Author Topic: Some More Thoughts Article  (Read 739 times)

Peter S

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 499
    • View Profile
Re: Some More Thoughts Article
« Reply #15 on: October 16, 2020, 07:30:51 PM »
I can't answer for the US system, but in the UK the courts have always been in the business of interpreting the laws as written. While some rules are quite simple (Driving over the speed limit? Fined!) others can get quite complicated, with the way laws are written leaving them open to question and interpretation when it comes to enacting them. The cynical among us might even say that lawyers write laws like that on purpose so they can keep making money out of them!

The argument that "cultural factors" come into play shouldn't be lightly dismissed; for instance, consumer law that was written when going into a shop was the only way to buy something has to then be reinterpreted to cover online trade. If the legislators haven't been able to update the rules, it's left to the courts to interpret the existing rules within the new context.

Motorcycling, history, country hiking,
naked living


  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3998
    • View Profile
Re: Some More Thoughts Article
« Reply #16 on: October 19, 2020, 01:59:09 AM »
That is how the spin of the think tanks frames the issue. It isn't what is happening. Liberal is a highly stereotypical reference, even a stab, an insult. I get pissed to be called a liberal. It is divisive and over simplifies the issue. There must be a few "liberals out here" but I've never met one. It is a fantasy to manipulate public opinion in places like New York City.

If you place religion on a persons RIGHT to own their own body, you are creating state religion. You are legislating from the bench. If that isn't a conservative problem, what is? Pot calling the kettle black. Blaming the other for doing what you are doing to deflect what you are doing, or just muddying up the truth.

We had decades of judges taking liberties making their own law, but that began to end during the "principled" Warren era. Now, the same big money, power of the buck, status quo not constitution entities are at it again. It is the conservative judges that shove their own sense of correctness on us, not the so called liberal ones.

As it pertains to this website, if a woman isn't woman enough to make her own choices, then they certainly won't accept us from making our own bodily decisions as to dress, or not.

Arbitrarily deciding that black people are equal in this country to throw out protections is legislating, which is another example of this new fish they are cooking's mentor and as she follows, her, too. She is not in anyway impartial.

If I have a right to free speech and religion, then it should not be infringed. I have the right to protect myself with any gun, and from the government, too. They are very simple to understand principles.

These appointees are being selected for their political bent, obviously. Their political bent shouldn't be a part of the process. I haven't seen a "liberal" judge legislate like those conservative politicians in robes. Pot calling the kettle black. Rush and Fox don't give both sides of the coin, they just make money and influence people in behest of big money donors and financiers. We have to get the info from the other side, too.

If a common citizen can't understand his "RIghts" then, there is BS clouding up the works. Those works are what has made this country free and special in the world. What those new judges mean makes USA no better than any other country in the world and to some less.
Barefoot all over, all over.