ROE overturned.. a bad day in America

Discussion of the recent unfolding of history.

ROE overturned.. a bad day in America

Postby Peter Kropotkin » Fri Jun 24, 2022 3:58 pm

and within one week, the SCOTUS has delivered two
unbelievable bad decisions.. on par with the "Dred Scott" case...

These two decisions have effectively unraveled America...
one Roe but the other basically prevents any, ANY attempt
to gun control laws... in several ways, the denial to us
the ability to contain guns means that this decision is even
worse than ROE... but of course, as usual, the SCOTUS will
not face the consequences of their actions... gun violence won't
plague them and the coming free for all in America, won't
impact the GOP/MAGA parties because they live their safe cocoons
in the suburbs...but for the rest of us, if you thought it was bad
before, schools massacres like the one in Texas, will happen
every single week in America now...and we won't even get the
usual lame "prayers and thoughts" that the GOP offer us before
frankly, they couldn't give a shit about lives.... for the GOP is
become the death party...killing children, the old, anyone
who isn't white, murdered by the police,
the GOP has no problem with those deaths...

in fact, the GOP/MAGA party welcomes and embraces those
deaths...the GOP/MAGA party is now the "PRO-DEATH" party...

and they welcome it....

Kropotkin
Now if only I could get the other "members of the collection of truth"
to put me on ignore, life would be good..

PK
Peter Kropotkin
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 11189
Joined: Thu Apr 07, 2005 1:47 am
Location: blue state

Re: ROE overturned.. a bad day in America

Postby Ecmandu » Fri Jun 24, 2022 4:32 pm

Evangelical Christians are moral nihilists.

So are you.

How do you feel about moral nihilists now?
The purpose of life is to give everyone individually what they always want at the expense of no being - forever.

The biggest problem of life is the, “hey, I don’t want this to be happening” problem for everyone.

Welcome to thinking.
Ecmandu
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 16011
Joined: Thu Dec 11, 2014 1:22 am
Location: Duh. Existence. I'm sure that'd be wrong on SAT's!

Re: ROE overturned.. a bad day in America

Postby Peter Kropotkin » Fri Jun 24, 2022 4:57 pm

Ecmandu wrote:Evangelical Christians are moral nihilists.

So are you.

How do you feel about moral nihilists now?


K: as I am not a "moral nihilist", your comment doesn't apply
to me...I am closer to a situational ethics type of guy...
which is to say the situation dictates the ethics/morals...
and that isn't being a "moral nihilist"...it is a nuanced
position, I will grant you, but that is the life of a liberal,
the universe not black and white, but shades of gray...

Kropotkin
Now if only I could get the other "members of the collection of truth"
to put me on ignore, life would be good..

PK
Peter Kropotkin
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 11189
Joined: Thu Apr 07, 2005 1:47 am
Location: blue state

Re: ROE overturned.. a bad day in America

Postby Ecmandu » Fri Jun 24, 2022 5:06 pm

Peter Kropotkin wrote:
Ecmandu wrote:Evangelical Christians are moral nihilists.

So are you.

How do you feel about moral nihilists now?


K: as I am not a "moral nihilist", your comment doesn't apply
to me...I am closer to a situational ethics type of guy...
which is to say the situation dictates the ethics/morals...
and that isn't being a "moral nihilist"...it is a nuanced
position, I will grant you, but that is the life of a liberal,
the universe not black and white, but shades of gray...

Kropotkin


Ok. I just assumed you were iambiguous’ lap dog.

But I’ll simply accept that a few of your sentences on these boards don’t represent who you are at this minute.

Let’s examine the gun thing and the abortion thing together.

The right to defend yourself from a tyrannical government. If your fetus is that tyrannical government, you have a right of self defense.

You can’t have them both.

If abortion is outlawed guns should be outlawed.

Unless a fetus is viable, it’s still part of the mother’s body, it’s her decision what to do with her own body.
The purpose of life is to give everyone individually what they always want at the expense of no being - forever.

The biggest problem of life is the, “hey, I don’t want this to be happening” problem for everyone.

Welcome to thinking.
Ecmandu
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 16011
Joined: Thu Dec 11, 2014 1:22 am
Location: Duh. Existence. I'm sure that'd be wrong on SAT's!

Re: ROE overturned.. a bad day in America

Postby iambiguous » Fri Jun 24, 2022 5:15 pm

Ecmandu wrote:Evangelical Christians are moral nihilists.


Being a moral nihilist myself, please explain to me how my own "fractured and fragmented" assessment of abortion as a moral issue is on par with Evangelical Christians who seem rather adamant that there is but one and only one manner in which to react to abortion as a moral issue: as a sin against God.
He was like a man who wanted to change all; and could not; so burned with his impotence; and had only me, an infinitely small microcosm to convert or detest. John Fowles

Start here: http://www.ilovephilosophy.com/viewtopi ... 1&t=176529
Then here: http://www.ilovephilosophy.com/viewtopi ... 5&t=185296
And here: http://www.ilovephilosophy.com/viewtopi ... 1&t=194382

"Sure, it works in practice, but does it work in theory?"

Danny Embling: "People wonder how Hitler managed to get so many followers...it's never surprised me."
User avatar
iambiguous
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 46376
Joined: Tue Nov 16, 2010 8:03 pm
Location: hanging out with godot

Re: ROE overturned.. a bad day in America

Postby Ecmandu » Fri Jun 24, 2022 5:20 pm

iambiguous wrote:
Ecmandu wrote:Evangelical Christians are moral nihilists.


Being a moral nihilist myself, please explain to me how my own "fractured and fragmented" assessment of abortion as a moral issue is on par with Evangelical Christians who seem rather adamant that there is but one and only one manner in which to react to abortion as a moral issue: as a sin against God.


Do you really think Trump believes in god?

The credo of moral nihilism is “get what you can get”, stepping on others no matter how rational or beautiful in spirit they are is of no concern.
The purpose of life is to give everyone individually what they always want at the expense of no being - forever.

The biggest problem of life is the, “hey, I don’t want this to be happening” problem for everyone.

Welcome to thinking.
Ecmandu
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 16011
Joined: Thu Dec 11, 2014 1:22 am
Location: Duh. Existence. I'm sure that'd be wrong on SAT's!

Re: ROE overturned.. a bad day in America

Postby origami » Fri Jun 24, 2022 5:23 pm

Certainly important legal developments for the history of the world.

Here are the official syllabuses for each case from the Supreme Court of the United States.



NEW YORK STATE RIFLE & PISTOL ASSOCIATION,
INC., ET AL. v. BRUEN, SUPERINTENDENT OF NEW
YORK STATE POLICE, ET AL.

https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/2 ... 3_7j80.pdf



DOBBS, STATE HEALTH OFFICER OF THE
MISSISSIPPI DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH, ET AL . v.
JACKSON WOMEN’S HEALTH ORGANIZATION ET AL .

https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/2 ... 2_6j37.pdf
There's no one thing that's true. It's all true.
Ernest Hemingway
User avatar
origami
Philosopher
 
Posts: 2313
Joined: Wed Jun 15, 2022 2:47 pm

Re: ROE overturned.. a bad day in America

Postby Peter Kropotkin » Fri Jun 24, 2022 5:26 pm

Ecmandu: Ok. I just assumed you were iambiguous’ lap dog.

K: just because I hold that IAM is the best philosopher on this
website (and it is not even close) doesn't assume anything..

E; But I’ll simply accept that a few of your sentences on these boards don’t represent who you are at this minute.

K: assumptions galore here....

E: Let’s examine the gun thing and the abortion thing together.

K: wait, is Ecmudu really IAM and been fooling us all along!

E: The right to defend yourself from a tyrannical government. If your fetus is that tyrannical government, you have a right of self defense.

K: A ''fetus being a tyrannical government'' and he's back.. there
is absolutely no logical path that somehow turns a fetus into
''tyrannical government'' thus your fanciful attempt fails...

E: You can’t have them both.

K: apparently you can't have one...

E: If abortion is outlawed guns should be outlawed.
Unless a fetus is viable, it’s still part of the mother’s body, it’s her decision what to do with her own body.

K: and I've been holding this position for 50 years...

Kropotkin
Now if only I could get the other "members of the collection of truth"
to put me on ignore, life would be good..

PK
Peter Kropotkin
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 11189
Joined: Thu Apr 07, 2005 1:47 am
Location: blue state

Re: ROE overturned.. a bad day in America

Postby Ecmandu » Fri Jun 24, 2022 5:36 pm

Peter.

A fetus is a tyrannical government if it affects your lifelong happiness. Some people accept the government about to rule their lives and others don’t.

You’re suffering from issues of abstraction and in doing so are shooting yourself in the foot.

I could easily make a case in the Supreme Court that if abortion gets struck down, gun restriction should be used.

They’re arguing against self defense with illegality of abortion.

The very same reason they’re liberal with guns.

That’s called a contradiction.
The purpose of life is to give everyone individually what they always want at the expense of no being - forever.

The biggest problem of life is the, “hey, I don’t want this to be happening” problem for everyone.

Welcome to thinking.
Ecmandu
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 16011
Joined: Thu Dec 11, 2014 1:22 am
Location: Duh. Existence. I'm sure that'd be wrong on SAT's!

Re: ROE overturned.. a bad day in America

Postby iambiguous » Fri Jun 24, 2022 5:43 pm

Ecmandu wrote:
iambiguous wrote:
Ecmandu wrote:Evangelical Christians are moral nihilists.


Being a moral nihilist myself, please explain to me how my own "fractured and fragmented" assessment of abortion as a moral issue is on par with Evangelical Christians who seem rather adamant that there is but one and only one manner in which to react to abortion as a moral issue: as a sin against God.


Do you really think Trump believes in god?


Nope. On the other hand, you yourself have claimed to have "personally met God and the Devil and Death and Buddha".

You tell me what He makes of the abortion wars down here.

Ecmandu wrote: The credo of moral nihilism is “get what you can get”, stepping on others no matter how rational or beautiful in spirit they are is of no concern.


Well, the personal opinion of this moral nihilist is that in a No God world, those on both sides of the abortion debate are able to make reasonable arguments for and against abortion: https://abortion.procon.org/

And, thus, what made Roe v. Wade the "best of all possible worlds" is that through "democracy and the rule of law" those on both sides of the issue here in America got something, but neither side got it all.

Now, in some states, all abortions may well be deemed illegal. And since any number of men and women base their view of the law on their moral convictions, why not the day when the Supremes rule that all abortions in all fifty states must be deemed premeditated murder?

No, they won't bring their Catholic God into the "legal argument", of course, but who is kidding whom that He is not in there? And 5 of the 9 current Justices are Catholics. And the sixth Neil Gorsuch was raised as a Catholic.

Oh, and by the way: "Welcome to thinking".
He was like a man who wanted to change all; and could not; so burned with his impotence; and had only me, an infinitely small microcosm to convert or detest. John Fowles

Start here: http://www.ilovephilosophy.com/viewtopi ... 1&t=176529
Then here: http://www.ilovephilosophy.com/viewtopi ... 5&t=185296
And here: http://www.ilovephilosophy.com/viewtopi ... 1&t=194382

"Sure, it works in practice, but does it work in theory?"

Danny Embling: "People wonder how Hitler managed to get so many followers...it's never surprised me."
User avatar
iambiguous
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 46376
Joined: Tue Nov 16, 2010 8:03 pm
Location: hanging out with godot

Re: ROE overturned.. a bad day in America

Postby Ecmandu » Fri Jun 24, 2022 5:49 pm

Iambiguous. Your sarcasm is noted.

Your philosophy (what peter thinks is the greatest on these boards)

Is all of us standing in place until we all die of dehydration. Can’t figure out any right or wrong action? Let’s all just stand in place forever. Who knows, maybe we’re wrong that we die of dehydration.
The purpose of life is to give everyone individually what they always want at the expense of no being - forever.

The biggest problem of life is the, “hey, I don’t want this to be happening” problem for everyone.

Welcome to thinking.
Ecmandu
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 16011
Joined: Thu Dec 11, 2014 1:22 am
Location: Duh. Existence. I'm sure that'd be wrong on SAT's!

Re: ROE overturned.. a bad day in America

Postby iambiguous » Fri Jun 24, 2022 5:52 pm

Ecmandu wrote:Iambiguous. Your sarcasm is noted.

Your philosophy (what peter thinks is the greatest on these boards)

Is all of us standing in place until we all die of dehydration. Can’t figure out any right or wrong action? Let’s all just stand in place forever. Who knows, maybe we’re wrong that we die of dehydration.


Not to worry: you're just a pawn in my game here.
He was like a man who wanted to change all; and could not; so burned with his impotence; and had only me, an infinitely small microcosm to convert or detest. John Fowles

Start here: http://www.ilovephilosophy.com/viewtopi ... 1&t=176529
Then here: http://www.ilovephilosophy.com/viewtopi ... 5&t=185296
And here: http://www.ilovephilosophy.com/viewtopi ... 1&t=194382

"Sure, it works in practice, but does it work in theory?"

Danny Embling: "People wonder how Hitler managed to get so many followers...it's never surprised me."
User avatar
iambiguous
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 46376
Joined: Tue Nov 16, 2010 8:03 pm
Location: hanging out with godot

Re: ROE overturned.. a bad day in America

Postby Ecmandu » Fri Jun 24, 2022 5:55 pm

iambiguous wrote:
Ecmandu wrote:Iambiguous. Your sarcasm is noted.

Your philosophy (what peter thinks is the greatest on these boards)

Is all of us standing in place until we all die of dehydration. Can’t figure out any right or wrong action? Let’s all just stand in place forever. Who knows, maybe we’re wrong that we die of dehydration.


Not to worry: you're just a pawn in my game here.


People who play games to win at another’s expense always lose.

You have no wisdom.
The purpose of life is to give everyone individually what they always want at the expense of no being - forever.

The biggest problem of life is the, “hey, I don’t want this to be happening” problem for everyone.

Welcome to thinking.
Ecmandu
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 16011
Joined: Thu Dec 11, 2014 1:22 am
Location: Duh. Existence. I'm sure that'd be wrong on SAT's!

Re: ROE overturned.. a bad day in America

Postby origami » Fri Jun 24, 2022 6:32 pm

origami wrote:Certainly important legal developments for the history of the world.

Here are the official syllabuses for each case from the Supreme Court of the United States.



NEW YORK STATE RIFLE & PISTOL ASSOCIATION,
INC., ET AL. v. BRUEN, SUPERINTENDENT OF NEW
YORK STATE POLICE, ET AL.

https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/2 ... 3_7j80.pdf



DOBBS, STATE HEALTH OFFICER OF THE
MISSISSIPPI DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH, ET AL . v.
JACKSON WOMEN’S HEALTH ORGANIZATION ET AL .

https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/2 ... 2_6j37.pdf


In reading the syllabus for the Second and Fourteenth Amendment case, one notes that the justices mention the rights protected by the Constitution and Bill of Rights were preexistent. This is coherent with the text of those documents. However, they mention the preexistence as falling in the domain of the government and people of England. For this we see no case, as the documents explicitly state that the origin of these rights, which predate the passing of the documents that enshirne them, is God. Considering that the justices affirm that, when considering extratextual evidence in order to interpret the text, the text must always take precedence in case of obvious conflict which cannot be accounted for with reference to discrepancies in understanding of terms and concepts during different historical periods, we believe that they are allowing an extralegal philosophical concept that postdates the text wherein only human authorities can constitute origins of law or any concept to take precedence over the clear text. We believe that, when the origin of the rights for the purposes of establishing legitimacy must be fixed, it must be God, and the argument must find a way to define God such that a challenge can be considered legitimate or illegitimate.

We consider it important due to the fact that, when something is not in the text, present interpretation allows for reference to English law. Far from this, when there is doubt regarding the interpretation of the text, the mention in the text of God as origin is clearly meant to forbid an appeal to any source of law that cannot be shown to be God.

Considering the opinion of the court already recognizes the right of the court to revise a previous opinion by the same court, this is worth bearing in mind for future cases.

Obviously, this does not mean that the text can only be altered by God, as the text, which legitimacy is drawn from God, lays out mechanisms for its being altered.
There's no one thing that's true. It's all true.
Ernest Hemingway
User avatar
origami
Philosopher
 
Posts: 2313
Joined: Wed Jun 15, 2022 2:47 pm

Re: ROE overturned.. a bad day in America

Postby Peter Kropotkin » Fri Jun 24, 2022 7:06 pm

any attempt to link the constitution with a god,
should be met with laughter and derision, for the entire
point of the constitution is to bring justice and equality to
human beings without any reference to a god or religion...

If you link the constitution with a god, you deny human beings
the ability to exists without a god... and BTW, which god?
The norse god, the egyptian god, the greek god, the hindu god,
the muslim god or the christian god?

which god do you refer to?

Kropotkin
Now if only I could get the other "members of the collection of truth"
to put me on ignore, life would be good..

PK
Peter Kropotkin
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 11189
Joined: Thu Apr 07, 2005 1:47 am
Location: blue state

Re: ROE overturned.. a bad day in America

Postby origami » Fri Jun 24, 2022 7:09 pm

The text doesn't mention any other specifications, it only mentions God. In order to challenge its contents, other than by the means enshrined in it, the burden will be on the challenger to show unequivocally that the quoted source constitutes God. Otherwise, it is proscribed by the letter of the law, which all government officials are sworn to uphold, and whose authority extends only to that granted by the documents they swear on.
There's no one thing that's true. It's all true.
Ernest Hemingway
User avatar
origami
Philosopher
 
Posts: 2313
Joined: Wed Jun 15, 2022 2:47 pm

Re: ROE overturned.. a bad day in America

Postby origami » Fri Jun 24, 2022 7:14 pm

We find this quote meaningful, from the same syllabus.

And as that individ-
ual right matured, “by the time of the founding,” the right
to keep and bear arms was “understood to be an individual
right protecting against both public and private violence.”
Heller, 554 U. S., at 594.


Considering that the court opines that the central consideration of the amendment is self defence, that the right to keep and bear arms is a right in reference to self defence (with which we don't necessarily agree, but it is their official opinion), it is important that it is recorded twice as the official opinion of the Supreme Court of the United States, once in Heller and reaffirmed here, that this includes defence against individuals and against the state.
There's no one thing that's true. It's all true.
Ernest Hemingway
User avatar
origami
Philosopher
 
Posts: 2313
Joined: Wed Jun 15, 2022 2:47 pm

Re: ROE overturned.. a bad day in America

Postby iambiguous » Fri Jun 24, 2022 7:26 pm

From the NYT:

'The man most responsible for shaping a United States Supreme Court that delivered the conservative movement a long-sought victory has spent weeks saying he didn’t think it will be good for his party.

'Publicly, after a draft of the likely decision leaked in May, former President Donald J. Trump was remarkably tight-lipped for weeks about the possible decision, which the court ultimately handed down on Friday, ending federal abortion protections. But privately, Mr. Trump has told people repeatedly that he believes it will be “bad for Republicans.”

'The decision, Mr. Trump has told friends and advisers, will anger suburban women, a group who helped tilt the 2020 presidential race to Joseph R. Biden Jr., and will lead to a backlash against Republicans in the November midterm elections.'


Let's call this the "politics of abortion".

On the other hand, who the hell really knows what might unfold between now and the November Congressional elections. Let alone between now the 2024 presidential elections.
He was like a man who wanted to change all; and could not; so burned with his impotence; and had only me, an infinitely small microcosm to convert or detest. John Fowles

Start here: http://www.ilovephilosophy.com/viewtopi ... 1&t=176529
Then here: http://www.ilovephilosophy.com/viewtopi ... 5&t=185296
And here: http://www.ilovephilosophy.com/viewtopi ... 1&t=194382

"Sure, it works in practice, but does it work in theory?"

Danny Embling: "People wonder how Hitler managed to get so many followers...it's never surprised me."
User avatar
iambiguous
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 46376
Joined: Tue Nov 16, 2010 8:03 pm
Location: hanging out with godot

Re: ROE overturned.. a bad day in America

Postby Peter Kropotkin » Fri Jun 24, 2022 7:38 pm

I am so angered by this court that is full of partisan hacks,
that I would favor eliminating the SCOTUS.. as being a
danger to the society and the state.... it isn't enough to
be about the law, which the current Supreme Court has
no interest in, but in the fact that by the actions of
9 people, who are shielded from any consequences of their actions,
have effectively demolished America as an institution...
we have no more constitutional rights as they can be destroyed
by the 9 unelected supreme court judges...

return America to a slavery country, that is now possible,
return women to being nothing more then property,
yep, that is on the docket now... Now some may claim
I exaggerate, but IN fact, all laws and every part of the
constitution is now under siege..

freedom of speech and religion "guaranteed" by the constitution,
that right is now in play.. Habeas corpus, is now also in play...
in fact, every single law that protects American freedoms is now
at risk.. and you can thank 9 unelected partisans hacks for that...

Kropotkin
Now if only I could get the other "members of the collection of truth"
to put me on ignore, life would be good..

PK
Peter Kropotkin
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 11189
Joined: Thu Apr 07, 2005 1:47 am
Location: blue state

Re: ROE overturned.. a bad day in America

Postby Peter Kropotkin » Fri Jun 24, 2022 7:56 pm

origami wrote:We find this quote meaningful, from the same syllabus.

And as that individ-
ual right matured, “by the time of the founding,” the right
to keep and bear arms was “understood to be an individual
right protecting against both public and private violence.”
Heller, 554 U. S., at 594.


Considering that the court opines that the central consideration of the amendment is self defence, that the right to keep and bear arms is a right in reference to self defence (with which we don't necessarily agree, but it is their official opinion), it is important that it is recorded twice as the official opinion of the Supreme Court of the United States, once in Heller and reaffirmed here, that this includes defence against individuals and against the state.


K: and thus once again, do we live in 1787? do we practice medicine as if
it were 1787? Is the technology the same as in 1787? so, why do we insist
on holding to idea's that are from 1787? the idea of self-protection made
sense in 1787... but it no longer makes any sense today... the idea of
the modern police force came about in Boston in 1838 and in NY in
1845.. thus we have no reason to hold onto the antiquated
idea of self-protection has given by the court.....

it is an historical fact, fact that crime is at an all time low
in America... as it is historically around the globe...
In England for example, we see that crime has fallen
in terms of historical rates in every decade... your idea
in self-protection makes no sense in modern America...

I would suggest you look up Wiki "Crimes in the United States"

Kropotkin
Now if only I could get the other "members of the collection of truth"
to put me on ignore, life would be good..

PK
Peter Kropotkin
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 11189
Joined: Thu Apr 07, 2005 1:47 am
Location: blue state

Re: ROE overturned.. a bad day in America

Postby origami » Fri Jun 24, 2022 8:06 pm

Well, everybody is entitled to an opinion. If you don't like the constitution, you are free to either change it through the mechanisms enshrined by it, show that God himself wills it to be changed, or establish a dictatorship that rejects it.

As far as the Supreme Court of the United States, they are bound by law and solemn oaths to uphold the laws of the United States, principal of which is the constitution.

The court goes through considerable lengths to carry out a historical comparison of the the situation at the time of the passing of the document and at the time of the appeal. Their opinion is that, being the principal law of the nation, it must always be upheld, but this upholding must take into account the historical differences, so that the intention must be objectively determined and established, and its applicability in modern terms determined. An example given in this syllabus is when the court decided that a bug planted in a house was a modern equivalent of physically searching premises at the time of the writing of the relevant amendment.

They make reference to more than a dozen historical documents and previous decisions, as well as scholarly studies, many brought to the court by the respondents (those arguing against the repeal of the gun ban in New York).
There's no one thing that's true. It's all true.
Ernest Hemingway
User avatar
origami
Philosopher
 
Posts: 2313
Joined: Wed Jun 15, 2022 2:47 pm

Re: ROE overturned.. a bad day in America

Postby Peter Kropotkin » Fri Jun 24, 2022 8:12 pm

origami wrote:Well, everybody is entitled to an opinion. If you don't like the constitution, you are free to either change it through the mechanisms enshrined by it, show that God himself wills it to be changed, or establish a dictatorship that rejects it.

As far as the Supreme Court of the United States, they are bound by law and solemn oaths to uphold the laws of the United States, principal of which is the constitution.

The court goes through considerable lengths to carry out a historical comparison of the the situation at the time of the passing of the document and at the time of the appeal. Their opinion is that, being the principal law of the nation, it must always be upheld, but this upholding must take into account the historical differences, so that the intention must be objectively determined and established, and its applicability in modern terms determined. An example given in this syllabus is when the court decided that a bug planted in a house was a modern equivalent of physically searching premises at the time of the writing of the relevant amendment.

They make reference to more than a dozen historical documents and previous decisions, as well as scholarly studies, many brought to the court by the respondents (those arguing against the repeal of the gun ban in New York).


K: great, another religious fanatic... see ya..

Kropotkin
Now if only I could get the other "members of the collection of truth"
to put me on ignore, life would be good..

PK
Peter Kropotkin
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 11189
Joined: Thu Apr 07, 2005 1:47 am
Location: blue state

Re: ROE overturned.. a bad day in America

Postby origami » Fri Jun 24, 2022 8:43 pm

Am I right to understand that your opinion is that observance of the law constitutes religious fanaticism?

Of course, there might be something to that. It might be that all who do not acknowledge God in heaven consider that their own opinions should arbitrarily be law. Like yours that the Supreme Court of the United States should be abolished, and the constitution disowned.

It is very possible that this was the downfall of the French Revolution, which did not place its law under the authority of God, but of whoever managed to occupy government.

England is another interesting case, because they do not follow the French path either, and have a long history of continuity of law. In their case, the highest authority is the reigning king or queen, and all laws are passed and upheld in their name. Even common law is observed explicitly at the king or queen's pleasure. Having made the monarch a figurehead with no legislative innitiative, they managed to make something firm. However, the monarch is still a human, and in order to challenge the letter of the law, all that has to be shown is that it is done in the name of the monarch. This took place not many years ago when an appeal to the highest court in England succeeded in convincing them that, on the letter of no particular law or precedent, in the name of the queen's authority, the government was breaking the law by calling for a break in the parliamentary session.
There's no one thing that's true. It's all true.
Ernest Hemingway
User avatar
origami
Philosopher
 
Posts: 2313
Joined: Wed Jun 15, 2022 2:47 pm

Re: ROE overturned.. a bad day in America

Postby origami » Fri Jun 24, 2022 9:14 pm

Even given my displeasure at acknowledging English law in a decision of the Supreme Court of the United States, I have to admit that they go through considerable lengths to frame that acknolwedgement to the circumstances relevant to and surrounding the writing of the constitution. It is only appealed to to the extent that it can be demonstrated to have been relevant to the drafting of the constitution. In that sense, they are able to grab on to the stability and continuity provided by centuries of English law, without breaking from the letter of the constitution or submitting to a foreign law. Here is a relevant quote:

To be sure, the Statute of Northampton survived both Sir
John Knight’s Case and the English Bill of Rights, but it
was no obstacle to public carry for self-defense in the dec-
ades leading to the founding. Serjeant William Hawkins,
in his widely read 1716 treatise, confirmed that “no wearing
of Arms is within the meaning of [the Statute of Northamp-
ton], unless it be accompanied with such Circumstances as
are apt to terrify the People.”


In other words, English law is invoked in order to better understand the law as written in the constitution, rather than to provide a source of authority for it. This is a danger which they also explicitly name, but are succesful in precicely defining and establishing mechanisms to preempt.
There's no one thing that's true. It's all true.
Ernest Hemingway
User avatar
origami
Philosopher
 
Posts: 2313
Joined: Wed Jun 15, 2022 2:47 pm

Re: ROE overturned.. a bad day in America

Postby origami » Fri Jun 24, 2022 9:37 pm

The legal structure of the United States also does something special, which is distinguish between the law and government interest, and putting the law first. In England, for example, as shown above, the government interest is the law. But, in the United States,

Moreover, Heller and McDonald expressly rejected the
application of any “judge-empowering ‘interest-balancing
inquiry’ that ‘asks whether the statute burdens a protected
interest in a way or to an extent that is out of proportion to
the statute’s salutary effects upon other important govern -
mental interests.’ ” Heller, 554 U. S., at 634 (quoting id., at
689–690 (B REYER, J., dissenting)); see also McDonald, 561
U. S., at 790–791 (plurality opinion) (the Second Amend-
ment does not permit—let alone require—“judges to assess
the costs and benefits of firearms restrictions” under
means-end scrutiny). We declined to engage in means-end
scrutiny because “[t]he very enumeration of the right takes
out of the hands of government—even the Third Branch of
Government—the power to decide on a case-by-case basis
whether the right is really worth insisting upon.” Heller,
554 U. S., at 634. We then concluded: “A constitutional
guarantee subject to future judges’ assessments of its use -
fulness is no constitutional guarantee at all.” Ibid


It is an implicit acknowledgement that the constitution of the United States exists as much to protect its people from the government as from any other legally identifiable threat. No other country does this, and all protections from the government are had solely at the government's discretion.

“A constitutional guarantee subject to future judges’ assessments of its usefulness is no constitutional guarantee at all.”

Which, of course, would apply to the right to free speech or a fair trial as much as the right to keep and bear arms.
There's no one thing that's true. It's all true.
Ernest Hemingway
User avatar
origami
Philosopher
 
Posts: 2313
Joined: Wed Jun 15, 2022 2:47 pm

Next

Return to Current Events



Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users