There are a few areas where liberals just kick the crap out of conservatives.
Liberals always fight harder for what they want, and that is why they usually get it.
The example I want to mention today (and hope to get a few responses this time) is the courts.
Why do libs obstruct judges so much?
Most of the judges that the libs stop from having their constitutionally guaranteed right for an up or down vote have been praised by conservatives and liberals for years. So what is the problem?
This is the only way that liberals can get their agenda passed. They are so far left now a days that they can no longer win elections on a national scale. They know that the only way to get the things they want done in America is to have liberal activist judges all over the country.
Well, it works and they are winning.
Please libs, tell me which congress passed any of these laws:
When was there a law passed making abortion legal?
When was a law passed making any mention of any religion or God made illegal....And anyone who has read the federalist papers knows that separation of church and state was implied to mean that our government could not force anyone to practice a particular religion, not that we could not have any.
When did congress make gay marriage legal?
It has been judges that have made all this happen. If liberals are honest, they know they can never get this stuff passed in congress, but they are smart enough to get it done a different way.
Just in the same way they are smart in filling our universities with burnt out hippies.
I wish conservatives would understand how important the judge issue is.
Since conservatives control the house, senate and Presidency, I think it is reasonable that this country might want people confirmed on the bench that are conservative. The benchmark should not be that they have to be middle of the road or liberal to be confirmed.
This is a very important issue, lets hear some comments
Saturday, August 06, 2005
Legislate from the Bench
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
5 comments:
If you would like some background on the construction and usage of the Supreme Court I did a blog on it no too long ago.
To be honest though, I wasn't bold enough to step up with some of the issues you mentioned. I do not know when interpretation became legislation but the established precedent is turning us into socialists. Interpreting the right to privacy guaranteed in the constitution to mean woman can kill babies is not the kind of decisions the forefathers had in mind for our judiciary.
I don't know what to do about it. Bush didn't even pick a true conservative to counter balance the nonsense, he took the middle road. Let's give up, I'm starting a commune in Northern California.
the Liberals wull point to the 14th amendment to justify abortion. But read it. There is nothing in that amendment that even implies that a women has the right to kill her baby.
I got into an argument on a Liberals blog once on this subject, and it appears i won!
Mr. anamerican way...
You said a lot, not sure if I got it all...
The first point you made basically was that this country is far to the right...but that is from your socialist, European perspective...
I see it that the whole world moves to the left, Europeans just faster than we have...
One good example is JFK...for the most part he would be what is considered today’s "conservative."
Because I believe your viewpoint starts very far from the left, your interpretation of this judge situation might be confusing...when you are talking about conservative and liberals, we might not be talking about the same thing...or have the same idea in mind...
You sound very intelligent and able to express yourself well...
I am a simple mid-western teacher...try and answer why it is okay for judges to legislate from the bench (based on the three issues I presented in my original blog) in a bit simpler terms...
I hope you are a regular on this blog...
the fetus/citizenship thing is interesting, but I just believe much of your arguement if flawed...
The government makes laws telling people what they can and can not do all the time...you can not murder someone (a good reason for late term abortion to be illegal).
Most laws are based on the morality of the ten commandments and christianity...Most people believe marriage is between a man and a woman, so states have passed laws (not all of them) stating that fact...
As for the religion issue, you must admit that when this country was founded, religion was very much apart of the lives of the founders, they talked about God and religion openingly and proudly. It is only recently that people have tried to take this away...I don't see the problem simply acknowleging God.
I fundamentally disagree with your point of view, but just like average Joe, I am very impressed with your ability to make your point.
which law was voided in row v wade...if there was I do not know..
as for religion, your point is valid that this country was founded due to kings and dictators forcing religion down our throat..so you might have a slight point on gay marriage...even so...it is not right to take the name god or any mention of religion out of all public life...I am quite confident our founding fathers did not intend for that to happen..
Post a Comment