Page 49 of 57 FirstFirst ... 394748495051 ... LastLast
Results 481 to 490 of 565

Thread: Boy Scouts vote to welcome gay members

  1. #481
    Sage
    sangha's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Lower Hudson Valley, NY
    Last Seen
    09-17-17 @ 05:48 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    59,990

    Re: Boy Scouts vote to welcome gay members

    Quote Originally Posted by Henrin View Post
    I already told you there is no reason for me to answer that question since I never said they were. Do you understand the difference between SC ruling being legally binding and SC ruling actually being correct?
    Since you won't deny that SCOTUS decisions are always constitutional, then there is no doubt that it is constitutional to apply the Commerce Clause to beyond "trade disputes between the listed members" and that the CC sometime does trump the 1st and 13th Amendments because SCOTUS decided that it is constitutional to do so.

    Therefore, you were wrong to claim otherwise.
    Quote Originally Posted by matchlight View Post
    Justice Thomas' opinions consistently contain precise, detailed constitutional analyses.
    Quote Originally Posted by jaeger19 View Post
    the vast majority of folks that need healthcare are on Medicare.. both rich and poor..

  2. #482
    Banned
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Last Seen
    07-19-17 @ 03:51 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    60,458

    Re: Boy Scouts vote to welcome gay members

    Quote Originally Posted by sangha View Post
    Since you won't deny that SCOTUS decisions are always constitutional, then there is no doubt that it is constitutional to apply the Commerce Clause to beyond "trade disputes between the listed members" and that the CC sometime does trump the 1st and 13th Amendments because SCOTUS decided that it is constitutional to do so.

    Therefore, you were wrong to claim otherwise.
    Nope. Again, that is not how it works. You don't seem to understand how the constitution works.

  3. #483
    Sage
    sangha's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Lower Hudson Valley, NY
    Last Seen
    09-17-17 @ 05:48 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    59,990

    Re: Boy Scouts vote to welcome gay members

    Quote Originally Posted by Henrin View Post
    Nope. Again, that is not how it works. You don't seem to understand how the constitution works.
    That's it?

    This is all you've got:
    Quote Originally Posted by matchlight View Post
    Justice Thomas' opinions consistently contain precise, detailed constitutional analyses.
    Quote Originally Posted by jaeger19 View Post
    the vast majority of folks that need healthcare are on Medicare.. both rich and poor..

  4. #484
    Global Moderator
    I'm a Jedi Master, Yo

    CaptainCourtesy's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Last Seen
    Today @ 09:38 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    152,692

    Re: Boy Scouts vote to welcome gay members

    Quote Originally Posted by Henrin View Post
    Which makes them wrong.
    In your opinion.

    Actually, no. You can not hide behind the commerce clause when you are actively violating the 1st and 13th amendment.
    Using the Commerce Clause in this case does not violate the 1st or 13 Amendment. It alters the context of the issue.

    Why? The reason the words were written does not change and nor does the power behind them. What could possibly be the reason to ignore intent?
    Intent is contextual. As context changes, intent becomes less relevant and more generalized.
    Last edited by CaptainCourtesy; 05-27-13 at 05:16 AM.
    "Never fear. Him is here" - Captain Chaos (Dom DeLuise), Cannonball Run

    ====||:-D

    Quote Originally Posted by Wiseone View Post
    This is what I hate about politics the most, it turns people in snobbish egotistical self righteous dicks who allow their political beliefs, partisan attitudes, and 'us vs. them' mentality, to force them to deny reality.

    Quote Originally Posted by Navy Pride View Post
    You can't paint everone with the same brush.......It does not work tht way.


    Quote Originally Posted by Wessexman View Post
    See with you around Captain we don't even have to make arguments, as you already know everything .
    Quote Originally Posted by CriticalThought View Post
    Had you been born elsewhere or at a different time you may very well have chosen a different belief system.
    Quote Originally Posted by ernst barkmann View Post
    It a person has faith they dont need to convince another of it, and when a non believer is not interested in listening to the word of the lord, " you shake the dust from your sandels and move on"

  5. #485
    Banned
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Last Seen
    07-19-17 @ 03:51 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    60,458

    Re: Boy Scouts vote to welcome gay members

    Quote Originally Posted by CaptainCourtesy View Post
    In your opinion.
    No, basic reason. The point of the constitution is to keep the government inside a box, so whenever the SC tries to get the government out of its box by ignoring intent they are wrong.

    Using the Commerce Clause in this case does not violate the 1st or 13 Amendment. It alters the context of the issue.
    That is not what I meant. The 1st and 13th amendment are violated by the law itself, not the SC ruling. My point was that if the law violates the 1st and 13th amendment it is immaterial if it is falls under the commerce clause or not. This is due to the fact that in order to act on the commerce you must violate the 1st and 13th amendment. When the supreme court ignores the rights of the people and simply falls back on government power it is a bad ruling.

    Intent is contextual. As context changes, intent becomes less relevant and more generalized.
    That is just a wild excuse. The issue being debated doesn't change the intent of the law. If the commerce clauses intent is trade disputes between the listed members and what you are debating with has to deal with business activities towards customers or employees you are way outside the scope of the clause. I'm sorry, but context does not affect the intent.
    Last edited by Henrin; 05-27-13 at 03:19 PM.

  6. #486
    Banned
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Last Seen
    07-19-17 @ 03:51 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    60,458

    Re: Boy Scouts vote to welcome gay members

    Here is a fun little question..

    Is it the job of the supreme court to update the constitution or to simply uphold it.

    Of course, the people that support the living constitution claim they are not updating the constitution, but merely addressing a set of economic facts that did not exist when the Constitution was framed. You know what we call that? Updating the Constitution. Yeah...

  7. #487
    Sage
    sangha's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Lower Hudson Valley, NY
    Last Seen
    09-17-17 @ 05:48 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    59,990

    Re: Boy Scouts vote to welcome gay members

    Quote Originally Posted by Henrin View Post
    Here is a fun little question..

    Is it the job of the supreme court to update the constitution or to simply uphold it.

    Of course, the people that support the living constitution claim they are not updating the constitution, but merely addressing a set of economic facts that did not exist when the Constitution was framed. You know what we call that? Updating the Constitution. Yeah...
    You continue to make it clear that you misunderstand the most basic of constitutional principles

    The job of SCOTUS is to render decisions on the cases that come before it based on their own beliefs concerning the constitution and the law.

    That's why we both agree that *any* decision they make is constitutional, regardless of their reasoning.
    Quote Originally Posted by matchlight View Post
    Justice Thomas' opinions consistently contain precise, detailed constitutional analyses.
    Quote Originally Posted by jaeger19 View Post
    the vast majority of folks that need healthcare are on Medicare.. both rich and poor..

  8. #488
    Banned
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Last Seen
    07-19-17 @ 03:51 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    60,458

    Re: Boy Scouts vote to welcome gay members

    Quote Originally Posted by sangha View Post
    You continue to make it clear that you misunderstand the most basic of constitutional principles

    The job of SCOTUS is to render decisions on the cases that come before it based on their own beliefs concerning the constitution and the law.

    That's why we both agree that *any* decision they make is constitutional, regardless of their reasoning.
    You do realize that my position is the position of many justices, right?

    The fact is your position is counter to reason and the purpose of law and the constitution to begin with.

  9. #489
    Sage
    sangha's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Lower Hudson Valley, NY
    Last Seen
    09-17-17 @ 05:48 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    59,990

    Re: Boy Scouts vote to welcome gay members

    Quote Originally Posted by Henrin View Post
    You do realize that my position is the position of many justices, right?

    The fact is your position is counter to reason and the purpose of law and the constitution to begin with.
    If you believe it is counter to the constitution, then please quote from the constitution where it says SCOTUS must use your position when coming to a decision
    Quote Originally Posted by matchlight View Post
    Justice Thomas' opinions consistently contain precise, detailed constitutional analyses.
    Quote Originally Posted by jaeger19 View Post
    the vast majority of folks that need healthcare are on Medicare.. both rich and poor..

  10. #490
    Global Moderator
    I'm a Jedi Master, Yo

    CaptainCourtesy's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Last Seen
    Today @ 09:38 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    152,692

    Re: Boy Scouts vote to welcome gay members

    Quote Originally Posted by Henrin View Post
    No, basic reason. The point of the constitution is to keep the government inside a box, so whenever the SC tries to get the government out of its box by ignoring intent they are wrong.
    That's circular reasoning. You are justifying intent by claiming... intent. Firstly, intent is variable. There were many who had a hand in creating the Constitution... and many differing views. Intent was not universal. Secondly, since much of the Constitution was written in generalities, intent is fairly irrelevant. Generalities allow for a variety of situations to be applied. Beyond that, how a law was created is not always equivalent to how it is applied or can be applied. And, just because you disagree with this doesn't mean it's not accurate.

    That is not what I meant. The 1st and 13th amendment are violated by the law itself, not the SC ruling. My point was that if the law violates the 1st and 13th amendment it is immaterial if it is falls under the commerce clause or not. This is due to the fact that in order to act on the commerce you must violate the 1st and 13th amendment. When the supreme court ignores the rights of the people and simply falls back on government power it is a bad ruling.
    The law doesn't violate the 1st and 13 Amendments because one must look at the Commerce Clause in conjunction. None of these things live in a vacuum.

    That is just a wild excuse. The issue being debated doesn't change the intent of the law. If the commerce clauses intent is trade disputes between the listed members and what you are debating with has to deal with business activities towards customers or employees you are way outside the scope of the clause. I'm sorry, but context does not affect the intent.
    I've told you. I have no use for a narrow interpretation of the Constitution. Nor do many others. Intent is not only variable and relative but becomes less applicable as time passes. It is perfectly reasonable to use the Commerce Clause in the way it was used in the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Since that clause applies to private business operations between states, the application in this matter is justified. This is probably why it was never declared unconstitutional; because it wasn't. Intent has no relevancy here.
    "Never fear. Him is here" - Captain Chaos (Dom DeLuise), Cannonball Run

    ====||:-D

    Quote Originally Posted by Wiseone View Post
    This is what I hate about politics the most, it turns people in snobbish egotistical self righteous dicks who allow their political beliefs, partisan attitudes, and 'us vs. them' mentality, to force them to deny reality.

    Quote Originally Posted by Navy Pride View Post
    You can't paint everone with the same brush.......It does not work tht way.


    Quote Originally Posted by Wessexman View Post
    See with you around Captain we don't even have to make arguments, as you already know everything .
    Quote Originally Posted by CriticalThought View Post
    Had you been born elsewhere or at a different time you may very well have chosen a different belief system.
    Quote Originally Posted by ernst barkmann View Post
    It a person has faith they dont need to convince another of it, and when a non believer is not interested in listening to the word of the lord, " you shake the dust from your sandels and move on"

Page 49 of 57 FirstFirst ... 394748495051 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •