• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

US Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg to Egyptians: Look to the Constitutions

Re: US Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg to Egyptians: Look to the Constituti

Which does not in any way invalidate what I said about our constitution.


You claimed that constitutions must take into account scumbag politicians and supreme court justices making rulings based on their political bias.Ours does that but elected officials and supreme court judges don't care.Which is why it it doesn't matter how well written a constitution is. If elected officials wish to subvert it then they will find a way.
 
Re: US Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg to Egyptians: Look to the Constituti

Look at the end of his post. See where is says "j/k"? That stands for "just kidding". He was making(and admitedly poor) joke. Let me know if you need any more help with those complicated internet acronyms.

OK, I hope obama slips on a bananna peel and breaks his neck. "J/K".

Like that?
 
Ginsburg doesn't like our constitution

Who can blame her? Our constitution was crafted by an undiverse group of hateful white male christian fundamentalists for hateful white male christian fundamentalists. I'm tired of people acting like the founding fathers were somehow the wisest people who ever lived. They were white supremacists who knew nothing of the merits of diversity, multiculturalism, and government-facilitated social welfare.

Justice Ginsburg to Egyptian TV: You probably don’t want to use our Constitution as a model « Hot Air
 
Re: US Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg to Egyptians: Look to the Constituti

You claimed that constitutions must take into account scumbag politicians and supreme court justices making rulings based on their political bias.Ours does that but elected officials and supreme court judges don't care.Which is why it it doesn't matter how well written a constitution is. If elected officials wish to subvert it then they will find a way.

Well, yeah. But some constitutional systems are better than others. And parliamentary systems are better than presidential systems.
 
Re: US Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg to Egyptians: Look to the Constituti

Which amounts to someone saying they support the 2nd amendment before enacting all sorts of infringements on it. If she had sch a high regard for it then she wouldn't be basically dumping on it by telling other people to not go with ours but instead go with some other country's.

Only in the weird black-and-white universe you seem to live in is she "dumping on" our constitution.

Does "shall not be infringed" mean you should be allowed to own a nuclear weapon? That's an "arm!"
 
Re: Ginsburg doesn't like our constitution

Who can blame her? Our constitution was crafted by an undiverse group of hateful white male christian fundamentalists for hateful white male christian fundamentalists. I'm tired of people acting like the founding fathers were somehow the wisest people who ever lived. They were white supremacists who knew nothing of the merits of diversity, multiculturalism, and government-facilitated social welfare.

Justice Ginsburg to Egyptian TV: You probably don’t want to use our Constitution as a model « Hot Air

She didn't say anything about not liking the constitution.
 
Re: US Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg to Egyptians: Look to the Constituti

Which amounts to someone saying they support the 2nd amendment before enacting all sorts of infringements on it. If she had sch a high regard for it then she wouldn't be basically dumping on it by telling other people to not go with ours but instead go with some other country's.

Of course, its only patriotic to believe our Constitution is perfect for every situation that ever existed and will exist. It's not like our own Founding Fathers took things like culture, history, and the society for which they were creating this Constitution for. No their intent was to make a perfect system universal for everyone, which they succeeded perfectly with of course.

So why shouldn't Egypt do exactly what our Founding Fathers did, and look at their situation, history, and culture to make the best government for themselves and their people? Because our collective fragile American pride won't allow it that's why!
 
Re: US Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg to Egyptians: Look to the Constituti

What makes our constitution inflectional is due to scumbag politicians subverting the constitution and supreme court judges making rulings based on their political bias.It has nothing to do with the constitution itself. This can happen with any constitution.

Especailly that damned Brown v. Board of Education decision from 1954. (sarcasm alert)
 
Re: US Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg to Egyptians: Look to the Constituti

Which amounts to someone saying they support the 2nd amendment before enacting all sorts of infringements on it. If she had sch a high regard for it then she wouldn't be basically dumping on it by telling other people to not go with ours but instead go with some other country's.

Because, after all, ours was written by Gods (well, rich white guys - which I guess in some people's minds is the same thing). How dare anybody suggest somebody else may have gotten some parts a little better after looking at it though 21st century eyes?
 
Re: Ginsburg doesn't like our constitution

Who can blame her? Our constitution was crafted by an undiverse group of hateful white male christian fundamentalists for hateful white male christian fundamentalists. I'm tired of people acting like the founding fathers were somehow the wisest people who ever lived. They were white supremacists who knew nothing of the merits of diversity, multiculturalism, and government-facilitated social welfare.

So you're attacking the characters of the Founders (rather than the ideas they wrote into the Constitution). Well, good job on your ad hominem argument. What about the actual Constitution?


If you got Charles Manson, Ted Bundy, Jeff Dahmer and John W. Gacy together and they produced a document that touted small central government with checks and balances of powers and advised against private control of the currencies of nations, etc.... I would find that all to be very agreeable, regardless of whatever sick **** those individuals might have done in private that I would have found morally disagreeable.

The ideas speak for themselves. Your character attacks are a sign of intellectual weakness.
 
Last edited:
Re: Ginsburg doesn't like our constitution

Who can blame her? Our constitution was crafted by an undiverse group of hateful white male christian fundamentalists for hateful white male christian fundamentalists. I'm tired of people acting like the founding fathers were somehow the wisest people who ever lived. They were white supremacists who knew nothing of the merits of diversity, multiculturalism, and government-facilitated social welfare.

Justice Ginsburg to Egyptian TV: You probably don’t want to use our Constitution as a model « Hot Air
Please don't have children!
 
Re: US Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg to Egyptians: Look to the Constituti

Because, after all, ours was written by Gods (well, rich white guys - which I guess in some people's minds is the same thing). How dare anybody suggest somebody else may have gotten some parts a little better after looking at it though 21st century eyes?


Seeing how you are a lib who buys into the living constitution (Liberal code for blatantly misinterpreting the constitution in order to squash some constitutional rights) b.s. you are probably totally unaware of the fact there is an amendment process in place so you can add and or repeal amendments. The amendment process is what you do if you want to get rid of or add a right.
 
Re: US Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg to Egyptians: Look to the Constituti

Only in the weird black-and-white universe you seem to live in is she "dumping on" our constitution.

Does "shall not be infringed" mean you should be allowed to own a nuclear weapon? That's an "arm!"
Shall not infringe means I should be allowed to own any weapon without any infringements. If you wish for the 2nd amendment to have infringements there is an amendment process for that.
 
Re: US Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg to Egyptians: Look to the Constituti

Of course, its only patriotic to believe our Constitution is perfect for every situation that ever existed and will exist. It's not like our own Founding Fathers took things like culture, history, and the society for which they were creating this Constitution for. No their intent was to make a perfect system universal for everyone, which they succeeded perfectly with of course.

So why shouldn't Egypt do exactly what our Founding Fathers did, and look at their situation, history, and culture to make the best government for themselves and their people? Because our collective fragile American pride won't allow it that's why!


All that is allright for EGYPT to do that.However someone whose job it is to make court room decisions has no business dissing the very document she is supposed to make court room decisions on.
 
Re: US Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg to Egyptians: Look to the Constituti

Well, yeah. But some constitutional systems are better than others. And parliamentary systems are better than presidential systems.

What makes a parliamentary system better than a presidential system?
 
Re: US Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg to Egyptians: Look to the Constituti

Seeing how you are a lib who buys into the living constitution (Liberal code for blatantly misinterpreting the constitution in order to squash some constitutional rights) b.s. you are probably totally unaware of the fact there is an amendment process in place so you can add and or repeal amendments. The amendment process is what you do if you want to get rid of or add a right.

And you're the sort of person who thinks that there's only one possible interpretation of the constitution: YOUR interpretation of the constitution.

You have the right to bear arms. You have two, presumably, attached at your shoulders. That right has never been infringed. Or maybe you are interpreting that arms means "weapons?" And not, say, literal arms? Or specifically firearms which most certainly would not include "any weapon," like you claim?
 
Last edited:
Re: Ginsburg doesn't like our constitution

Who can blame her? Our constitution was crafted by an undiverse group of hateful white male christian fundamentalists for hateful white male christian fundamentalists. I'm tired of people acting like the founding fathers were somehow the wisest people who ever lived. They were white supremacists who knew nothing of the merits of diversity, multiculturalism, and government-facilitated social welfare.
Let me bring your attitude back into real from reality's divide and conquer conquests to own soles by selling notions of immortal soul. This is ancient thinking so the only thing they hide it behind is technological advances.
But this moment working genetically in natural balance of this moment is being here all the time, that changes everything believed by cultivated conceptual agreements never to discuss real as it functions the same way all the time.

So the entire human species as it has existed throughout history of humanity has been physically done differently than ancestry being male and female results each generation words rule what is allowed to be discussed under the rule of law that makes it criminal to criticize civil law about character rights.

The united States Constitution deals with indiviudal sole liberties of ancestors not being society's children. Every other franchise in human history is opposite that thinking. Society owns ancestral resutls each generation for the greater good of those in charge staying in power of suggestion and governance of governmental language arts.
i.e. legalized tyranny.
 
Last edited:
Re: Ginsburg doesn't like our constitution

She didn't say anything about not liking the constitution.

Telling them to use anything but the model within the original isn't speaking louder than words define by suggestion they use another country's other than the one she rules from through re-interpretation to change gender liberal into character's rights.

Please, don't insult my instincts.
 
Re: Ginsburg doesn't like our constitution

Let me bring your attitude back into real from reality's divide and conquer conquests to own soles by selling notions of immortal soul. This is ancient thinking so the only thing they hide it behind is technological advances.
But this moment working genetically in natural balance of this moment is being here all the time, that changes everything believed by cultivated conceptual agreements never to discuss real as it functions the same way all the time.

So the entire human species as it has existed throughout history of humanity has been physically done differently than ancestry being male and female results each generation words rule what is allowed to be discussed under the rule of law that makes it criminal to criticize civil law about character rights.

The united States Constitution deals with indiviudal sole liberties of ancestors not being society's children. Every other franchise in human history is opposite that thinking. Society owns ancestral resutls each generation for the greater good of those in charge staying in power of suggestion and governance of governmental language arts.
i.e. legalized tyranny.

Telling them to use anything but the model within the original isn't speaking louder than words define by suggestion they use another country's other than the one she rules from through re-interpretation to change gender liberal into character's rights.

Please, don't insult my instincts.

Dude. What?
 
Re: US Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg to Egyptians: Look to the Constituti

Moderator's Warning:
Threads merged
 
Re: US Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg to Egyptians: Look to the Constituti

What makes a parliamentary system better than a presidential system?

The problem with a presidential system is the separation of powers.

In presidential systems, the main representative of the people is embodied in the legislature. But here's the problem with that.

Everybody likes their own legislator, but everybody hates the legislature as a whole.

So when that happens the legislators eventually decide to hand over more and more power over to executive authority. This is so legislators can have a reason to be re-elected to their position without actually having to make hard decisions that may mean they won't be re-elected.

And so, more and more, the executive becomes less a position of checks and balances and more of a temporary absolute dictatorship.

In a parliamentary system, however, the executive is established from the legislature, and the executive must maintain the confidence of a majority of the legislators. Therefore, the executive is just as representative as the people are.

And since the executive is formed from the legislature, the executive is just as dependent on the will of the populace as the legislature is. And so the executive is as tuned into the popular will.

Also, I think people should be able to have power of federal referendum to act as a check against the government system. So direct democracy can work as a check and balance against the representative democracy.

That, I think, would be a better method of governance.
 
Re: US Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg to Egyptians: Look to the Constituti

[...] No constitution on earth is perfect [...]
Blasphemy!!! The U.S. Constitution is indeed perfect.
It would be more perfect if we quit giving rights to people that don't deserve them, like liberals.
Only by suppressing and subjugating those that disagree can America be made truly free! :doh

Which amounts to someone saying they support the 2nd amendment before enacting all sorts of infringements on it. [...]
Well, personally I fully support and defend your right to keep and bear arms that I approve of :2razz:

Well, yeah. But some constitutional systems are better than others. And parliamentary systems are better than presidential systems.
Finally, someone points out that there are, indeed, other forms of government than our 'strong executive' model (which can be prone to Machiavellian machinations). Well done, sir
clap.gif
 
Re: US Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg to Egyptians: Look to the Constituti

And you're the sort of person who thinks that there's only one possible interpretation of the constitution: YOUR interpretation of the constitution.

You have the right to bear arms. You have two, presumably, attached at your shoulders. That right has never been infringed. Or maybe you are interpreting that arms means "weapons?" And not, say, literal arms? Or specifically firearms which most certainly would not include "any weapon," like you claim?
Okay, I have the right to bear arms.

What about the bear's rights?
confuse.gif
 
Re: US Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg to Egyptians: Look to the Constituti

The problem with a presidential system is the separation of powers.

In presidential systems, the main representative of the people is embodied in the legislature. But here's the problem with that.

Everybody likes their own legislator, but everybody hates the legislature as a whole.

So when that happens the legislators eventually decide to hand over more and more power over to executive authority. This is so legislators can have a reason to be re-elected to their position without actually having to make hard decisions that may mean they won't be re-elected.

And so, more and more, the executive becomes less a position of checks and balances and more of a temporary absolute dictatorship.

In a parliamentary system, however, the executive is established from the legislature, and the executive must maintain the confidence of a majority of the legislators. Therefore, the executive is just as representative as the people are.

And since the executive is formed from the legislature, the executive is just as dependent on the will of the populace as the legislature is. And so the executive is as tuned into the popular will.

Also, I think people should be able to have power of federal referendum to act as a check against the government system. So direct democracy can work as a check and balance against the representative democracy.

That, I think, would be a better method of governance.

But parliamentary systems can be ridiculously unstable, and in the current atmosphere, I suspect would be.
 
Re: US Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg to Egyptians: Look to the Constituti

Seeing how you are a lib who buys into the living constitution (Liberal code for blatantly misinterpreting the constitution in order to squash some constitutional rights) b.s. you are probably totally unaware of the fact there is an amendment process in place so you can add and or repeal amendments. The amendment process is what you do if you want to get rid of or add a right.

So which constitutional rights were squashed by the U.S. Supreme Court in the Brown decision? The right to forever condemn blacks to separate and unequal education system?

And Yeah, I'm sure those southern states would have jumped right on a Constitutional Amendment to do away with the 'separate but equal' garbage. Let's face it - you kinda like the 18th century approach to human rights and equality and anything done by the courts to bring the nation into the light will be frowned upon by you.
 
Back
Top Bottom