Page 1 of 9 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 83

Thread: Iowans dismiss three justices

  1. #1
    Sage
    Navy Pride's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Pacific NW
    Last Seen
    05-07-15 @ 02:01 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    39,883

    Iowans dismiss three justices

    Iowa kicks activist judges who voted for gay marriage to the curb..........Rge people speak again......How sweet it is.............

    Iowans dismiss three justices | desmoinesregister.com | The Des Moines Register

    Iowans dismiss three justices

    By GRANT SCHULTE • gschulte@dmreg.com • November 3, 2010

    Comments (689) Recommend (22) Print this page E-mail this article Share
    Del.icio.us Facebook Digg Reddit Newsvine Buzz up!
    Twitter FarkIt Type Size A A A Three Iowa Supreme Court justices lost their seats Tuesday in a historic upset fueled by their 2009 decision that allowed same-sex couples to marry.

    Vote totals from 96 percent of Iowa's 1,774 precincts showed Chief Justice Marsha Ternus and Justices David Baker and Michael Streit with less than the simple majority needed to stay on the bench.

    Their removal marked the first time an Iowa Supreme Court justice has not been retained since 1962, when the merit selection and retention system for judges was adopted.
    "God Bless Our Troops in Harms Way."

  2. #2
    Outer space potato man

    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Last Seen
    Today @ 10:56 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    51,812

    Re: Iowans dismiss three justices

    Oh hey, another Navy Pride gay marriage thread. Let me shorten this up for everyone:

    NP: Gays shouldn't be able to marry.
    Other people: Yes they should.
    Yet more people: No they shouldn't.
    Some other people: Yes they should.
    NP: No they shouldn't.

    Loop until page 40.

    Instead, I think we should talk about removal of judges in general. To me, the whole REASON we have the judicial branch of government is to protect the country from the whims of the majority or the whims of congress. They're not SUPPOSED to be "accountable to the will of the people," because sometimes the people are assholes who support terrible things. Or, sometimes politicians are corrupt assholes who need a slap in the face.

    We're not a direct democracy for a damned good reason. The founding fathers were smart enough to realize how that would end up.
    Last edited by Deuce; 11-03-10 at 05:35 PM.
    He touched her over her bra and underpants, she says, and guided her hand to touch him over his underwear
    Quote Originally Posted by Lutherf View Post
    We’ll say what? Something like “nothing happened” ... Yeah, we might say something like that.

  3. #3
    Guru
    Morality Games's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Iowa
    Last Seen
    05-24-16 @ 10:00 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    3,733

    Re: Iowans dismiss three justices

    America is fast becoming a de facto direct democracy. We are a republic, except that majorities can intervene in any part of the process. Seems natural law only exists when it comes to guns rights. Everything else is subject to the whim of a majority.
    Last edited by Morality Games; 11-03-10 at 06:14 PM.
    If you notice something good in yourself, give credit to God, not to yourself, but be certain the evil you commit is always your own and yours to acknowledge.

    St. Benedict

  4. #4
    Count Smackula
    rathi's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    California
    Last Seen
    10-31-15 @ 10:29 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    7,890

    Re: Iowans dismiss three justices

    I dislike judges being elected. Oftentimes the right legal choice is very unpopular. The judge who made the call on the Fred Phelps case is not going to be well liked, but he shouldn't be punished for upholding the law.

  5. #5
    Sage
    Navy Pride's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Pacific NW
    Last Seen
    05-07-15 @ 02:01 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    39,883

    Re: Iowans dismiss three justices

    There is no law here....It is pure and simple activism and these justices are paying for it by the will of the ballot box...........The fact remains gay marriage will never be approved by the people, only activism judges..........
    "God Bless Our Troops in Harms Way."

  6. #6
    Guru
    Diogenes's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Last Seen
    10-11-13 @ 06:52 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    4,980

    Re: Iowans dismiss three justices

    Quote Originally Posted by Deuce View Post
    Instead, I think we should talk about removal of judges in general. To me, the whole REASON we have the judicial branch of government is to protect the country from the whims of the majority or the whims of congress.
    And we the people retain the power to remove judges who place their whims above the law. You may remember a Wisconsin case a few years ago where the judge dismissed charges against a child molester on the grounds that the five year old victim had "behaved provocatively." In that case, as in the current Iowa situation, the people decided at the next election that the judge lacked the qualifications and temperament to keep his job.

    Politicians are not the only ones who occasionally suffer from a case of terminal arrogance.
    "We the people are the rightful masters of both Congress & the courts, not to overthrow the Constitution, but overthrow the men who pervert the Constitution."
    - Abraham Lincoln

  7. #7
    Sage

    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    USA
    Last Seen
    Today @ 03:22 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    9,812

    Re: Iowans dismiss three justices

    This story reminds me of roosevelt's threat to pack the supreme court unless they stopped invalidating his new deal programs.

    Many of the liberal's favorite programs were the direct result of, basically, the exact thing they now claim to oppose.

    Having said that, and I do believe that the judges made a bad decision, I don't think judges should be voted on in this manner.
    Last edited by buck; 11-03-10 at 08:33 PM.

  8. #8
    Sage
    Hatuey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Last Seen
    Today @ 10:34 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    42,050

    Re: Iowans dismiss three justices

    Quote Originally Posted by Diogenes View Post
    And we the people retain the power to remove judges who place their whims above the law. You may remember a Wisconsin case a few years ago where the judge dismissed charges against a child molester on the grounds that the five year old victim had "behaved provocatively." In that case, as in the current Iowa situation, the people decided at the next election that the judge lacked the qualifications and temperament to keep his job.

    Politicians are not the only ones who occasionally suffer from a case of terminal arrogance.
    Will you look at that.... 6 posts in and somebody mentions pedophilia in a thread about judges who were dismissed for supporting gay marriage.

    Pedophilia. Godwin's law for Homos.
    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. #9
    Outer space potato man

    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Last Seen
    Today @ 10:56 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    51,812

    Re: Iowans dismiss three justices

    Quote Originally Posted by Diogenes View Post
    And we the people retain the power to remove judges who place their whims above the law. You may remember a Wisconsin case a few years ago where the judge dismissed charges against a child molester on the grounds that the five year old victim had "behaved provocatively." In that case, as in the current Iowa situation, the people decided at the next election that the judge lacked the qualifications and temperament to keep his job.

    Politicians are not the only ones who occasionally suffer from a case of terminal arrogance.
    Translation:

    "Activist judge," which means "judge who rules in a way I disagree with."

    To me, it's perfectly clear that same sex marriage bans are unconstitutional and in opposition to already-existing supreme court decisions.
    1) Loving v. Virginia, "Marriage is one of the "basic civil rights of man," fundamental to our very existence and survival"

    2) 14th amendment, "nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws."

    3) Our laws prevent discrimination based on gender. In most states, I am barred as a private citizen from entering into a contract (marriage) with another private citizen because they happen to be the same gender as me. People say "but sexual orientation isn't protected like that!" So? Who said anything about sexual orientation? Gay marriage and gay sex are not the same thing.

    4) It doesn't harm anyone. If it doesn't harm myself or others, why does the government have the right to ban it?

    5) In what universe is it a good idea for personal liberties to be decided by majority vote?

    It's clear as day to me. An "activist" judge, to me, is one who would ignore this constitutional contradiction because he personally disapproves. So, you and I disagree. Why should we subject this to a vote? We don't vote on freedom. A judge spends his career becoming an expert on the law and on the constitution, clearly a judge is more qualified for this than you or I.
    He touched her over her bra and underpants, she says, and guided her hand to touch him over his underwear
    Quote Originally Posted by Lutherf View Post
    We’ll say what? Something like “nothing happened” ... Yeah, we might say something like that.

  10. #10
    Hung like Einstein
    Singularity's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    San Diego
    Last Seen
    12-12-17 @ 05:47 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    1,058

    Re: Iowans dismiss three justices

    Quote Originally Posted by Navy Pride View Post
    Iowa kicks activist judges who voted for gay marriage to the curb..........Rge people speak again......How sweet it is.............
    Your apparent dislike of homosexual equality aside, I think you should relish in this tiny victory, because it's about to be incredibly short-lived. First off, Iowa won't overturn their marriage equality law, even if all three newbies vote against it. Furthermore, they are possibly to be joined by Rhode Island and Maryland, and New York depending on the final Senate tally. So you're looking at 3 more states where homosexual couples may soon get married legally - something which will undoubtedly chap the proverbial hides of conservatives like yourself.

    Another interesting note to this GOP victory is the record number of LGBT candidates who won - 106 out of 164 total supported, bringing that to around 64%. In contrast, only 32% of tea-party endorsed candidates won. This is sobering news to those of you who oppose equality for homosexuals.
    Last edited by Singularity; 11-03-10 at 08:55 PM.

Page 1 of 9 123 ... 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
  •