Total Posts:17|Showing Posts:1-17
Jump to topic:

A precient quote...

drafterman
Posts: 18,870
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/29/2012 5:54:09 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
In 1986, the United States Supreme Court, in Bowers v. Hardwick, heard a case involving, of all things, sex between two consenting, unrelated adults in the privacy of their own homes.

Apparently, in doing so, they violated Georgia's anti-sodomy laws, which banned oral and anal sex. Seems like an odd thing for the Supreme Court to hear. Oh wait, did I mention both adults were the same sex?

In one of the stupidest, short sighted, and most ignorant moves, the Supreme Court upheld the anti-sodomy law. However, a dissenting judge stated:

"That certain, but by no means all, religious groups condemn the behavior at issue gives the State no license to impose their judgments on the entire citizenry. The legitimacy of secular legislation depends, instead, on whether the State can advance some justification for its law beyond its conformity to religious doctrine."

It took 17 years for this decision to be overturned in Lawreence v. Texas.

Of course, this has absolutely NO relevance to any issues happening today. *coughDOMAcough*
Ore_Ele
Posts: 25,980
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/29/2012 5:58:32 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
This simply shows that the SC is political and changes with the times and the judges on the court.
"Wanting Red Rhino Pill to have gender"
drafterman
Posts: 18,870
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/29/2012 6:13:05 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 6/29/2012 5:58:32 PM, Ore_Ele wrote:
This simply shows that the SC is political and changes with the times and the judges on the court.

Would you disagree that the mentioned quote transcends such political and temporal issues and has merit of its own accord?
Wnope
Posts: 6,924
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/29/2012 6:13:23 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 6/29/2012 5:54:09 PM, drafterman wrote:

"The legitimacy of secular legislation depends, instead, on whether the State can advance some justification for its law beyond its conformity to religious doctrine."

Ironically, this sounds quite a bit like the Iraqi Constitution.
drafterman
Posts: 18,870
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/29/2012 7:36:17 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 6/29/2012 6:13:23 PM, Wnope wrote:
At 6/29/2012 5:54:09 PM, drafterman wrote:

"The legitimacy of secular legislation depends, instead, on whether the State can advance some justification for its law beyond its conformity to religious doctrine."


Ironically, this sounds quite a bit like the Iraqi Constitution.

I'm not sure if that is supposed to be a good thing or a bad thing.
DetectableNinja
Posts: 6,043
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/29/2012 7:48:15 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 6/29/2012 7:36:17 PM, drafterman wrote:
At 6/29/2012 6:13:23 PM, Wnope wrote:
At 6/29/2012 5:54:09 PM, drafterman wrote:

"The legitimacy of secular legislation depends, instead, on whether the State can advance some justification for its law beyond its conformity to religious doctrine."


Ironically, this sounds quite a bit like the Iraqi Constitution.

I'm not sure if that is supposed to be a good thing or a bad thing.

It's clearly bad.

Them damn Eye-rack-ees, comin ovur here, takin our jobs, bombin our buildings like the damn Muslams they are.
Think'st thou heaven is such a glorious thing?
I tell thee, 'tis not half so fair as thou
Or any man that breathes on earth.

- Christopher Marlowe, Doctor Faustus
drafterman
Posts: 18,870
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/29/2012 8:43:02 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 6/29/2012 7:48:15 PM, DetectableNinja wrote:
At 6/29/2012 7:36:17 PM, drafterman wrote:
At 6/29/2012 6:13:23 PM, Wnope wrote:
At 6/29/2012 5:54:09 PM, drafterman wrote:

"The legitimacy of secular legislation depends, instead, on whether the State can advance some justification for its law beyond its conformity to religious doctrine."


Ironically, this sounds quite a bit like the Iraqi Constitution.

I'm not sure if that is supposed to be a good thing or a bad thing.

It's clearly bad.

Them damn Eye-rack-ees, comin ovur here, takin our jobs, bombin our buildings like the damn Muslams they are.

I meant "bad" in the sense that even a nation like Iraq can apparently get that sentiment regarding secular legislation correct and yet we apparently couldn't.
DetectableNinja
Posts: 6,043
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/29/2012 8:48:54 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 6/29/2012 8:43:02 PM, drafterman wrote:
At 6/29/2012 7:48:15 PM, DetectableNinja wrote:
At 6/29/2012 7:36:17 PM, drafterman wrote:
At 6/29/2012 6:13:23 PM, Wnope wrote:
At 6/29/2012 5:54:09 PM, drafterman wrote:

"The legitimacy of secular legislation depends, instead, on whether the State can advance some justification for its law beyond its conformity to religious doctrine."


Ironically, this sounds quite a bit like the Iraqi Constitution.

I'm not sure if that is supposed to be a good thing or a bad thing.

It's clearly bad.

Them damn Eye-rack-ees, comin ovur here, takin our jobs, bombin our buildings like the damn Muslams they are.

I meant "bad" in the sense that even a nation like Iraq can apparently get that sentiment regarding secular legislation correct and yet we apparently couldn't.

Damn. I can't believe it. My joke has been backfired. But what do you expect from the all-powerful drafterman?
Think'st thou heaven is such a glorious thing?
I tell thee, 'tis not half so fair as thou
Or any man that breathes on earth.

- Christopher Marlowe, Doctor Faustus
Ore_Ele
Posts: 25,980
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/30/2012 5:57:33 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 6/29/2012 6:13:05 PM, drafterman wrote:
At 6/29/2012 5:58:32 PM, Ore_Ele wrote:
This simply shows that the SC is political and changes with the times and the judges on the court.

Would you disagree that the mentioned quote transcends such political and temporal issues and has merit of its own accord?

Why should popular law be allowed EXCEPT if it is religious based? If the people (meaning the majority of them) of a nation support a progressive tax rate, should it matter if they support it because the bible tells them so, or an economist tells them so?
"Wanting Red Rhino Pill to have gender"
drafterman
Posts: 18,870
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/30/2012 6:07:42 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 6/30/2012 5:57:33 PM, Ore_Ele wrote:
At 6/29/2012 6:13:05 PM, drafterman wrote:
At 6/29/2012 5:58:32 PM, Ore_Ele wrote:
This simply shows that the SC is political and changes with the times and the judges on the court.

Would you disagree that the mentioned quote transcends such political and temporal issues and has merit of its own accord?

Why should popular law be allowed EXCEPT if it is religious based? If the people (meaning the majority of them) of a nation support a progressive tax rate, should it matter if they support it because the bible tells them so, or an economist tells them so?

The bill of rights, maybe?
Ore_Ele
Posts: 25,980
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/30/2012 6:10:25 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 6/30/2012 6:07:42 PM, drafterman wrote:
At 6/30/2012 5:57:33 PM, Ore_Ele wrote:
At 6/29/2012 6:13:05 PM, drafterman wrote:
At 6/29/2012 5:58:32 PM, Ore_Ele wrote:
This simply shows that the SC is political and changes with the times and the judges on the court.

Would you disagree that the mentioned quote transcends such political and temporal issues and has merit of its own accord?

Why should popular law be allowed EXCEPT if it is religious based? If the people (meaning the majority of them) of a nation support a progressive tax rate, should it matter if they support it because the bible tells them so, or an economist tells them so?

The bill of rights, maybe?

what makes the appeal to authority greater than an appeal to popularity?
"Wanting Red Rhino Pill to have gender"
drafterman
Posts: 18,870
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/30/2012 7:33:55 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 6/30/2012 6:10:25 PM, Ore_Ele wrote:
At 6/30/2012 6:07:42 PM, drafterman wrote:
At 6/30/2012 5:57:33 PM, Ore_Ele wrote:
At 6/29/2012 6:13:05 PM, drafterman wrote:
At 6/29/2012 5:58:32 PM, Ore_Ele wrote:
This simply shows that the SC is political and changes with the times and the judges on the court.

Would you disagree that the mentioned quote transcends such political and temporal issues and has merit of its own accord?

Why should popular law be allowed EXCEPT if it is religious based? If the people (meaning the majority of them) of a nation support a progressive tax rate, should it matter if they support it because the bible tells them so, or an economist tells them so?

The bill of rights, maybe?

what makes the appeal to authority greater than an appeal to popularity?

The Civil War.
Ragnar_Rahl
Posts: 19,297
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/1/2012 2:19:25 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 6/29/2012 6:13:05 PM, drafterman wrote:
Would you disagree that the mentioned quote transcends such political and temporal issues and has merit of its own accord?

The merit the quote has is political. All of the content is political.

The Civil War.
That's an appeal to force.
It came to be at its height. It was commanded to command. It was a capital before its first stone was laid. It was a monument to the spirit of man.
drafterman
Posts: 18,870
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/1/2012 5:35:48 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 7/1/2012 2:19:25 AM, Ragnar_Rahl wrote:
At 6/29/2012 6:13:05 PM, drafterman wrote:
Would you disagree that the mentioned quote transcends such political and temporal issues and has merit of its own accord?

The merit the quote has is political. All of the content is political.

The Civil War.
That's an appeal to force.

And?
Ragnar_Rahl
Posts: 19,297
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/1/2012 2:26:19 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
Whether the guns are pointed a certain way is no guarantee that they ought to be.

As for the importance of whether the quote transcends the political, you tell me, you brought it up.
It came to be at its height. It was commanded to command. It was a capital before its first stone was laid. It was a monument to the spirit of man.
drafterman
Posts: 18,870
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/1/2012 7:36:03 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 7/1/2012 2:26:19 PM, Ragnar_Rahl wrote:
Whether the guns are pointed a certain way is no guarantee that they ought to be.

As for the importance of whether the quote transcends the political, you tell me, you brought it up.

I brought it up because I think it has application on current issues, Ore brought up the politicized aspect.