, their job is to uphold the US constitution, not to ad-lib with their favourite pieces of morality from foreign laws. What you're really saying though is that you're too close-minded to admit that sometimes the US constitution is not the shining ball of light and equality that you perceive it to be.
 
a13antichrist said:
I like this idea that suggesting the US could possibly learn something from other countries is an attack on "national integrity and sovereignty". That's the most American thing I've heard in a long time and I thank you for it.

And yes I see your point, their job is to uphold the US constitution, not to ad-lib with their favourite pieces of morality from foreign laws. What you're really saying though is that you're too close-minded to admit that sometimes the US constitution is not the shining ball of light and equality that you perceive it to be.
Click to expand...


:beerbang:
 
I may not get any fans for this but:

The constitution was written when...the arse end of the 1700's? It was intended to apply to people living in that period when stuff like bearing arms was required cause of the Independence thing, free speach was goverened by the church etc. These things arent applicable in this modern world. Maybe if the constitution was redrafted (instead of ammened) to make it more in line with the problems and politics of today the US wouldnt be going through all this hoohaa with gun nuts and stuf.

There....just my opinion on the thing. Feel free to pelt me with bricks if you wish....
 
Aint throwing no bricks here Stewey, the thing is that freedoms haven't changed. No matter what happens over time the freedoms that were guaranteed in the constitution should remain, and there isn't a real good reason why they shouldn't. Now, should we use foreign influence when we decide issues, damn right. If this world is ever going to have some semblance of peace, we damn well better.
 
It is so good to see that our collection of misfits has a grasp on how severeignty works. We are not a world government. We are an independent nation, apart from the worlds governing boards. If the state department used world opinion, that's one thing. The US Supreme Court is designed to interpret US laws & how they fit within the US Constitution.

Since the US uses the death penalty how could we get a constitutional interpretation from, say, a Danish court? In short, we can't. Because Danish law has nothing to do with the American judicial system. I wouldn't expect the Italian courts to use American law.

The Constitution may have been written over 200 years ago but it is still the best piece of governing rules ever written. It limits the federal governments role over the states & it's peoples. It contains certain inalienable rights that may not be removed. It specifically spells out the role of what the government may and, far more importantly, may not do. If those of you who do not live here like what you have, then good for you. If those of you who do live here don't like it, I'd bet there are many countries on this earth that has a more fitting governing model. Our Constitution is not a "living & breathing" document. It is set in stone (well, parchment). It may not be changed at the whim & fancy of some legislative, executive or judicial body or follow the styles & traditions of the day, which, as a matter of fact & course, change.

You may want to read it, since it's apparently so misunderstood.

US Constitution

YOu may also want to read the Federalist Papers. They will show you that these men who created this document & our country were not some country bumpkins, but men who had a grasp on tomorrow as well.
 
I didnt mean rewrite it entirely I just meant review it and 'prune' as necessary. Then again the bush admin ( :lol: )wouldnt be the best people to do said pruning
 
The US constitution itself is a borrowed piece of legislation, mainly from the Magna Carta, but also from the Bible. These are/were both international writtings.

Also, treaties are law, so I don't see a problem with citing treaties.

rrfield
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top