Master Shake Posted September 13, 2005 Share Posted September 13, 2005 Just wondering what Neowin thought. Bring it on. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AmericanConservative Posted September 13, 2005 Share Posted September 13, 2005 W/o a doubt Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hurmoth Posted September 13, 2005 Share Posted September 13, 2005 W/o a doubt 586520566[/snapback] Agreed :yes: Overturn Roe v. Wade :yes: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AmericanConservative Posted September 13, 2005 Share Posted September 13, 2005 Overturn Roe v. Wade :yes: 586520574[/snapback] You know it ;) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Master Shake Posted September 13, 2005 Author Share Posted September 13, 2005 Look at those reptilian eyes..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John S. Veteran Posted September 13, 2005 Veteran Share Posted September 13, 2005 yes indeed Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
teeple Posted September 13, 2005 Share Posted September 13, 2005 yes - but only because of his belief in the equitable right of the legislature to make policy and it is the judicial branches responsibility to uphold the legislatures enactments. What we have lost in the past few years is the basic belief that our lawmakers make the rules that govern us, while the Supreme Court is meant to uphold those 'approved' laws and to be the authority behind the law. So let us not talk about Roe v. Wade overturning or stuff like that - that is for the lawmakers to decide and the the Supreme Court to enforce. Bill Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hurmoth Posted September 13, 2005 Share Posted September 13, 2005 So let us not talk about Roe v. Wade overturning or stuff like that - that is for the lawmakers to decide and the the Supreme Court to enforce. 586520694[/snapback] It was the Court who made it legal in the first place. The Court should overturn itself and if the branch that makes law wants to make it legal, then that's the way it should be. :p Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AmericanConservative Posted September 13, 2005 Share Posted September 13, 2005 yes - but only because of his belief in the equitable right of the legislature to make policy and it is the judicial branches responsibility to uphold the legislatures enactments.What we have lost in the past few years is the basic belief that our lawmakers make the rules that govern us, while the Supreme Court is meant to uphold those 'approved' laws and to be the authority behind the law. So let us not talk about Roe v. Wade overturning or stuff like that - that is for the lawmakers to decide and the the Supreme Court to enforce. Bill 586520694[/snapback] And we can't forget the fact that he just wants to be an "umpire" and not pitch or hit :) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Master Shake Posted September 13, 2005 Author Share Posted September 13, 2005 Biden let him have today and tore about his baseball analogy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
teeple Posted September 13, 2005 Share Posted September 13, 2005 It was the Court who made it legal in the first place. The Court should overturn itself and if the branch that makes law wants to make it legal, then that's the way it should be. :p 586520709[/snapback] Uhmmm - I think that is what I said - above everyone is spouting about how the courts should overturn Roe V. Wade - well - that would be the courts make policy again - the Senators and Reps should get off the fence and do what it is we pay them to do - make policy. I do not dispute whether or not Roe v. Wade is correct or not - I dispute the fact that some 30 years ago - the Supreme Court deemed what was right or wrong while the people of the United States had very different views on what was right or wrong. Enforcement of current policy is what the Supreme Court is for. As for Roberts - I listened to him today getting grilled by Senator (Drunkedness) Kennedy and Roberts is very eloquent and well spoken - very intelligent - I like him. cheers, Bill Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
betasp Posted September 13, 2005 Share Posted September 13, 2005 yes - but only because of his belief in the equitable right of the legislature to make policy and it is the judicial branches responsibility to uphold the legislatures enactments.What we have lost in the past few years is the basic belief that our lawmakers make the rules that govern us, while the Supreme Court is meant to uphold those 'approved' laws and to be the authority behind the law. You get the post of the day award! I agree. His personal views should be irrelevent. He is there to judge the constitutionality of law. If he is qualified and willing, let him serve. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Master Shake Posted September 14, 2005 Author Share Posted September 14, 2005 :woot: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Simplicity Posted September 14, 2005 Share Posted September 14, 2005 Senator Drunken Kennedy should grill him, he could overturn vital cases if the appear in front of the courts, thus for changing the laws of the land I.E. roe v wade Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fedorpheux Posted September 14, 2005 Share Posted September 14, 2005 (edited) Hmm, well this just makes me think about The Daily Show. Go here and then select the video that says "Judged Roberts" for their recent bit about all this. Good stuff. ;) ...and, for the record, I sincerely hope that Roberts does not succeed because if he does, it could significantly change this country for the worse. Separation of church and state, I say, and if you think that is completely unrelated, you're either ignorant or in denial. Edited September 15, 2005 by Fedorpheux Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zoue Posted September 15, 2005 Share Posted September 15, 2005 I do not dispute whether or not Roe v. Wade is correct or not - I dispute the fact that some 30 years ago - the Supreme Court deemed what was right or wrong while the people of the United States had very different views on what was right or wrong. Enforcement of current policy is what the Supreme Court is for. If it was up you I suppose the "colored" folk would still be in seperate schools and drinking from seperate water fountains. :rolleyes: That's what the conservatives and "Christians" of the times wanted. Who was it that made that law?... oh yeah, the court. Judges make law, everyone knows that. Legislature makes guidelines. The court upholds the Constitution of the United States. The upmost law of the land. Giving women the right to privacy and autonomy of themselves is part of that. Please go spread the right wing propoganda elsewhere. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Master Shake Posted September 15, 2005 Author Share Posted September 15, 2005 Is anyone watching the hearings? Sometimes they're kinda educational, other times the Senators just use their time to get some camera time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OrangeSoul Posted September 15, 2005 Share Posted September 15, 2005 actually he should. America should get what they voted for. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NightmarE D Posted September 15, 2005 Share Posted September 15, 2005 No because he keeps dodging questions that would be important to him in this position and using his charm to get past them. That just shows me that he's a sneaky f*ck and doesn't deserve the position. I think Bush only chose him because Bush is lazy and thought "who's that there guy I picked da last time? Oh that's right that there Johhny Robbie...pick him pick him" then Bush goes back to playing with his ball of yarn and legos Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Master Shake Posted September 15, 2005 Author Share Posted September 15, 2005 Shouldn't they have picked someone that is already on the court to be chief justice? how are they going to choose someone who isn't even on it to replace rehnquist? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fred Derf Veteran Posted September 15, 2005 Veteran Share Posted September 15, 2005 [Thread Moved from Poll Station to RWI] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thejohnnyq Posted September 15, 2005 Share Posted September 15, 2005 Judges make law, everyone knows that. Legislature makes guidelines. The court upholds the Constitution of the United States. The upmost law of the land. Giving women the right to privacy and autonomy of themselves is part of that. Please go spread the right wing propoganda elsewhere. 586526329[/snapback] Judges should not make law, and thank god that Roberts doesn't think that he should. The best part is how stupid Roberts is making the Senators. They are willing to asking loaded question, and expect black and white answers. Roberts is showing that he is the right person for the position. And to save time and money, and TV coverage, no Bush did the right thing and changed the nomination to Chief Justice, otherwise there would have been 3 hearings. You must be one of the 'Progressives' - which only defines arrogance and attitude, not ideals. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aaron Veteran Posted September 15, 2005 Veteran Share Posted September 15, 2005 No because he keeps dodging questions that would be important to him in this position and using his charm to get past them. That just shows me that he's a sneaky f*ck and doesn't deserve the position. I think Bush only chose him because Bush is lazy and thought "who's that there guy I picked da last time? Oh that's right that there Johhny Robbie...pick him pick him" then Bush goes back to playing with his ball of yarn and legos 586529338[/snapback] Justice Ginsberg refused as well, should she have been denied? The way I see it these justices simply need to be judged by how well they, well... can judge. If he has been incositent with the law and interjected his perosnal opinons in his previous rulings, then let's see them. But so far three days in and all tha thas happened is a bunch of publicity ###### have grandstanded in front of the TV cameras. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fred Derf Veteran Posted September 15, 2005 Veteran Share Posted September 15, 2005 Judges make law, everyone knows that. Legislature makes guidelines. The court upholds the Constitution of the United States. The upmost law of the land. Giving women the right to privacy and autonomy of themselves is part of that. Please go spread the right wing propoganda elsewhere. 586526329[/snapback] In Canada anyway (and probably the US as well), judges only interpret existing laws and apply them to new situations. They do not create law. New laws can only be created by legislation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Master Shake Posted September 15, 2005 Author Share Posted September 15, 2005 You must be one of the 'Progressives' - which only defines arrogance and attitude, not ideals. 586529464[/snapback] Because the 'Conservatives' don't have an attitude and aren't arrogant... except for Bush... Oh yeah... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts