Page 20 of 21 FirstFirst ... 1018192021 LastLast
Results 191 to 200 of 207

Thread: Cruz: Opposition To Same-Sex Marriage Will Be 'Front And Center' In 2016 Campaign

  1. #191
    Banned
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    The anals of history
    Last Seen
    07-25-15 @ 01:05 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Progressive
    Posts
    10,348

    Re: Cruz: Opposition To Same-Sex Marriage Will Be 'Front And Center' In 2016 Campaign

    Quote Originally Posted by katiegrrl0 View Post
    Within states some judges are voted on and approved by the people. Federal Judges serve and are selected. The Supreme Court is as it is as it was set up by the founders. This is as I say to have Judges who are free from the electorate. They can rule on cases as they see fit without backlash from the people. They rule according to their idea of what the Constitution means not what you or anyone else would like them to see.
    The will of the people is not always correct and these 9 people fill the gap between tyrants and freedom. This decision was unpopular with many not as many as some decisions in the past but unpopular. A few days ago we would not have had this discussion because no decision had been made. Today we are having this discussion because you don't care for the result. I am guessing. If you had a hand in electing these judges they may see it more your way. I again am guessing from the type of dialogue we are having. Your last phrase is interesting But the Senator certainly hands in the favors for votes promised to keep her or his job. You really don't want judges like this. My guess is you are not in favor of the decision the Justices or 5 of them made. Now you dislike the idea of them being able to defeat the mobs in the street. By the way The popular vote according to poles would have legalized same sex marriage anyway. The majority of voters poled were for Same Sex Marriage. It may have taken another year to make it legal and it would have been the main plank in the parties platforms so it is best out of the way.
    This has nothing to do with same sex marriage, for me... it just ended up being an interesting catalyst in to this discussion. It's more principled on my side now. I don't believe in unelected governance. That's been true long before the SSM ruling, and it will be true long afterward.

    My view on homosexuals has been all over the board this past week. I went from not caring, to extreme dislike after the ruling, to extreme compassion after meeting my girlfriend's gay best friend this weekend.

    My view on lawyers, on the other hand, is unchanged. I don't trust them. And Supreme Court judges are nothing but robed lawyers.

    I realize you can't have a legal system without lawyers, but, at least, they need to be held in check as much as humanly possible.

  2. #192
    Banned
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    The anals of history
    Last Seen
    07-25-15 @ 01:05 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Progressive
    Posts
    10,348

    Re: Cruz: Opposition To Same-Sex Marriage Will Be 'Front And Center' In 2016 Camp...

    Quote Originally Posted by Hatuey View Post
    Utter nonsense. There was no ad hominem. I discussed your positions, not your character. If you want my thoughts on your character, I'd be more than wiling to give them. However, then, you'd actually have grounds to report me and I'm having so much fun watching you squirm and acting clueless about how the forum works. They statements would be entirely true, but they'd be ad hominems none the less and I'd miss out on this exchange.

    With that said, the fact still remains. Your positions on elected officials and the people are entirely dependent on how they vote. That alone is enough to dismiss the entire premise. If you don't like who the SCOTUS judges are, petition your representatives and tell them to vote in accordance to your wishes. If they won't, vote for a different person next time. What you don't get to do is change the rules to the game because you don't like the outcome.


    Actually, it isn't, that's why ad hominem is an established logical fallacy.

    I could be the lovechild of Adolf Hitler and Sadaam Hussein with a penis goatee and fire spraying out of my ears, it would have no effect on the logic of my argument. That's the way it works, in the civilized world of debate.

    You, however, seem to prefer the mudslinging world of campaign politics.... I'm trying to debate, you're trying to smear.

    Interesting that you never responded to the last part of what I said. I'll give you another shot at it.

    Underneath all the finger pointing, your argument really amounts to this: you don't trust the American Public to decide for themselves who ought to be judge over them. I do. You don't believe in the democratic process for electing Supreme Court judges. I do.

    You not only don't believe in democracy in this instance, you are so strongly against it that you feel the need to attack me ad hominem as just coming out and stating your position would probably be ineffectual. Attack the messenger to silence the message, that sort of thing.

    The message is democracy and freedom of choice. I'm for it. You're against. If I'm wrong, just come out and say so.

    How about it?

  3. #193
    Temp Suspended
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Location
    A2
    Last Seen
    Today @ 04:17 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    16,890

    Re: Cruz: Opposition To Same-Sex Marriage Will Be 'Front And Center' In 2016 Campaign

    Quote Originally Posted by clownboy View Post
    Add my family to that. They are all for folks going their own way. But even the ones who campaigned in their states for homosexual marriage, hate this decision and the way in which they got what they wanted. When will the namecallers learn that the method counts often more than the result.
    i have learned that indeed and i much prefer the federal courts to safeguard minority rights than for the majority to do so

    the idea of my rights being in your hands makes me nauseous. Here is a thought: let's put YOUR marriage to a vote

    for one who claims to care deeply about the constitution, the supreme court is responsible for upholding it, but there is NO process outlined anywhere in that document for ballot initiatives, let alone for the voters to directly undo equal protection

  4. #194
    Sage
    Hatuey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Last Seen
    Today @ 02:57 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    40,857

    Re: Cruz: Opposition To Same-Sex Marriage Will Be 'Front And Center' In 2016 Camp...

    Quote Originally Posted by Peter Grimm View Post
    Actually, it isn't, that's why ad hominem is an established logical fallacy.
    And yet, I am still here and not a single mod has brought anything to my attention about attacking you. I'll keep you posted on the matter. However, like the outcome of the gay marriage case, you really shouldn't hold your breath. Your argument is illogical for the sole reason that it is inconsistent with the reason justices are appointed and not elected. This has already been pointed out by various posters of various leans but you refuse to acknowledge it because it simply refutes your agenda's see through chants for democracy.

    Electing our SCOTUS judges would make our judges subject to partisanship. Though it is unquestionable that their political leans can affect how they vote, they're also above the petty partisan whims of folks like you or I. In other words, they don't have to promise anybody anything to get elected. That is the best possible argument for keeping things as they are.

    If you don't like that, you don't get to change the rules and make them up to fit your preferred current partisan flavor. SPECIALLY when you yourself have made it clear that your faith in the American people exists as long as they vote like you do. You've made the best possible argument against your own desires for SCOTUS. There is no logical fallacy there, it's the only conclusion that can be drawn from your statements on the matter.
    Last edited by Hatuey; 06-30-15 at 02:37 AM.
    I refuse to accept the view that mankind is so tragically bound to the starless midnight of racism and war that the bright daybreak of peace and brotherhood can never become a reality. - MLK

  5. #195
    Banned
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    The anals of history
    Last Seen
    07-25-15 @ 01:05 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Progressive
    Posts
    10,348

    Re: Cruz: Opposition To Same-Sex Marriage Will Be 'Front And Center' In 2016 Camp...

    Quote Originally Posted by Hatuey View Post
    And yet, I am still here and not a single mod has brought anything to my attention about attacking you. I'll keep you posted on the matter. However, like the outcome of the gay marriage case, you really shouldn't hold your breath. Your argument is illogical for the sole reason that it is inconsistent with the reason justices are appointed and not elected. This has already been pointed out by various posters of various leans but you refuse to acknowledge it because it simply refutes your agenda's see through chants for democracy.

    Electing our SCOTUS judges would make our judges subject to partisanship. Though it is unquestionable that their political leans can affect how they vote, they're also above the petty partisan whims of folks like you or I. In other words, they don't have to promise anybody anything to get elected. That is the best possible argument for keeping things as they are.

    If you don't like that, you don't get to change the rules and make them up to fit your preferred current partisan flavor. SPECIALLY when you yourself have made it clear that your faith in the American people exists as long as they vote like you do. You've made the best possible argument against your own desires for SCOTUS. There is no logical fallacy there, it's the only conclusion that can be drawn from your statements on the matter.
    What makes a lawyer above partisanship?


    Also, you can't tell someone what opinions they can/can't have, it doesn't work that way. I'm telling you I believe in the American People and that I think democratic principles should determine who our Supreme Court judges are. That's my opinion. You don't share it. You don't believe in democracy in this case, and that's fine. At least you're starting to own up to it.

  6. #196
    Sage
    Hatuey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Last Seen
    Today @ 02:57 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    40,857

    Re: Cruz: Opposition To Same-Sex Marriage Will Be 'Front And Center' In 2016 Camp...

    Quote Originally Posted by Peter Grimm View Post
    What makes a lawyer above partisanship?
    We're not discussing whether lawyers should be above partisanship. We're discussing discussing SCOTUS justices should be above partisan politics. Anybody with enough time to study can become a lawyer, few people ever become judges, less than that become SCOTUS justices. The people selected to become justices are picked in accordance with the powers granted to the president. Congressional critters - who may not even be around after next election - don't get to change that because they don't like how SCOTUS ruled on a matter that was important to them.

    Also, you can't tell someone what opinions they can/can't have, it doesn't work that way.
    Nobody has told you what opinions you can and can't have. You're more than welcome to them. However, your opinion simply won't be taken seriously by anybody who has examined the body of your posts in their entirety. Your fickle appreciation of the American people is entirely dependent on how they vote. That is enough to dismiss your appeals to their wisdom as nothing more than political desperation with an agenda behind it. An agenda which has been defeated through this case. More importantly, those opinions and their instability are a pretty good reason to keeping the process of selecting justices far away from the grasp of like minded but inconsistent voters like yourself.
    I refuse to accept the view that mankind is so tragically bound to the starless midnight of racism and war that the bright daybreak of peace and brotherhood can never become a reality. - MLK

  7. #197
    Banned
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    The anals of history
    Last Seen
    07-25-15 @ 01:05 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Progressive
    Posts
    10,348

    Re: Cruz: Opposition To Same-Sex Marriage Will Be 'Front And Center' In 2016 Camp...

    Quote Originally Posted by Hatuey View Post
    We're not discussing whether lawyers should be above partisanship. We're discussing discussing SCOTUS justices should be above partisan politics. Anybody with enough time to study can become a lawyer, few people ever become judges, less than that become SCOTUS justices. The people selected to become justices are picked in accordance with the powers granted to the president. Congressional critters - who may not even be around after next election - don't get to change that because they don't like how SCOTUS ruled on a matter that was important to them.



    Nobody has told you what opinions you can and can't have. You're more than welcome to them. However, your opinion simply won't be taken seriously by anybody who has examined the body of your posts in their entirety. Your fickle appreciation of the American people is entirely dependent on how they vote. That is enough to dismiss your appeals to their wisdom as nothing more than political desperation with an agenda behind it. An agenda which has been defeated through this case. More importantly, those opinions and their instability are a pretty good reason to keeping the process of selecting justices far away from the grasp of like minded but inconsistent voters like yourself.
    Everybody always thinks they win every argument on here, it's amusing. You didn't even attempt to make an argument, you just turned the discussion to my character, and you still think you "won" something. I guess that's the way ego works.

    A judge is a lawyer in a black robe. A Supreme Court Justice is a lawyer with a capitalized job title. They're all lawyers. And nothing about lawyers makes them inherently more fit to govern than the teachers or nurses or doctors that make up the American Public.

    Really, you can try to make this about whatever.... it's about democracy at the end of the day. It's about the right to choose who you want governing you. That's what I believe in. You can say the American People can't handle it, I disagree.

    I believe in America, and all the wonderful people who make this country great.

    Goodnight

  8. #198
    Sage
    Hatuey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Last Seen
    Today @ 02:57 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    40,857

    Re: Cruz: Opposition To Same-Sex Marriage Will Be 'Front And Center' In 2016 Camp...

    Quote Originally Posted by Peter Grimm View Post
    Everybody always thinks they win every argument on here, it's amusing.
    I think it is pretty clear who has won the argument here and it definitely isn't anybody named "Peter Grimm". You suggested an idea that completely defeats the purpose of having at least one branch of government not being beholden to donors, partisanship and the false promises so common in Congress and the WH.

    Everyone but you seems to have realized what a terrible idea it would be to change that and has rightly rejected it. Your continued appeal to the wisdom of the American people - which is entirely based on how they vote - has cemented the collective rejection expressed in this forum as the right position to take.
    Last edited by Hatuey; 06-30-15 at 03:25 AM.
    I refuse to accept the view that mankind is so tragically bound to the starless midnight of racism and war that the bright daybreak of peace and brotherhood can never become a reality. - MLK

  9. #199
    Banned
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    The anals of history
    Last Seen
    07-25-15 @ 01:05 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Progressive
    Posts
    10,348

    Re: Cruz: Opposition To Same-Sex Marriage Will Be 'Front And Center' In 2016 Camp...

    Quote Originally Posted by Hatuey View Post
    I think it is pretty clear who has won the argument here and it definitely isn't anybody named "Peter Grimm". You suggested an idea that completely defeats the purpose of having at least one branch of government not being beholden to donors, partisanship and the false promises so common in Congress and the WH.

    Everyone but you seems to have realized what a terrible idea it would be to change that and has rightly rejected it. Your continued appeal to the wisdom of the American people - which is entirely based on how they vote - has cemented the collective rejection expressed in this forum as the right position to take.


    Go to bed.

  10. #200
    Sage
    Hatuey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Last Seen
    Today @ 02:57 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    40,857

    Re: Cruz: Opposition To Same-Sex Marriage Will Be 'Front And Center' In 2016 Camp...

    Quote Originally Posted by Peter Grimm View Post


    Go to bed.
    Your inability to respond to the post with anything other than see through chest beating is all one needs.
    I refuse to accept the view that mankind is so tragically bound to the starless midnight of racism and war that the bright daybreak of peace and brotherhood can never become a reality. - MLK

Page 20 of 21 FirstFirst ... 1018192021 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
  •