Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

The Power of the SCOTUS VIII - I am certiorari we'll be arguing until Thanksgiving

Collapse
This topic is closed.
X
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Re: The Power of the SCOTUS VIII - I am certiorari we'll be arguing until Thanksgivin

    Originally posted by Bob Gray View Post
    Same thing if God condemns pedophilia or incest. This is easy to flip around.
    **NOTE: The misleading post above was brought to you by Reynold's Wrap and American Steeples, makers of Crosses.

    Originally Posted by dropthatpuck-Scooby's a lost cause.
    Originally Posted by First Time, Long Time-Always knew you were nothing but a troll.

    Comment


    • Re: The Power of the SCOTUS VIII - I am certiorari we'll be arguing until Thanksgivin

      Originally posted by Bob Gray View Post
      Same thing if God condemns pedophilia or incest. This is easy to flip around.
      No, your example is only too flawed as it deals with potentially causing harm of another person. Children are subject of special laws to that they're protected because they don't always know what can or cannot harm them. Most incest, I would think, is not full grown adult children with parents or siblings, it's an older family member preying on an underage one, usually getting the Daily Double of pedophila and incest all in one nut.
      "The party told you to reject the evidence of your eyes and ears. It was their final, most essential command." George Orwell, 1984

      "One does not simply walk into Mordor. Its Black Gates are guarded by more than just Orcs. There is evil there that does not sleep, and the Great Eye is ever watchful. It is a barren wasteland, riddled with fire and ash and dust, the very air you breathe is a poisonous fume." Boromir

      "Good news! We have a delivery." Professor Farnsworth

      Comment


      • Re: The Power of the SCOTUS VIII - I am certiorari we'll be arguing until Thanksgivin

        Originally posted by joecct View Post
        I am saying that your view may not be the view of the Almighty. While I am not the Supreme Judge, He is. To presume to make God's opinion conform to our perception is presunptious on our part.

        As everything for God is the present, His rules have never changed. What has changed is our interpretation, however imperfect, of His rules.
        About 2015 years ago they seemed to have changed a lot, if you believe the New Testament trumps the Old Testament. Otherwise Christians wouldn't wear polyblend clothing or eat shellfish.
        "The party told you to reject the evidence of your eyes and ears. It was their final, most essential command." George Orwell, 1984

        "One does not simply walk into Mordor. Its Black Gates are guarded by more than just Orcs. There is evil there that does not sleep, and the Great Eye is ever watchful. It is a barren wasteland, riddled with fire and ash and dust, the very air you breathe is a poisonous fume." Boromir

        "Good news! We have a delivery." Professor Farnsworth

        Comment


        • Originally posted by St. Clown View Post
          About 2015 years ago they seemed to have changed a lot, if you believe the New Testament trumps the Old Testament. Otherwise Christians wouldn't wear polyblend clothing or eat shellfish.
          If it trumped, then we would not have the OT at all. Read what I wrote again.
          CCT '77 & '78
          4 kids
          5 grandsons (BCA 7/09, CJA 5/14, JDL 8/14, JFL 6/16, PJL 7/18)
          1 granddaughter (EML 4/18)

          ”Any society that would give up a little liberty to gain a little security will deserve neither and lose both.”
          - Benjamin Franklin

          Banned from the St. Lawrence University Facebook page - March 2016 (But I got better).

          I want to live forever. So far, so good.

          Comment


          • Re: The Power of the SCOTUS VIII - I am certiorari we'll be arguing until Thanksgivin

            Originally posted by joecct View Post
            As everything for God is the present, His rules have never changed. What has changed is our interpretation, however imperfect, of His rules.
            In that case all we can do is our best interpretation at any given time. The final tally will comes soon enough for us all. The interpretation people are moving towards is that gay/straight is as equal as white/black or male/female.
            Cornell University
            National Champion 1967, 1970
            ECAC Champion 1967, 1968, 1969, 1970, 1973, 1980, 1986, 1996, 1997, 2003, 2005, 2010
            Ivy League Champion 1966, 1967, 1968, 1969, 1970, 1971, 1972, 1973, 1977, 1978, 1983, 1984, 1985, 1996, 1997, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2012, 2014, 2018, 2019, 2020

            Comment


            • Re: The Power of the SCOTUS VIII - I am certiorari we'll be arguing until Thanksgivin

              Originally posted by St. Clown View Post
              No, your example is only too flawed as it deals with potentially causing harm of another person. Children are subject of special laws to that they're protected because they don't always know what can or cannot harm them. Most incest, I would think, is not full grown adult children with parents or siblings, it's an older family member preying on an underage one, usually getting the Daily Double of pedophila and incest all in one nut.
              As usual, you miss my point. I'm starting to wonder if you ever understand as I seem to go through this with you all too regularly.
              Originally posted by Priceless
              Good to see you're so reasonable.
              Originally posted by ScoobyDoo
              Very well, said.
              Originally posted by Rover
              A fair assessment Bob.

              Comment


              • Re: The Power of the SCOTUS VIII - I am certiorari we'll be arguing until Thanksgivin

                Originally posted by joecct View Post
                I am saying that your view may not be the view of the Almighty. While I am not the Supreme Judge, He is. To presume to make God's opinion conform to our perception is presunptious on our part.

                As everything for God is the present, His rules have never changed. What has changed is our interpretation, however imperfect, of His rules.
                And really, a lot of folks aren't even interested in what God is saying, they just want to remake God in whatever fashion makes them feel comfortable. That's rubbish. Then there are people who really honest to goodness try to understand what God is saying and come to honestly held differences. I can respect that a lot more, but such is becoming more scarce.
                Originally posted by Priceless
                Good to see you're so reasonable.
                Originally posted by ScoobyDoo
                Very well, said.
                Originally posted by Rover
                A fair assessment Bob.

                Comment


                • Re: The Power of the SCOTUS VIII - I am certiorari we'll be arguing until Thanksgivin

                  Originally posted by Bob Gray View Post
                  As usual, you miss my point. I'm starting to wonder if you ever understand as I seem to go through this with you all too regularly.
                  You seem to have that problem with a lot of people, Bob. Perhaps you should point that finger at a mirror instead.
                  "The party told you to reject the evidence of your eyes and ears. It was their final, most essential command." George Orwell, 1984

                  "One does not simply walk into Mordor. Its Black Gates are guarded by more than just Orcs. There is evil there that does not sleep, and the Great Eye is ever watchful. It is a barren wasteland, riddled with fire and ash and dust, the very air you breathe is a poisonous fume." Boromir

                  "Good news! We have a delivery." Professor Farnsworth

                  Comment


                  • Re: The Power of the SCOTUS VIII - I am certiorari we'll be arguing until Thanksgivin

                    Originally posted by joecct View Post
                    If it trumped, then we would not have the OT at all. Read what I wrote again.
                    I heard somewhere the Book of Mormon trumped both the Old and New Testament.
                    **NOTE: The misleading post above was brought to you by Reynold's Wrap and American Steeples, makers of Crosses.

                    Originally Posted by dropthatpuck-Scooby's a lost cause.
                    Originally Posted by First Time, Long Time-Always knew you were nothing but a troll.

                    Comment


                    • Re: The Power of the SCOTUS VIII - I am certiorari we'll be arguing until Thanksgivin

                      Back to FF's 9:43 post.

                      If one side of the Constitutional triangle starts to exert too much power, how do you reign it in?

                      While the Founders intended for 3 equal branches of government, were they OK if the Congress got too big for its britches as they are closest to the people?
                      CCT '77 & '78
                      4 kids
                      5 grandsons (BCA 7/09, CJA 5/14, JDL 8/14, JFL 6/16, PJL 7/18)
                      1 granddaughter (EML 4/18)

                      ”Any society that would give up a little liberty to gain a little security will deserve neither and lose both.”
                      - Benjamin Franklin

                      Banned from the St. Lawrence University Facebook page - March 2016 (But I got better).

                      I want to live forever. So far, so good.

                      Comment


                      • Re: The Power of the SCOTUS VIII - I am certiorari we'll be arguing until Thanksgivin

                        Originally posted by Bob Gray View Post
                        As usual, you miss my point. I'm starting to wonder if you ever understand as I seem to go through this with you all too regularly.
                        We all seem to be missing your point on this one. Perhaps you would consider restating it? This is not a knock -- it usually takes me three or four tries to make something I consider to be clear as day comprehensible to other people.
                        Cornell University
                        National Champion 1967, 1970
                        ECAC Champion 1967, 1968, 1969, 1970, 1973, 1980, 1986, 1996, 1997, 2003, 2005, 2010
                        Ivy League Champion 1966, 1967, 1968, 1969, 1970, 1971, 1972, 1973, 1977, 1978, 1983, 1984, 1985, 1996, 1997, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2012, 2014, 2018, 2019, 2020

                        Comment


                        • Re: The Power of the SCOTUS VIII - I am certiorari we'll be arguing until Thanksgivin

                          Originally posted by joecct View Post
                          I am saying that your view may not be the view of the Almighty. While I am not the Supreme Judge, He is. To presume to make God's opinion conform to our perception is presunptious on our part.

                          As everything for God is the present, His rules have never changed. What has changed is our interpretation, however imperfect, of His rules.
                          I still don't understand for SSM, which harms nobody, cost nobody else any money, and treats more people equally- how that is something that you need project religious judgement on vs. just letting people get married and judged when the time comes.

                          You posted your measure of worry a while ago, which SSM meets, yet you don't think it should happen. What's up with that?

                          And in this particular instance, when given a government who is legally bound to NOT recognize a religion, you seem to think that a person in the government should be legally allowed to recognize a religion on behalf of the government. If her church does not marry same sex couples, or she will not marry another woman- fine. But to force that belief onto the government when it's been decided that it's ok?

                          Comment


                          • Re: The Power of the SCOTUS VIII - I am certiorari we'll be arguing until Thanksgivin

                            Originally posted by joecct View Post
                            If it trumped, then we would not have the OT at all. Read what I wrote again.
                            Are there not parts of the OT that the NT made completely useless? Do Christians provide burnt offerrings? Are there bans on fabrics and fish as proscribed in the OT? Things have changed, perhaps not all of them but certainly some of them.
                            "The party told you to reject the evidence of your eyes and ears. It was their final, most essential command." George Orwell, 1984

                            "One does not simply walk into Mordor. Its Black Gates are guarded by more than just Orcs. There is evil there that does not sleep, and the Great Eye is ever watchful. It is a barren wasteland, riddled with fire and ash and dust, the very air you breathe is a poisonous fume." Boromir

                            "Good news! We have a delivery." Professor Farnsworth

                            Comment


                            • Re: The Power of the SCOTUS VIII - I am certiorari we'll be arguing until Thanksgivin

                              Originally posted by joecct View Post
                              Back to FF's 9:43 post.

                              If one side of the Constitutional triangle starts to exert too much power, how do you reign it in?

                              While the Founders intended for 3 equal branches of government, were they OK if the Congress got too big for its britches as they are closest to the people?
                              You're assuming the Court has gotten too big for it's britches? Last I saw we have 3 equal branches and the checks and balances are working fine. It's only folks on the extreme right who thinks the Courts have gone insane and it's their own nominees to the Court who are giving the rulings. Just imagine if the Court were actually Left Leaning? You'd probably have a coronary.
                              **NOTE: The misleading post above was brought to you by Reynold's Wrap and American Steeples, makers of Crosses.

                              Originally Posted by dropthatpuck-Scooby's a lost cause.
                              Originally Posted by First Time, Long Time-Always knew you were nothing but a troll.

                              Comment


                              • Re: The Power of the SCOTUS VIII - I am certiorari we'll be arguing until Thanksgivin

                                Originally posted by joecct View Post
                                Back to FF's 9:43 post.

                                If one side of the Constitutional triangle starts to exert too much power, how do you reign it in?

                                While the Founders intended for 3 equal branches of government, were they OK if the Congress got too big for its britches as they are closest to the people?
                                The rights of the individual trumps the will of the masses. We are a Republic afterall.

                                You see the legislative branch putting your will onto other people as ok, but if that will is against their rights, then it's its up to the court branch to stop that. That's the point of the court.

                                I'm know that gun rights people have anurisms every time any gun legislation is brought to the floor, even if there are a majority of support.

                                The SCOTUS *should* have intervened when people of Japanese ancestry were put into camps. They intervened with the Jim Crow laws when the legislation branch thought it was ok to have separate but equal, as it was neither, in actual practice.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X