• 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!

Barbarism of Supreme Court Ruling Favors Christians

Obscurity

Obscurity

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 18, 2018
Messages
11,484
Reaction score
5,148
Location
PA
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Left
Obscurity said:
Civil rights experts question Supreme Court execution rulings - Religion News Service

Disgusting ruling by partisan hacks on the scotus. Clearly this ruling shows the conservative bent of this bench is willing to exert it's ideological slant on everything it corrupts with a ruling.

This is blatantly unconstitutional and these justices are disgusting.
Click to expand...

There are a couple of different rulings discussed in your article. Which one(s) are you referring to, and what specifically is your problem with it/them?
 
Obscurity said:
Civil rights experts question Supreme Court execution rulings - Religion News Service

Disgusting ruling by partisan hacks on the scotus. Clearly this ruling shows the conservative bent of this bench is willing to exert it's ideological slant on everything it corrupts with a ruling.

This is blatantly unconstitutional and these justices are disgusting.
Click to expand...

This is a very glittering generality, Obscurity. What specifically do you dislike: The fact that they upheld the death sentence? The fact that the inmate was not allowed a Buddhist priest? Both? Neither?
 
Obscurity said:
Civil rights experts question Supreme Court execution rulings - Religion News Service

Disgusting ruling by partisan hacks on the scotus. Clearly this ruling shows the conservative bent of this bench is willing to exert it's ideological slant on everything it corrupts with a ruling.

This is blatantly unconstitutional and these justices are disgusting.
Click to expand...
Which justices? There was only 1 that voted differently in the two cases and in the first case he said he only denied the appeal for procedural reason or he would of decided to postpone the execution. All the other judges voted the same in both cases.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I467 using Tapatalk
 
Dude was sentenced to death. Dude wanted that sentence lifted on account of not being able to have a chaplain of his faith in the room with him. Supreme court said, nope, you're still dying, but we will give you a couple days to find a chaplain.


Explain what's wrong here?
 
Harshaw said:
There are a couple of different rulings discussed in your article. Which one(s) are you referring to, and what specifically is your problem with it/them?
Click to expand...

Specifically the problem is:

Muslim inmate getting executed files 10 days before execution to have an inmam present at his execution, DENIED.
Buddhist inmate getting executed files 2 days before his execution to have a buddhist present at his execution, APPROVED.

In the Muslim's case Justice Brett Kavanaugh voted with the majority, saying his decision was because the inmate filed for a review too late. Remember the Muslim inmate filed 10 DAYS before his execution.

In the Buddhist case Kavanaugh wrote: "Still, in Murphy’s case, Kavanaugh sided with the court’s liberal justices. His brief, concurring opinion highlighted both the appeal’s “sufficiently timely manner” as well as the court’s obligation to prevent “governmental discrimination against religion.” Even though the Buddhist filed 2 DAYS before his execution.

See the glaring hypocrisy there yet?
 
Obscurity said:
Civil rights experts question Supreme Court execution rulings - Religion News Service

Disgusting ruling by partisan hacks on the scotus. Clearly this ruling shows the conservative bent of this bench is willing to exert it's ideological slant on everything it corrupts with a ruling.

This is blatantly unconstitutional and these justices are disgusting.
Click to expand...

I'll bet you are among the first to scream about separation of church and state. Where in the world did a murderer get the right to have clergy present to speed his soul to heaven? Good luck with that. As far as I care "reasonable accommodation" is the order of the day. If they can't get the right guy, then sorry about that. I seriously doubt his victims had clergy present as he murdered them.

We are turning the death penalty into a game.
 
Praxas said:
Specifically the problem is:

Muslim inmate getting executed files 10 days before execution to have an inmam present at his execution, DENIED.
Buddhist inmate getting executed files 2 days before his execution to have a buddhist present at his execution, APPROVED.

In the Muslim's case Justice Brett Kavanaugh voted with the majority, saying his decision was because the inmate filed for a review too late. Remember the Muslim inmate filed 10 DAYS before his execution.

In the Buddhist case Kavanaugh wrote: "Still, in Murphy’s case, Kavanaugh sided with the court’s liberal justices. His brief, concurring opinion highlighted both the appeal’s “sufficiently timely manner” as well as the court’s obligation to prevent “governmental discrimination against religion.” Even though the Buddhist filed 2 DAYS before his execution.

See the glaring hypocrisy there yet?
Click to expand...

You seem to be describing a problem quite different from that mentioned in/by the OP:

Disgusting ruling by partisan hacks on the scotus. Clearly this ruling shows the conservative bent of this bench is willing to exert it's ideological slant on everything it corrupts with a ruling.

This is blatantly unconstitutional and these justices are disgusting.
Click to expand...
 
Why doesnt one of the prison guards (or better yet, the executioner) just dress up as a priest/iman/rabbi/magus to placate the death row inmates? I doubt they could tell the difference.
 
Harshaw said:
You seem to be describing a problem quite different from that mentioned in/by the OP:
Click to expand...

Maybe so, I'm just going by the article. I don't know where the OP is coming from but there is a clear confliction of rulings between the two in the article and it does appear there is biasness from Kavanaugh against the Muslim inmate's situation offhand.
 
Praxas said:
Maybe so, I'm just going by the article. I don't know where the OP is coming from but there is a clear confliction of rulings between the two in the article and it does appear there is biasness from Kavanaugh against the Muslim inmate's situation offhand.
Click to expand...

If that's the way you want to read it, you will. :shrug:
 
Obscurity said:
Civil rights experts question Supreme Court execution rulings - Religion News Service

Disgusting ruling by partisan hacks on the scotus. Clearly this ruling shows the conservative bent of this bench is willing to exert it's ideological slant on everything it corrupts with a ruling.

This is blatantly unconstitutional and these justices are disgusting.
Click to expand...

Complete misrepresentation of the ruling.


It had nothing to do with his being a muslim.

A prison official responded that only prison employees are allowed in the execution chamber, “which precludes Mr. Murphy’s spiritual adviser from being present.”

Texas officials said the state’s policy was based on security considerations. An untrained visitor to the execution chamber, they wrote, could succumb to “irrational and uncontrollable behavior or fainting” or start “pulling intravenous lines out of the inmate, taunting witnesses observing on behalf of the victim, causing disruption within the execution chamber or attempting to gain access to the execution team.”


In the Alabama case, Dunn v. Ray, the majority, in an unsigned opinion, said that the inmate, Domineque Ray, had waited too long to object.


Supreme Court Stays Execution of Buddhist Inmate - The New York Times
 
Grokmaster said:
Complete misrepresentation of the ruling.


It had nothing to do with his being a muslim.

A prison official responded that only prison employees are allowed in the execution chamber, “which precludes Mr. Murphy’s spiritual adviser from being present.”

Texas officials said the state’s policy was based on security considerations. An untrained visitor to the execution chamber, they wrote, could succumb to “irrational and uncontrollable behavior or fainting” or start “pulling intravenous lines out of the inmate, taunting witnesses observing on behalf of the victim, causing disruption within the execution chamber or attempting to gain access to the execution team.”


In the Alabama case, Dunn v. Ray, the majority, in an unsigned opinion, said that the inmate, Domineque Ray, had waited too long to object.


Supreme Court Stays Execution of Buddhist Inmate - The New York Times
Click to expand...

Allow the Imam.

End of story.
 
PoS said:
Why doesnt one of the prison guards (or better yet, the executioner) just dress up as a priest/iman/rabbi/magus to placate the death row inmates? I doubt they could tell the difference.
Click to expand...

Even if he could tell the difference, its not like the convict would be upset about it for long. :shrug:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom