Topic awaiting preservation: New Nomination to US Supreme Court (Page 1 of 5)

Many who are anti-abortion can see a light at the end of the tunnel with the confirmation of this nominee. I can only say many prayers may be answered. I have been praying for a reversal since 1973.



Alito would be fifth Catholic on Supreme Court

By Jerry Filteau
Catholic News Service

WASHINGTON (CNS) -- If Judge Samuel Alito Jr. is confirmed as a U.S. Supreme Court justice, it would be the first time in history that the majority of justices on the nation's highest court are Catholic.

President George W. Bush Oct. 31 nominated Alito, a former U.S. attorney in New Jersey and for the past 15 years a judge on the Philadelphia-based 3rd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals. He is widely regarded as a strong conservative on an appellate court that is considered among the most liberal in the country.

The 55-year-old judge is likely to face strong Democratic opposition because on the appellate court he opined that it was constitutional to require wives to notify their husbands before having an abortion. That opinion came as a minority dissent in Planned Parenthood vs. Casey, a landmark case contesting Pennsylvania's 1989 Abortion Control Act.

The Supreme Court in 1992 upheld most of the Pennsylvania law but agreed with the appeals court majority in striking down the spousal notification provision. In the Supreme Court's ruling the late Chief Justice William Rehnquist quoted Alito in his dissent against striking down the spousal notification portion of the law.

On the other hand, in 2000 Alito joined in a ruling striking down a New Jersey partial-birth abortion law as unconstitutional. In his concurring opinion he said Supreme Court precedents required a health exception for the mother to make the law constitutional.

In a case of church-state interest, Alito wrote the majority opinion of the appellate court in ACLU vs. Schundler, upholding a New Jersey city's holiday display that included a Nativity scene and menorah, on the grounds that it also displayed secular symbols including Frosty the Snowman.

In another religion-related case, he ruled in 1999 that the Newark, N.J., police department could not bar Muslim police officers from wearing beards for religious reasons, since the city permitted other officers to wear beards for medical reasons.

If confirmed, Alito would be the 11th Catholic in U.S. history to sit on the Supreme Court and would become the fifth Catholic justice on the current court, forming for the first time a majority of Catholics on the nine-member court.

Other Catholics currently on the nation's highest bench are recently appointed Chief Justice John Roberts and Justices Antonin Scalia, Anthony Kennedy and Clarence Thomas.

Past Catholics on the Supreme Court included two other chief justices, Roger Taney, 1836-64, and Edward White, a justice from 1894 to 1910 and chief justice, 1910-21. Other former Catholic justices were Joseph McKenna, Pierce Butler, Frank Murphy and William Brennan Jr.

Alito was named to take the place of Justice Sandra Day O'Connor, who last summer announced her plans to retire as soon as a successor is confirmed.

In his nomination speech Bush called Alito "one of the most accomplished and respected judges in America."

The nomination came just four days after White House counsel Harriet Miers, who had been nominated Oct. 3 to succeed O'Connor, withdrew her name under heavy fire from conservative groups who form the core of Bush's political support. They were concerned that she had no court track record to back administration claims that she would bring a conservative judicial philosophy to the bench.

Alito could face the opposite problem. Observers believe that if Democratic Senators judge him too conservative their shaky political agreement to avoid minority filibusters to block judicial appointments could break down.

The day before Alito's nomination Sen. Arlen Specter, R-Pa., chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, expressed fears of a filibuster by Democrats if they oppose a nominee's position on abortion. "The topic which dominates the discussion, as we all know, is a woman's right to choose," he said.

Alito was born April 1, 1950, in Trenton, N.J. His late father, Samuel Alito Sr., was an Italian immigrant. His mother, Rose, who turns 91 later this year, was a public school teacher.

After graduating from Princeton University, he attended Yale Law School, where he was editor of the Yale Law Journal and earned his law degree in 1976.

After a year clerking for U.S. 3rd Circuit Judge Leonard Garth, Alito spent four years as assistant U.S. attorney for the District of New Jersey. He went on to become assistant to the U.S. solicitor general in 1981, deputy assistant U.S. attorney general in 1985 and U.S. attorney for the District of New Jersey in 1987.

He was only 39 when he was appointed to the federal appeals court in 1990. Bush said that with 15 years on that court Alito "has more prior judicial experience than any Supreme Court nominee in more than 70 years."

Alito's wife, Martha, was a law librarian when they met. They have two children: a son, Philip, in college and a daughter, Laura, in high school.

I also support our new freedom destroying overlords.

Dan @ Code Town

It never ceases to amaze me the number of so-called 'good-xians' who are desperately hoping for a rturn to the day of back-alley abortionists and all the misery, pain and death that represents.

Fortunately though, it seems un-likely RvW will be reversed as even amogst the religious. there are many who support and recognize the need for abortion on demand.

If it was reversed, well the cross border traffic to Mexica and Canada would be impressive and finacially rewarding for both countries.

Never let your sense of morals get in the way of doing what's right.
Isaac Asimov
US science fiction novelist & scholar (1920 - 1992)

[Apparently] being one of the few here who lived through that era, I have to agree with you Diogenes.

quote:

---

It never ceases to amaze me the number of so-called 'good-xians' who are desperately hoping for a rturn to the day of back-alley abortionists and all the misery, pain and death that represents.

---

.



-- not necessarily stoned... just beautiful.

quote:

---

It never ceases to amaze me the number of so-called 'good-xians' who are desperately hoping for a rturn to the day of back-alley abortionists and all the misery, pain and death that represents.

---

Likewise it never ceases to amaze me on how the number of caring individuals allow unborn children to be slaughtered in the womb in the most painful way. Who is seeking relief here, the mother or the unborn child? The little one also feels, pain and misery in the womb. Back alley abortions are over-rated. The mother is seeking a quick fix to a problem they think they have. I don't feel sorry for them.

^^ Yep... the pinnacle of morality. What more can you say. Well actually a lot more. Here's just a bit.

One of this nominees rulings on the court of appeals but overturned by the 'Supreme' court was that a woman should be required to notify her spouse / father if she was going to have an abortion.

This mind-set doesn't, and others holding similar, don't seem to ever, take into consideration situations where such a statute/law, legitamizes abusive relationships.

Yes..certainly the woman, most usually the case, can but not always secure a restraining order and even if she does... well we all know how well 'those' work don't we.

"Well damn... I didn't think he'd kill her but thank the lord she didn't have an abortion... and thank you god for judge alito you answered our prayers.''

Yep... the pinnacle of morality alright.

(Edited by NoJive on 11-01-2005 21:16)

quote:

---

jade said:

quote: I don't feel sorry for them.

---

No... we know you don't and that truly is the saddest part of this whole thing.

quote:

---

I don't feel sorry for them.

---

That is the cornerstone of xianity, right there, folks!

Forget the message from God, from Jesus, from all the prophets, from all the saints. That little quote up there, that is xianity. If you don't believe what we do, then we don't give a damn about you. In fact, you deserve every bad thing that we and life can heap on you.

Thank you, Jade, for that very valuable insight.

I never bought into the "Lets sympathize with back alley abortions women will have to re-endure" idea that left wing feminism wants generated. I use to see both child and mother as victims in past times. . Now in these times with much education out there, I see the child as the sole victim of a murder. I belived it should be referred to as "back alley murders" where helpless infants are the victims. The mother can change her mind but the child is given no opportunity to do so. I do feel a sadness for the act one resorts to rather than take a responsibility. I am sorry for the one who can't take cover and run and is immobile when the harmful painful act is done.

quote:

---

That is the cornerstone of xianity, right there, folks!

---

Its typical for you to take my comment and run with it to prove your point about all Christians and they being hypocrites. You are true to form. Do you ever break out of your mold? I repeat I don't feel sorry for the persons who take an innocent life when given the opportunity to change their heart. We are to shake the dust from our sandles and pray for their souls when they have harden their hearts.

Before you start a victory celebration, jade you may want to consider this man's history in ruling on abortion cases. He is by no means predictable in exactly how he will rule regarding particular abortion cases. The following Christian Science Monitor article states the following:

quote:

---

- A 1991 challenge to a Pennsylvania law requiring married women to notify their husbands before seeking an abortion. The court struck down the restriction. Alito dissented.

- A 1995 challenge to a Pennsylvania law that required women seeking to use Medicaid funds to abort a pregnancy resulting from rape or incest to report the incident to law enforcement officials and identify the offender. Alito provided the decisive vote striking down the abortion restriction.

- A 1997 challenge to a New Jersey law that prevents parents from suing for damages on behalf of the wrongful death of a fetus. Alito ruled that the Constitution does not afford protection to the unborn.

- A 2000 challenge to New Jersey's ban on so-called partial-birth abortions. Alito struck down the law based on a recent Supreme Court decision.

---

Take particular note of the third case mentioned: "Alito ruled that the Constitution does not afford protection to the unborn.

I am still learning about this man and how he would fit in with the Supreme Court. I have long held the opinion that just because a judge is conservative does not mean that it will bring the downfall of Roe vs Wade. So far what I have seen is someone who upholds constitutional law and I view this to be a good thing. Abortion is not the only issue that the Supreme Court makes decisions on and I think it is very, very important to remember that.

quote:

---

Its typical for you to take my comment and run with it to prove your point about all Christians and they being hypocrites.

---

You said it, not me.

And yes, you are a h-y-p-o-c-r-i-t-e Jade. The bible does say, that he without sin should cast the first stone. And isn't it the providence of your God, to judge? Love your neighbor?

The point is, that history is full of exactly the same xian behavior that you have demonstrated here in this thread, with that comment and belief. You just merely prove that it is still around, that it is also present in modern day xianity, something that you have vehemently denied in previous threads, saying that the crimes of the past are past.

Right on WS.

It is the typical xian belief that since the got pregnant they must suffer through the prgnancy.

No matter it may have been rape or incestuos rape, iof she is pregnant it is her own fault, she is evil and sinful and must pay for her crime.

This attitude does not even begin to take into account the sort of life the child may have if born in sich circumstances or even if to a "properly narried woman", who already has a number of kids and simply can't afford or handle more.

A child born of rape or incest will be a constant reminder to the other of the despicable event. Human nature is such it is not surprsiing such children are often hated from birth for just that reason and go on to lives of abuse and pain.

But the good xians never take such things into account. Dogma must be followed.

jade is not only a hypocrite of the first water, she is a hateful and hate-fiulled, disgusting individual and deserves no more pity than that she affords the women she despises.

Never let your sense of morals get in the way of doing what's right.
Isaac Asimov
US science fiction novelist & scholar (1920 - 1992)

Jade, I'm very curious with "... in these times with much education out there, ..." Education in and of what? Seriously... what are you talking about when you say ' much education out there.' ??

N-Jive

Education in regard to family planning, no sex before marriage, ABSTAIN, instead of have sex with whom you want, when you want without worrying about the consequences.

quote:

---

jade is not only a hypocrite of the first water, she is a hateful and hate-fiulled, disgusting individual and deserves no more pity than that she affords the women she despises.

---

Dio
Where is there a cause to call me hateful and disgusting??? Because you disagree with me.
Aren't you guilty of what webshannon accuses me of being? Are you thowing stones as well as he is?


If Christians are hateful, all of us in the billions that think like me are in danger of loosing our souls since we are so hateful, disgusitng etc.... In your ideology since you oppose my belief regarding abortions, you must feel you are on the right side of the fence which represents kindness, and compassion to the mother but not the unborn child which lives in the womb???? Where do you draw the line on what is of good and what is of no good?

In the face of adversity, the ones who will live forever will be the ones who remain faithful to truth for the sake of love no matter how twisted society has disguised truth for the sake of evil.

Abortions are of evil. Evil want abortions to continue as long as evil is allowed to exist I hate evil.

See, you hate yourself. 99.9% of abortions do no more than remove a slippery mass of cells from the womb about the size of your thumb.

There is no cognition, no ability to live outside the womb, no sense of feeling.

You hate-mongers have produced doctored images to convince the gullible every abortion is a living-breathing cognating individual.

I note you fail to address the issue if unawnted children. One should note, you anti-abotionists are not exactly lining up to adopt these unwanted children you would foist on woman who, for a variety of reasons, either may not or should not be having children.

The there is the fact the state has no business telling a person what to do with their body.

T'aint nobody's business but their own.

That means it is none of your business what a woman does with hers.

Oh, you are hateful alright, in the most pious fashion.

If you hated evil, as you claim, you would be picketing the Vatican demanding they rid themselves of pedophiles. That crime is abominable, but no less so than the ongoing protection of said pedophiles by the Vatican and other religious orders.

Man's evils are part of man's make-up, churches put themselves above these earthly frailities but suffer seriously from hypocrisy.

Never let your sense of morals get in the way of doing what's right.
Isaac Asimov
US science fiction novelist & scholar (1920 - 1992)

Dio. Everyone has ideologies about life and your no different from the thousands upon thousands of others who try to push their own or voice their own. What makes you so different? How you view me and others who follow like me does not make it better for me. It just makes you feel better to vent your fustrations out on what you alone think about the issue of religious on what ever denomination they belong too. I doubt you have anything good to say about any organized religion. Or is it just the Catholic Church. Better watch it, pretty soon they will have control of the highest court in the land. Your points are made but your posting to the wind. Organized religions are here to stay and voice their ideologies which may filter into the laws of the land as rule eventally. Thats why its good the religious follow in large sect numbers, because they are more powerful that way spritually and and in earthly matters. There are many secret societies secualar societies, agencies, organizations, groups in the USA who may do the same thing. I wonder if you have a problem with them also. The humane society, The Society for the performing Arts, the Boy Scouts, Girl Scouts, ACLU, college fraternities, PETA, MADD, VFW, Actors Guild, Lesians Alliance, NWACP, LULAC, ALA, ARP, NAFTA, GAY Alliance. NOW, just to name a few. Do you have a problem with any of these I mentioned also? Eveyone is free to choose thier way even if you have a personal issue of dislike. All try to push for change and follow their own idologies. I think you just have a problem with the Christian God is what I am getting from you an others.

(Edited by jade on 11-02-2005 20:33)

What color is the sky on your planet, jade? is the weather nice?

They sky is black DL, it rains blood there and the winds sound like the screams of women dieing from botched abortions.

I see you are still avoiding the issue jade. Perhaps it is just fine with you that priests continue to rape children, so long as no woman has an abortion?

BTW, I live in a much more enlightened country and have no fear of your catholic judges.

Never let your sense of morals get in the way of doing what's right.
Isaac Asimov
US science fiction novelist & scholar (1920 - 1992)

quote:

---

jade said:

Eveyone is free to choose thier way even if you have a personal issue of dislike

---

Keep that in mind while trying to tell women what to do with their own bodies.

quote:

---

jade said:

Thats why its good the religious follow in large sect numbers, because they are
more powerful that way spritually and and in earthly matters

---

Okay... reign in the Jihad brigade, Jade. That's the closest thing I've seen to a point blank statement about a Christian Army in a long time. (Stated as such because you said it and you're christian, not because I'm anti-christian, I'm not against anyone). It sounds like you're saying if we can't win you over to our faith though prayer we'll force you over under our sheer weight of numbers. Dangerous ground. Very dangerous ground. There is no better way to obliterate yourself than by uniting your enemies and a new crusade will do just that.

A second point... stop equating Religion and Ideology. They aren't the same thing. Ideology describes an arena of open thought, theories, and an ebb and flow of thinking and changing attitudes around a specific topic or topics while considering the ideas and thoughts of people outside of or in disagreement with the idealogy itself. The goal being to find an answer. Religion is a following of a SINGLE train of thought based on static dogma from ages past and all of the topics that are related to, and influencing said religion are drawn from within with little or no input from outside (or inside for that matter) the religion itself. Religion provides THE answer, Ideology provides a path to AN answer.

GD

(Edited by GrythusDraconis on 11-02-2005 22:06)

quote:

---

jade said:

Or is it just the Catholic Church. Better watch it, pretty soon they will have control of the highest court in the land.

---

Are we in for another inquisition?

quote:

---

jade said:

I think you just have a problem with the Christian God is what I am getting from you an others.

---

Not just the Christian God, but any god!

All faiths want to spread their beliefs, escpecially Christianity. Yes, we are on a crusade to evalngelize and spread the news of our faith. We have a been in existance for 2000 years spreading the same messages 24/7 since. It is in our interest to grow and grow and grow. So yes in large numbers matters. For us the whole world to follow Chrisitan thought is ideal. Yes we belong to a spiritual army trying to obliterate evil. Have you ever heard of the Blue Army? Its a group of crusaders affliated with the promise to spread the love of God thru the Virgin Mary. Heard of the Knights of Columbus? They do the same thing the Blue Army does. Though there are different sects of Christianity that kinda differ on some issues, we all point the same way. Methodist, Lutherans, Eposcipilians, Church of Christ, Greek/Russian Orthodox, Baptist, Non-demininational, Morman, Presbyterians, etc all want earthilings to be Christians. Thats what we strive for. So what else is new. WE constantly think of ways reach out and this has been its processes of faith since its inception going all they way thru its evolvement thru history. The Christian faith is constantly evolving with the times That is why it survives. What the faith was in its infancy, though it has not changed its dogma, still changes in its attitude in reaching the masses. ANd it has been very successful. Though you may not agree and are free to disagree because you have a personal opinion with religion in general it still continues to grow.

Jade: although one can easily pick what you're trying to say from that paragraph, I think your diction accidently betrays everything you attempt to say. Watch out for these words and phrases, specifically, and your point may come across much more fluently: "crusade to evangelize," "we belong to a spiritual army," "group of crusaders...[spreading] love."

It's interesting that you include the Greek Orthodox church in that list. You might also include the Jesuits. Both are a curious bunch. They stand out from the other listed denominations in their methodology. Whereas the Roman Catholics (I include you in this statement), Lutherans, Baptists, etcetera, all evangelize with piety, the Eastern Orthodox church has adopted a different approach: to proselytize in a passive, and accepting manner. By example. You have a tendency, as do other non-religious members of this forum, to take extravagant stances on issues which causes nothing but faction.

What does this have to do with Alito? (Which is, of course, the topic.) It's interesting that the majority of Mier's opposition came from the far right. Left wing ideologues were surprisingly silent, as in the Roberts nomination. It's my personal opinion that Roberts and Miers were, in a sense, a blessing from Bush (gasp!). Although I do not support 99% (give or take) of Bush's policies and judgments, it seems he almost went out on a limb to appease the left in these cases. With Miers we had a right-of-center female judge to replace a much-respected dead-center female judge. Not a far-right judge. Similarly, with Roberts.

It's sad to see Miers replaced with Alito. If it were my decision, we would have two more Ginsburgs. Perhaps though, it's the conservative's turn at the supreme court, like it or not.

cfb

There are crusades that are in existence as we speak in tents and in stadiums and in halls all across America. Ever heard of Billy Graham crusades? Why are you afraid of words. There are physical armies that try to obliterate communism, oppression, evil, tyranny, etc. So there are spiritual armies trying to obliterate sin by prayer. We, as Christians are in a serious war always doing battle with the enemy Satan. And Satan's evil is very real ro us. In my sacrament of confirmation I promised to became a Chrisitan solider to uphold the truth of faith no matter how adverse it may seem in the culture of the times. The majority of the Christian faithful crossing all denominations are in coummunion with this belief.

To many of us Christian faithful, to have one more conservative who is against abortion, etc is going towards winning the battle against the horrible evil of aborting innocent babies. With his confirmation, we see a hope in our desire to change an injustice to tiny humans. Sure there are other important issues out there to be debated,etc., but the issue of abortion is a primary issue that preceeds all others, simply because it regards the most innocent fragile human life. We believe the power of prayer has helped in getting Bush elected so as conservative, he could choose a conservative court, which could unbalance and change the course of the court. I strongly believe he choose Miers and knew she would not be accepted, but it was a ploy use in the scheme to elect another conservative, and a Catholic, because Bush is a fetus friendly President. His aim is to reverse Roe vs Wade.

Bush is a Bush friendly president, his aim at this point is not to get impeached. He will cheerfully use your religious bigotry to further his own ends, just as Billy Graham uses people like you to furtrher his.

I await, with some considerable interest jade, your response to my earlier statements about the vatican and the popes protecting, defending, denying, hiding and essentially approving, through such actions, the depravity of pedophilia in your church.

Which actions, one may say with some confidence, would seem to me to cause considerably more anguish to the souls of living beings (were they to exist) than to the few thousands of senseless cells which represent 99.9 of all abortions.

Never let your sense of morals get in the way of doing what's right.
Isaac Asimov
US science fiction novelist & scholar (1920 - 1992)

quote:

---

Diogenes said:

I await, with some considerable interest jade, your response to my earlier statements about the vatican and the popes protecting, defending, denying, hiding and essentially approving, through such actions, the depravity of pedophilia in your church.

---

you won't get it. I've asked for the same for the past two years with no actual response other than redirection and insult/attack.

which seems to me answer enough i guess...

^Yup. She seems incapable of accepting that the Church is guilty of crimes against Humanity.

quote:

---

jade said:
The Christian faith is constantly evolving with the times That is why it survives.

---

Well, maybe some sects of the Christian faith are evolving, but the Catholic Church... not so much. They remain the same old misogynistic and patriarchal group of white men they've always been.

quote:

---

jade said:

So there are spiritual armies trying to obliterate sin by prayer. We, as
Christians are in a serious war always doing battle with the enemy
Satan. And Satan's evil is very real ro us. In my sacrament of
confirmation I promised to became a Chrisitan solider to uphold the
truth of faith no matter how adverse it may seem in the culture of the
times. The majority of the Christian faithful crossing all
denominations are in coummunion with this belief.

---

Just as a thought, you might want to leave the house a bit more and join this thing we like to call the "real world." It's not as filled with boogey men as you seem to believe, and at the same time, it is. You however, seem to think more of the hypothetical "Satan" type than the real life flesh-and-blood sorts.

EDIT - Oh yeah, almost forgot the reason I highlighted part of the quote above! Things must have changed in the 25 years since I got out of grade school and was confirmed. I definitely don't remember avowing to become a Christian soldier of any sort. Confirmation was a just that - the young adult was confirming the promise their parents made for them at Baptism to be raised and part of the Catholic faith. No mention of soldiers there.

quote:

---

Jade said:
To many of us Christian faithful, to have one more conservative who is
against abortion, etc is going towards winning the battle against the
horrible evil of aborting innocent babies. With his confirmation, we
see a hope in our desire to change an injustice to tiny humans. Sure
there are other important issues out there to be debated,etc., but the
issue of abortion is a primary issue that preceeds all others, simply
because it regards the most innocent fragile human life. We believe the
power of prayer has helped in getting Bush elected so as conservative,
he could choose a conservative court, which could unbalance and change
the course of the court. I strongly believe he choose Miers and knew
she would not be accepted, but it was a ploy use in the scheme to elect
another conservative, and a Catholic, because Bush is a fetus friendly
President. His aim is to reverse Roe vs Wade.

---

First off, the government has no business getting into the reproductive business. None at all. It's not their concern, and until the collective government is raising and supporting any and all children, they need to butt out. Plain and simple.

Second, here's a hypothetical question for Jade - what if RvW is overturned, and women are forced to carry unwanted children to term? Will the pro-lifers be there to support and help raise those unwanted, unloved, neglected and abandoned children? Are you going to open your doors and home to these children and raise them? What about when they turn to lives of crime to support drug habits, or other such "hard luck" stories? How about if any of them commit murder and/or are given the death penalty? Will you be there to support them? Or are you going to rally against the death penalty as well? Oh wait, if they are bad people, committing crimes and killing others, then they are evil and need to be punished perhaps?

There are any number of reasons for a woman to get an abortion. Not all of them involve being careless or stupid. Birth control is not widely and affordably available to all and sundry, and as for education... well.. first we'd have to get the kids into schools and actually teach them for that education to stick. People don't want their kids getting sex ed in school because that's bad and nasty! Not my kid! Yet the parents aren't doing their parts in teaching their children themselves necessarily. And aren't woman that are more educated less likely to have an unwanted or accidental pregnancy, while the dropouts, trailer park queens, addicts and, in a few cases, the overly religious, the ones having all the babies lately?

The Christian belief is that every sexual act should be open to the option of reproduction, meaning no contraceptives. And I'm sorry, telling people not to have sex for pleasure is misguided and frankly stupid in the extreme. Sex is a basic human drive. Telling someone not to do it unless it "means" something isn't going to work. That is a revelation that each person has to come to on their own - whether or not the morals taught to them while they were growing up are actually important to them or not. I know this because I went through that very revelation after my freshman year of college. I decided that all the stuff I'd been taught in my 12 years of Catholic schooling meant something after all; and that came after I began stepping away from the church and my beliefs.

Anyways, back on topic of a sort - Government does not belong in the bedroom nor does it need to be involved in any pregnancy issues.

_____________________

coeur de feu
Qui sème le vent récolte la tempête!

(Edited by RhyssaFireheart on 11-03-2005 08:57)

Nice post, Rhyssa. Unfortunately, you are blowing wind on deaf ears in this case. Such arguments and reason have been pointed at Jade before.

she'll probably just side-step the issue, or go off on a tangent and avoid it altogether, as she has always done, when faced and confronted with reason and logic.

Religous ramifications aside, and to perhaps, further explain Jades elation with this nominee... she does, if I'm not mistaken, work in a District Attorney's office somewhere in Texas.

Now the ramifications of that and the possibility of others in that office, specifically prosecutors, sharing an even remotely similar mindset... well that's bit scarey.

Texas sports the most densley populated 'death row' in the US. I'm wondering who's working in the other DA offices.

She is likely a 'friend' of Dumbya's.

DL, you are right of course, but it might be fun to keep hammering her on the subject just to see her avoid it.

So how about it Jade? Got the balls to answer the issues instead of ripping pages out of the "Xian Zealot's Handbook" and flinging them at us?

Never let your sense of morals get in the way of doing what's right.
Isaac Asimov
US science fiction novelist & scholar (1920 - 1992)

Not that I want to throw a wrench into another abortion discussion... okay I'm lying - yes I do. I am curious as to what others think of Alito as a nominee to the Supreme Court.

I'll admit, I follow business news much more than events and politics. But from what I've heard, Judge Alito typically follows the letter of the law. The buzz about him is that he likely wont ever choose to change a law, or go against one, and sways to the side of caution when it's not particularly clear which side the law is on.

Good for businesses.
Bad for anti-abortionists.

From what I can tell, he's definately not an extremist, and I don't think the fact that he's catholic will mean much in his career on the bench. He seems to be a judge first, then a catholic.

He's replacing O'Conner, right?

Now maybe I missed it, but Roberts replaced the Chief Justice.

Where was THAT thourough debate?

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
" The noblest pleasure is the joy of understanding, and being understood. "

Jade? Oh Jade? Stil hiding under the pulpit?

Never let your sense of morals get in the way of doing what's right.
Isaac Asimov
US science fiction novelist & scholar (1920 - 1992)

There wasn't much of a debate on that situation I feel because it was a conservative justice replacing another conservative justice. The current situation is about a judge who has a very conservative history replacing a judge who has a history of being a swing vote. There also wasn't much uproar over Roberts nomination and subsequent confirmation, because Roberts is a generally middle-of-the-road kind of guy. Okay, so a little right of middle, but the point is there were very few from the democratic side that were screaming and hollering.

This thread took a bend towards abortion. There seem to be a lot of people who think this should be the deciding factor on judgment of Alito. (Not necessarily here, just in general.) My personal feelings on this are that the Supreme Court has more purpose than deciding abortion issues. Yes, it's important, but c'mon people there is more to the US than Pro-Life/Pro-Choice.

From what I remember of my Civics classes, the separation of powers dictates that the Legislative branch creates the Laws, and the Judicial branch interprets and for lack of a better term, enforces Law. The Supreme Court is the ultimate say on the Consitutionality of a law. It is not up to the Supreme Court to repeal R v W, that is up to the Legislature to do. Until legislature does so, it is the Supreme Court's responsibility to make rulings based on the law that exists as a constituional amendment. At this time, abortion is legal, and there are no provisions in the Constitution to afford protection to an unborn child. Any Justice who does not understand and rule based on this is overstepping his bounds.

So, as I see it, repealing R v W should not even be a topic for discussion when dealing with the Supreme Court. It is not their role. Any of you out there who have made a better study of American Civics, feel free to correct me... I most certainly concede that I could be completely off base!

Dan - Thanks for your opinion, that has been my general feeling on Alito so far as well.

quote:

---

Zynx said:

Now maybe I missed it, but Roberts replaced the Chief Justice.

Where was THAT thourough debate?

---

It seems you are still having trouble with the whole discussion board concept

1) there was, in fact, conversation about roberts.

2) if you feel there should have been more, or if there hadn't been any, and you feel there should be, start one!

3) the 'debate' going on here is mainly a result of the implications made by the person who opened the topic - not necessarily because of the nomination itself.

The issue has also become a larger one in general because of the increased publicity surrounding the latest events.

Moon Dancer: although theoretically the Judiciary system is limited to interpretation, the specific "interpretation" of "interpretation" has been confused. The power of the courts in the 20th century has been greatly expanded beyond its original intention. Think of interest groups who act through the judicial system, pioneered by the civil rights movement in the 1960s. Other more recent examples include Romer vs. Evans, in which the courts struck down legislation approved by the Colorado legislature. Examples of this "judicial activism" include many beneficial rulings, as well: Brown vs. Board of Education and Roe vs. Wade (I forget...Lawrence vs. Texas was another high-profile case as well, I think).

However have we not seen all branches of government expanding their influence? From 1920 to 1980 the power of the executive branch increased, decreasing after 1980 and increasing again following the 2000 election (especially in light of 9/11). The legislative branch has also expanded its power, however court cases such as US vs. Lopez and US vs. Morrison show a distrust of the legislative branch. Similarly, the judicial branch as gained prominence as the role in "interpretation" has expanded.

quote:

---

. It is not up to the Supreme Court to repeal R v W, that is up to the Legislature to do. Until legislature does so, it is the Supreme Court's responsibility to make rulings based on the law that exists as a constitutional amendment.

---

Is not Roe vs. Wade a perfect example of such activism? It has been affirmed and reaffirmed in subsequent rulings, however it has been argued (repeatedly) that the Supreme Court overstepped its bounds in ruling state-affirmed laws outlawing abortion "unconstitutional." This doesn't negate the necessary or beneficiary nature of such a ruling, however.

And I repeat the sentiment:

quote:

---

Any of you out there who have made a better study of American Civics, feel free to correct me... I most certainly concede that I could be completely off base!

---

because I myself don't pay too much attention in Civics, although the info is rather fresh in my mind =p

quote:

---

cfb said:

that the Supreme Court overstepped its bounds in ruling state-affirmed laws outlawing abortion "unconstitutional."

---

It is not possible for the supreme court to overstep it's bounds when ruling something unconstitutional.
Its job is to make exactly that kind of ruling - to make sure the constitution is upheld.

The constitution supercedes the state's rights to make law.