If a Conservative Reaches High Court, say goodbye to Bill of Rights

[alienken]

Anyone trying to make a case to justify renditions, and what we are doing to prisoners during interrogation at GITMO and Abu Ghraib, is lower than garbage in my book.

Then call me trash, I don't care. It just proves how you bleeding heart liberals are- decide everything using pure emotion and call names like children when people disagrees with you.

 

[alienken]

I think they are.

Excerpts from Bill of Rights (which is in the Constitution):
Amendment I
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or
prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or
of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition
the Government for a redress of grievances.

Amendment IV
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

OK where does it say in Amendment I that the Ten Commandments can not be displayed at a courthouse. A judge read into this that a Ten Commandment monument should be removed.It says CONGRESS(congress makes laws not judges) shall make NO law respecting establishment of religion or prohibiting the FREE EXORCISE thereof(ordering the removal of the Ten Commandments IS limiting free exorcise) The TEN Commandments represent at least 3 major U.S. religions.
Amendment IV protects us from law enforcement. There is no right to privacy here that protects gay sex(though I think it should be legal but that is for congress to change the law not judges.) It's always the liberal judges who are activist, not conservative judges.

 

[RightinNYC]

I think they are.

Excerpts from Bill of Rights (which is in the Constitution):
Amendment I
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or
prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or
of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition
the Government for a redress of grievances.

Amendment IV
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

Actually, no they're not. Do you even understand the amendments you posted?

The first amendment was created to offer protection to religion from the state, not the other way around. Nowhere in the first amendment does it mandate the separation of church and state, but only the absence of a mandated, established one. Effectively, the amendment is saying that there can be any religions, as intertwined in the government as they want to be, as long as no one specific religion is established as a state religion.

And the right to privacy? First off, I think the original poster was referring to the challenges to Roberts record on abortion, which was mistakenly tied to the right to privacy in the 70's. The fact that roberts has given no sign that he'd try to overturn roe is irrelevant. And even so, the right to remain secure in your houses/person/papers etc does not necessarily translate into a right to privacy. See the thousands of cameras that watch us each day, bag checks on the subway, security at airports, etc.

 

[Billo_Really]

Originally posted by alienken
1).If you think prisoners of war should have access to our courts, think about the mess that would make. The enemy has a platform for spreading there propaganda and our military would always get dumped on because the one thing defense lawyers do is make the defendant look like a victim.Do you really mean- everyone deserves due process? EVERYONE?! The only thing a terrorist deserves is a bullet in the head.2). Yes we do follow GC even though it does not apply because that is the kind of country we are.There is no torture being done in Gitmo and there wasn't any in Abu Ghraib.

Everyone, means everyone, you bad American. In this country, you are not guilty by accusation. Treating someone like they are a terrorist, before proving they are, is not justice being served. If you can't see what we are doing at those to places is torture, then pull your head out of your ass.

Originally posted by alienken
Then call me trash, I don't care. It just proves how you bleeding heart liberals are- decide everything using pure emotion and call names like children when people disagrees with you.

When did I call you any names?

Originally posted by alienken
OK where does it say in Amendment I that the Ten Commandments can not be displayed at a courthouse. A judge read into this that a Ten Commandment monument should be removed.It says CONGRESS(congress makes laws not judges) shall make NO law respecting establishment of religion or prohibiting the FREE EXORCISE thereof(ordering the removal of the Ten Commandments IS limiting free exorcise) The TEN Commandments represent at least 3 major U.S. religions.

Why do you mention the Ten Commandments when you don't follow them yourself. I'll say this, I don't want my tax dollars being wasted on issues such as these. This is a non-issue for me. There are many more important things for government to do than waste my money on religous bullshit! Religion has no place in government. As shown during the Spanish Inquisition.

 

[alienken]

Everyone, means everyone, you bad American. In this country, you are not guilty by accusation. Treating someone like they are a terrorist, before proving they are, is not justice being served. If you can't see what we are doing at those to places is torture, then pull your head out of your ass.

When did I call you any names?

Why do you mention the Ten Commandments when you don't follow them yourself. I'll say this, I don't want my tax dollars being wasted on issues such as these. This is a non-issue for me. There are many more important things for government to do than waste my money on religous bullshit! Religion has no place in government. As shown during the Spanish Inquisition.

1).Why do you think we have to prove that the prisoners in Gitmo are terrorist.These people were captured in the field of battle.Do you know what that MEANS? People that try to kill us or our military are the enemy.Firing at our people they are caught red handed.You can't prove that a prisoner of war is the enemy in a court of law.2).Why do you say I don't fallow the Ten Commandments, you don't even know me.3). Describe what torture your talking about.Name one torture session.4).religon has had a place in our gov. since day one you people just haven't noticed until the P.C. crowd starting getting their delicat little feelings hurt and went whinning to the scummy lawers.

 

[alienken]

Everyone, means everyone, you bad American. In this country, you are not guilty by accusation. Treating someone like they are a terrorist, before proving they are, is not justice being served. If you can't see what we are doing at those to places is torture, then pull your head out of your ass.

When did I call you any names?

Why do you mention the Ten Commandments when you don't follow them yourself. I'll say this, I don't want my tax dollars being wasted on issues such as these. This is a non-issue for me. There are many more important things for government to do than waste my money on religous bullshit! Religion has no place in government. As shown during the Spanish Inquisition.

1).Why do you think we have to prove that the prisoners in Gitmo are terrorist.These people were captured in the field of battle.Do you know what that MEANS? People that try to kill us or our military are the enemy.Firing at our people they are caught red handed.You can't prove that a prisoner of war is the enemy in a court of law.2).Why do you say I don't fallow the Ten Commandments, you don't even know me.3). Describe what torture your talking about.Name one torture session.4).religion has had a place in our gov. since day one you people just haven't noticed until the P.C. crowd starting getting their delicat little feelings hurt and went whining to the scummy lawyers.

 

[JOHNYJ]

The Majority of thye Justices are Center Right . You have what is generaly considered a CONSERVATIVE court. Justice Roberts makes no diference.

 

[Billo_Really]

Originally posted by alienken
1).Why do you think we have to prove that the prisoners in Gitmo are terrorist.These people were captured in the field of battle.Do you know what that MEANS?

Yeah, their prisoners of war that should be treated according to the rules of the Geneva Convention.

Originally posted by alienken
People that try to kill us or our military are the enemy.Firing at our people they are caught red handed.You can't prove that a prisoner of war is the enemy [combatant] in a court of law.

Would you agree without my addition to your statement?

Originally posted by alienken
2).Why do you say I don't fallow the Ten Commandments, you don't even know me.

Your right, I don't know what you "fallow". Whatever it is, it is not the Ten Commandments.

Originally posted by alienken
3). Describe what torture your talking about.Name one torture session.

Torture as defined by the Geneva Conventions or by Attorney General Gonzales?

Originally posted by alienken
4).religon has had a place in our gov. since day one

...and on day two, the Lord created...

Originally posted by alienken
...you people...

...and on the third day HE rested. But there was problems with day two. HE...

Originally posted by alienken
just haven't noticed until the P.C. crowd starting getting their delicat little feelings hurt and went whinning to the scummy lawers

What's a "delicat?" Does it come with a salad?

 

[AK_Conservative]

i find this amazing.. A lot of you dont really understand the Supreme court, though i dont either BUT i do know this. No matter the political view, conservative or liberal, to interpret the constitution is unbiased. Now i know in some situations, it is but how often do ytou see that? The constitution is a very easy document and whatever is stated is spitted out pretty clearly (read a similar exposistion to the constitution). Now Billo, to say what you said in your first post is down right ignorant, imho.

Let me take an example of how hypacritical a typical liberal is! In anywhere in the constitution, Does it CLEARLY state that the woman has the right to her body and can have an abortion if she wants? NO. What about this. Does it clearly state in the constitution that citizen shall have the right to bear arms? YES, second amendment, which is in the bill of rights! Yet a lot (proably majority, not too sure) of liberals are pro-choice yet anti-gun (in any shape or form)!

You say, Billo, that conservatives are out to take away our bill of rights.. Isnt the liberal ideology doing that here in this example? Ill let you decide the answer! Simple yes or no answer.. no explanation needed for a no answer b/c i know your arguement will be 100% completely false! If you say Yes, than i know i got my point across to you! Think about both side of the party before you speak! :donkeyfla

 

[Columbusite]

i find this amazing.. A lot of you dont really understand the Supreme court, though i dont either BUT i do know this. No matter the political view, conservative or liberal, to interpret the constitution is unbiased. Now i know in some situations, it is but how often do ytou see that? The constitution is a very easy document and whatever is stated is spitted out pretty clearly (read a similar exposistion to the constitution). Now Billo, to say what you said in your first post is down right ignorant, imho.

Let me take an example of how hypacritical a typical liberal is! In anywhere in the constitution, Does it CLEARLY state that the woman has the right to her body and can have an abortion if she wants? NO. What about this. Does it clearly state in the constitution that citizen shall have the right to bear arms? YES, second amendment, which is in the bill of rights! Yet a lot (proably majority, not too sure) of liberals are pro-choice yet anti-gun (in any shape or form)!

You say, Billo, that conservatives are out to take away our bill of rights.. Isnt the liberal ideology doing that here in this example? Ill let you decide the answer! Simple yes or no answer.. no explanation needed for a no answer b/c i know your arguement will be 100% completely false! If you say Yes, than i know i got my point across to you! Think about both side of the party before you speak! :donkeyfla

Just for the record, I support both the 2nd amendment and a right to abortion. No, that one isn't specifically mentioned in the Constitution, but then the purpose of the Constitution is not to list all the rights of the people
on what they can/can't do. Oh yeah, I would describe myself as "liberal".

 

[Billo_Really]

Originally posted by AK_Conservative:
i find this amazing.. A lot of you dont really understand the Supreme court, though i dont either BUT i do know this. No matter the political view, conservative or liberal, to interpret the constitution is unbiased. Now i know in some situations, it is but how often do ytou see that? The constitution is a very easy document and whatever is stated is spitted out pretty clearly (read a similar exposistion to the constitution). Now Billo, to say what you said in your first post is down right ignorant, imho.

Let me take an example of how hypacritical a typical liberal is! In anywhere in the constitution, Does it CLEARLY state that the woman has the right to her body and can have an abortion if she wants? NO. What about this. Does it clearly state in the constitution that citizen shall have the right to bear arms? YES, second amendment, which is in the bill of rights! Yet a lot (proably majority, not too sure) of liberals are pro-choice yet anti-gun (in any shape or form)!

You say, Billo, that conservatives are out to take away our bill of rights.. Isnt the liberal ideology doing that here in this example? Ill let you decide the answer! Simple yes or no answer.. no explanation needed for a no answer b/c i know your arguement will be 100% completely false! If you say Yes, than i know i got my point across to you! Think about both side of the party before you speak!

I have no opinion on abortion one way or the other. I don't have babies. It's not my call. Not my dance.

 

[AK_Conservative]

I have no opinion on abortion one way or the other. I don't have babies. It's not my call. Not my dance.

Just for the record, I support both the 2nd amendment and a right to abortion. No, that one isn't specifically mentioned in the Constitution, but then the purpose of the Constitution is not to list all the rights of the people
on what they can/can't do. Oh yeah, I would describe myself as "liberal".

Good for you! especially Columbusite! It is good to not see contridicting arguements withing one person! :cheers:

 

[Billo_Really]

Originally posted by AK_Conservative:
Good for you! especially Columbusite! It is good to not see contridicting arguements withing one person

I'm not sure what your saying here.

 

[aquapub]

Actually, say hello to non-hallucinogenic interpretations of the Constitution. There will be no more mythical privacy rights, there will be intelligent interpretations of the Second Amendment, and we will have a system that at least vaguely resembles what the Founding Fathers intended.

 

[Vader]

It doesn't take a rocket scientist to see that extreme right conservatives are anti-American. They practice, on a daily basis: censorship, restrictions of personal liberties and freedom of speech, slander, condoning torture, justifying illegal aggression on sovereign nations, blind faith in their leaders and the immoral act of forcing their religion on others at tax payers expense. And they are without a doubt, the biggest hypocrits on the planet.

If they get a judicial seat on the high court, you can say good-bye to life as you know it. It has already started with passage of the Patriot Act, electronic voting, and the un-ending state of fear they keep this country in with lies, half-truths and character assasinations. They refuse to listen to anyone with a different view. Check out various "conservative only" message boards on the internet. There is not a lot of mental health in these clubs. Its like a guy that hangs with buddies that don't know any girls, and then he complains that he can't get a date. Conservatives just want to be with there own kind, and lose the ability to communicate with others. Which is in part, contributing to Americas low standard around the world.

Not all are so anti-American. But enough of them are in government now that it is affecting what this country was founded on. If a extreme conservative reaches the High Court, the nail in the coffin of liberty will be driven in for years to come.

Billo,

I am a Libertarian and I don't believe most of that. While I agree that ultra rightists don't care if the poor live or die, I do not believe that they force religion on anybody nor do I believe they are overly aggressive with foreigners.

As far as Roberts goes, I agree that he isn't fit to sit on the Supreme Court. In my view, this is because Mr. Roberts is so far right he's almost left. Mr. Roberts is a federalist. Our country had two federalist presidents, George Washington and John Adams. There hasn't been an openly federalist president since John Adams left office in 1801. There is a reason for this; federalists were openly despised by the people because they made laws that nobody liked.

As such, we cannot allow a federalist to sit on the Supreme Court; much less be Chief Justice. The Supreme Court has already stolen liberty from us once this year and we cannot afford to allow that to happen again.

Benjamin Franklin often spoke of the liberty granted to Americans by the constitution; saying that liberty is precious and that the government must never be allowed to take it away. Ben Franklin was correct.

The liberty we have comes from the United States Constitution and the Constitution is a contract, which is and was signed in and paid for by the blood of every man and woman who died to bring us freedom or in the great cause of keeping freedom alive.

If we allow people like Mr. Robertson to unduly influence the Supreme Court, we are giving away the liberty for which so many Americans have fought and died to provide and protect.

As Americans, we simply cannot allow this to happen. Liberty must come first, and must remain first, in all legal and political issues. If we fail in this ideal, and allow liberty to be forgotten, even if only for a second, we fail to remain a free country and we shame our forefathers and the great sacrifices they made to provide us with liberty and freedom from tyranny and oppression.

I was born free and I intend to die free.

GOD BLESS AMERICA

:ind:


- Vader



:memorial_

 

[Billo_Really]

Originally posted by Vader:
I am a Libertarian and I don't believe most of that. While I agree that ultra rightists don't care if the poor live or die, I do not believe that they force religion on anybody nor do I believe they are overly aggressive with foreigners.

As far as Roberts goes, I agree that he isn't fit to sit on the Supreme Court. In my view, this is because Mr. Roberts is so far right he's almost left. Mr. Roberts is a federalist. Our country had two federalist presidents, George Washington and John Adams. There hasn't been an openly federalist president since John Adams left office in 1801. There is a reason for this; federalists were openly despised by the people because they made laws that nobody liked.

As such, we cannot allow a federalist to sit on the Supreme Court; much less be Chief Justice. The Supreme Court has already stolen liberty from us once this year and we cannot afford to allow that to happen again.

Benjamin Franklin often spoke of the liberty granted to Americans by the constitution; saying that liberty is precious and that the government must never be allowed to take it away. Ben Franklin was correct.

The liberty we have comes from the United States Constitution and the Constitution is a contract, which is and was signed in and paid for by the blood of every man and woman who died to bring us freedom or in the great cause of keeping freedom alive.

If we allow people like Mr. Robertson to unduly influence the Supreme Court, we are giving away the liberty for which so many Americans have fought and died to provide and protect.

As Americans, we simply cannot allow this to happen. Liberty must come first, and must remain first, in all legal and political issues. If we fail in this ideal, and allow liberty to be forgotten, even if only for a second, we fail to remain a free country and we shame our forefathers and the great sacrifices they made to provide us with liberty and freedom from tyranny and oppression.

I was born free and I intend to die free.

GOD BLESS AMERICA

That was a very good post. This country needs more voters such as yourself.

I personnally think we started going down hill when they gave corporations the same rights as a living, breathing, human being.

 

[AK_Conservative]

I'm not sure what your saying here.

Bah ok maybe i didnt explain it well enough for everyone! Coinsiding with my previous posts, I am glad to see that you dont have a contridicting view with the right to abortion and the right to bear arms! Saying that it is a womans RIGHT to have an abortion (which is not stated in the constitution) and condoning the second amendment, which is part of the constitution. You supporting the second amendment and your opinion on this thread on the Supreme court justice nominee, there is no contridiction! If you said you did not in fact support the second amendment (which i run in too much more often than not from the left wing), your first post would be contridicting and invalid! That is why i threw the respect out to you? Does that help any? Kinda seams a bit confusing!