What's new
By:
USCHO Fan Forum

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

  • The USCHO Fan Forum has migrated to a new plaform, xenForo. Most of the function of the forum should work in familiar ways. Please note that you can switch between light and dark modes by clicking on the gear icon in the upper right of the main menu bar. We are hoping that this new platform will prove to be faster and more reliable. Please feel free to explore its features.

The Power of the SCOTUS Part VI - Roberts rules disorder

Status
Not open for further replies.
Re: The Power of the SCOTUS Part VI - Roberts rules disorder

joecct said:
Not this forum's usual read, but a discussion on Indiana's Religious Freedom Statute.
Click to expand...

AR pushing one through right now, soon to be followed by the rest of the homophobe herd. The old "protection of marriage" in new bottles.

Should be fun when Oh God You're Not the Ones We Meant start brandishing it.

Also: the victimized tone of that AmCon article is all too typical of what passes for conservative "thought" these days. To find it convincing, you must already be on board. As to the merits, it's just a dogmatic hodgepodge dressed up to resemble self-reflection. That's not an insult -- all apologetics is written backwards from the conclusion to the ostensible rationale -- but be clear that is not "discussion." It is assertion, not thought.

Another thing to bear in mind.
 
Last edited:
Re: The Power of the SCOTUS Part VI - Roberts rules disorder

No offense, but it goes to prove what I always say, which is this is what happens when you elect Republicans. Pence could probably do without this law personally, but once the nutters get in they start forcing divisive social issue legislation every time. So, the next time your friendly GOP rep starts talking about how if they get into power they'll focus on the economy, don't believe them.
 
Re: The Power of the SCOTUS Part VI - Roberts rules disorder

joecct said:
Not this forum's usual read, but a discussion on Indiana's Religious Freedom Statute.
Click to expand...

Kepler said:
Should be fun when Oh God You're Not the Ones We Meant start brandishing it.
Click to expand...

I was thinking the same thing. Wonder what will happen when someone is denied anything since they don't follow sharia law. That should be fun.

Theoretically, this can let someone deny service for not wearing a burga.

Betcha they didn't think of that.

FWIW, the Indiana Star has the full text of the law- http://www.indystar.com/story/news/politics/2015/03/27/text-indianas-religious-freedom-law/70539772/

It allows ANYONE under ANY religion to use the protection.
 
Last edited:
Re: The Power of the SCOTUS Part VI - Roberts rules disorder

Kepler said:
Should be fun when Oh God You're Not the Ones We Meant start brandishing it.
Click to expand...
Which, given all the stuff Dems have pushed over the years with all sorts of unintended fallout (though often not that surprising for people who pay attention), isn't something you should mind one bit. Just par for the course.
 
Re: The Power of the SCOTUS Part VI - Roberts rules disorder

Bob Gray said:
Which, given all the stuff Dems have pushed over the years with all sorts of unintended fallout (though often not that surprising for people who pay attention), isn't something you should mind one bit. Just par for the course.
Click to expand...
Not mind? He (and many others of us) are looking forward to it!
 
Re: The Power of the SCOTUS Part VI - Roberts rules disorder

Bob Gray said:
Which, given all the stuff Dems have pushed over the years with all sorts of unintended fallout (though often not that surprising for people who pay attention), isn't something you should mind one bit. Just par for the course.
Click to expand...

Examples? I'm not doubting it, but I'd like to know what you had in mind.

The worst Unintended Consequences project we backed was rural electrification. It's be a simpler world if the herpa-derps were still* in their outhouses with no ISP. :p

(* they sure wouldn't have figured it out on their own.)
 
Re: The Power of the SCOTUS Part VI - Roberts rules disorder

Kepler said:
Examples? I'm not doubting it, but I'd like to know what you had in mind.

The worst Unintended Consequences project we backed was rural electrification. It's be a simpler world if the herpa-derps were still* in their outhouses with no ISP. :p

(* they sure wouldn't have figured it out on their own.)
Click to expand...

Damm government overreach. Should have let those rugged individuals pull themselves up by the bootstraps.
 
Re: The Power of the SCOTUS Part VI - Roberts rules disorder

alfablue said:
I was thinking the same thing. Wonder what will happen when someone is denied anything since they don't follow sharia law. That should be fun.

Theoretically, this can let someone deny service for not wearing a burga.

Betcha they didn't think of that.

FWIW, the Indiana Star has the full text of the law- http://www.indystar.com/story/news/politics/2015/03/27/text-indianas-religious-freedom-law/70539772/

It allows ANYONE under ANY religion to use the protection.
Click to expand...

The Church of Cannabis is going to be great.
 
Re: The Power of the SCOTUS Part VI - Roberts rules disorder

Priceless said:
The Church of Cannabis is going to be great.
Click to expand...

What is funny (as in an odd way) the example (and I make that singular) that all news uses is for gay marriage. As if it's the only thing that can and will happen.

But it allows for a religious exception to be anti-semetic. The whole gay marriage thing is two different Christian religions fighting each other. They can let the Shiites and Sunnis fight it out.

Any "For God" or even "For Mother Earth" refusal of service is in play all of a sudden.
 
Re: The Power of the SCOTUS Part VI - Roberts rules disorder

Priceless said:
The Church of Cannabis is going to be great.
Click to expand...

I assume a Church of Holy Prostitution will not be far behind. You can't stop them, it'd be a violation of their religious freedom. How about a Church of Underage Sex, or a Church of Animal Love (call them "Wisconsinists")?
 
Re: The Power of the SCOTUS Part VI - Roberts rules disorder

Kepler said:
I assume a Church of Holy Prostitution will not be far behind. You can't stop them, it'd be a violation of their religious freedom. How about a Church of Underage Sex, or a Church of Animal Love (call them "Wisconsinists")?
Click to expand...

I imagine after some staffer greenlit the Church of Cannabis the requirements to become a legal church in Indiana tightened significantly. Of course, that could also be grounds for a lawsuit. Why do Catholics get to be a church (and serve wine to their congregation) while other groups can't form a church?
 
Re: The Power of the SCOTUS Part VI - Roberts rules disorder

Priceless said:
I imagine after some staffer greenlit the Church of Cannabis the requirements to become a legal church in Indiana tightened significantly. Of course, that could also be grounds for a lawsuit. Why do Catholics get to be a church (and serve wine to their congregation) while other groups can't form a church?
Click to expand...

"A religion is a cult with a navy."
 
Re: The Power of the SCOTUS Part VI - Roberts rules disorder

Priceless said:
I imagine after some staffer greenlit the Church of Cannabis the requirements to become a legal church in Indiana tightened significantly. Of course, that could also be grounds for a lawsuit. Why do Catholics get to be a church (and serve wine to their congregation) while other groups can't form a church?
Click to expand...

According to the Church of Scientology, it's all up to the IRS's discretion.
 
Re: The Power of the SCOTUS Part VI - Roberts rules disorder

joecct said:
The FBI has some 'splainin to do.
Click to expand...

Jesus Christmas.

Of 28 examiners with the FBI Laboratory’s microscopic hair comparison unit, 26 overstated forensic matches in ways that favored prosecutors in more than 95 percent of the 268 trials reviewed so far, according to the National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers (NACDL) and the Innocence Project, which are assisting the government with the country’s largest post-conviction review of questioned forensic evidence.

The cases include those of 32 defendants sentenced to death. Of those, 14 have been executed or died in prison, the groups said under an agreement with the government to release results after the review of the first 200 convictions.
Click to expand...
I'm officially naive. I honestly thought that kind of stuff was limited to municipal police departments.
 
Re: The Power of the SCOTUS Part VI - Roberts rules disorder

This is going to make a lot of defense lawyers a lot of money
 
dxmnkd316 said:
This is going to make a lot of defense lawyers a lot of money
Click to expand...

Not really. I would venture that most of the affected people don't have a pot to pee into and can't afford the fees. However, the CIVIL suits for wrongful imprisonment could be spectacular.
 
Re: The Power of the SCOTUS Part VI - Roberts rules disorder

joecct said:
Not really. I would venture that most of the affected people don't have a pot to pee into and can't afford the fees. However, the CIVIL suits for wrongful imprisonment could be spectacular.
Click to expand...

I have a dumb question. I know that the guy wrongfully imprisoned can and does have standing to sue, and that sometimes immense civil awards are given. But what about the guys who were executed? Does the family have standing to sue, or are they outta luck?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top