Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Kavanaugh is horrendous on the 4th and 5th amendments which doesn't come as a surprise considering he is a Bush lackey. Anybody who sticks up for the NSA's warrantless crap should be disqualified.
If anything, it's the liberal fanatics among us who are calling for government implementation of Christian mores. Jesus called for man to be charitable to his neighbors, acquaintances, and even strangers. But he was addressing his calls to individual humans, to give freely of their own time, effort, and materials to others in need, asking no recompense...
That is not true. The standards Jesus preached for individuals, are just as applicable to governments and other institutions. If individuals should not sin, neither should governments and other institutions. If individuals should be charitable, so should governments and other institutions. To say otherwise would be like saying it is not OK for an individual to sin, but it is OK for a group of 2 or more people to sin. Clearly that is not true.
That is not true. The standards Jesus preached for individuals, are just as applicable to governments and other institutions. If individuals should not sin, neither should governments and other institutions. If individuals should be charitable, so should governments and other institutions. To say otherwise would be like saying it is not OK for an individual to sin, but it is OK for a group of 2 or more people to sin. Clearly that is not true.
Conservatives use this same approach but to justify their moralist positions. For instance, the religious right believes that if the US allows gay marriage or abortion legally, then in God's eyes the entire nation is guilty and will suffer judgment even if only a small percentage of the population actually participates in those activities.
I believe we should have social safety nets for the less fortunate because it's the right thing to do, not because any deity or religion says we should.
If anything, it's the liberal fanatics among us who are calling for government implementation of Christian mores.
BTW, I actually agree with that to a large extent, and I think it's a greatly underappreciated fact by both liberals and Christian conservatives. They both base much of their political beliefs on a certain kind of morality, it's just that the two moralities are different (but, I would argue they aren't that different). I also regard it as a positive thing, whereas people like Roboteer treat it with scorn. And it's also why I have come to regard non-religious conservatives as probably the most immoral and, frankly, evil political belief around. I would much rather be governed by, say, Mike Huckabee than Donald Trump, and I don't really regard Huckabee as any more "dangerous" than, say, Bernie Sanders. At least both have a sense of morality. The same cannot be said of non-religious conservatives such as Trump, whose only motivation seems to be a hatred of government. That hatred of government leads them to want to do just about anything to destroy it and anyone who supports it, and they tend to have little compunction against doing it by whatever means necessary.
During the Kavanaugh hearings, Democrats said, directly or implicitly, that if someone who is not a white man accuses a white man of a crime, then the fact that the accuser is not a white man, and the fact that the accused person is a white man, means that the accusation should be treated as valid without further corroboration and regardless of what the white man did or says.
That is the kind of justice system that the US had in, say, 1830 (although biased in the other direction).
I have deep concerns that Democrats really do not care about the rule of law; they simply care about prioritizing what their preferred demographic groups want.
(Trump is horrid and does not support the rule of law either, and I am not a Republican, but the Democratic perspective is truly scary.)
Ginsburg is 85 years old. If Ginsburg dies, becomes unable to serve, or quits during Trumps tenure, she'll be replaced with a Conservative Judge. That would really pull the SC hard right.
Yes, this entire stunt, in the end, is about the left fearing Justices, who will interpret the Constitution as originalists. They want Justices, who will legislate from the bench and make decisions based on their personal preferences.
Umm Kav was picked and pushed due to the upcoming needs of the current president. Not to meet the needs of America.
Ginsburg is 85 years old. If Ginsburg dies, becomes unable to serve, or quits during Trumps tenure, she'll be replaced with a Conservative Judge. That would really pull the SC hard right.
In what way? Actually following the Constitution and not using the power of the judicial branch to make laws is hardly "Conservative". It is much more "Constitutionalist". Now I think I see your point. If you're saying that SCOTUS has been liberal, has exceeded it's authority for decades and has treated the Constitution with scorn, and is simply becoming less liberal, then yes, I'd agree with you.
During the Kavanaugh hearings, Democrats said, directly or implicitly, that if someone who is not a white man accuses a white man of a crime, then the fact that the accuser is not a white man, and the fact that the accused person is a white man, means that the accusation should be treated as valid without further corroboration and regardless of what the white man did or says.
That is the kind of justice system that the US had in, say, 1830 (although biased in the other direction).
I have deep concerns that Democrats really do not care about the rule of law; they simply care about prioritizing what their preferred demographic groups want.
(Trump is horrid and does not support the rule of law either, and I am not a Republican, but the Democratic perspective is truly scary.)
Lemme fix this for you. Democrats prioritize what their respective constituents want.
Trump Republicans appear to consider the rule of law a roadblock or a conspiracy tool used by the Clintons.
They are so constantly paranoid its no wonder they get nothing done. 4 years to come up with something better than Obama care....and still..nothing ...going on six years..
They spend their time figuring out how to overthrow democracy.
Gerrymandering, stealing social.media data, gaslighting...spending America s 4th of July flying to Russia to apologize for the indictments.?...a ha....they all know Russia is in it to help.keep them in power. Trump Republicans went after Hilary and the Clintons, because Putin hates Hilary Clinton. Innocent until proven guilty?
Name one thing Hilary has been found guilty of....and you can't use her emails being stolen by Russia on Trumps televised cue...that is what Trump is guilty of...
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
