0
   

Has the Supreme Court become a political tool

Forums: Supreme Court
Email this Topic • Print this Page
 
 
Rickoshay75
 
Reply Sat 3 May, 2014 03:41 pm
By declaring that political contributions were a way to express free speech they are favoring the Republicans who have more sources of big money than the Democrats.

“What we think, or what we know, or what we believe is, in the end, of little consequence. The only consequence is WHAT WE DO.” John Ruskin (1819 - 1900)
  • Topic Stats
  • Top Replies
  • Link to this Topic
Type: Question • Score: 0 • Views: 914 • Replies: 8
No top replies

 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Sun 4 May, 2014 08:20 pm
@Rickoshay75,
Accept that the supreme court are made up of humans who are influenced by their party politics. They are a bunch of ideologues who are unaware without much conscience or ethics that they swore to uphold the Constitution.
Rickoshay75
 
  1  
Reply Sat 10 May, 2014 11:31 am
@cicerone imposter,
cicerone imposter wrote:

Accept that the supreme court are made up of humans who are influenced by their party politics. They are a bunch of ideologues who are unaware without much conscience or ethics that they swore to uphold the Constitution.


We should replace them, and all other judges, with pre-programmed computers that open a trap door if the person is found guilty, and while we're at it, do the same thing to congress.

“What we think, or what we know, or what we believe is, in the end, of little consequence. The only consequence is WHAT WE DO.” John Ruskin (1819 - 1900)
0 Replies
 
OmSigDAVID
 
  1  
Reply Sat 10 May, 2014 11:43 am
@Rickoshay75,
Rickoshay75 wrote:
By declaring that political contributions were a way to express free speech they are favoring the Republicans who have more sources of big money than the Democrats.

“What we think, or what we know, or what we believe is, in the end, of little consequence. The only consequence is WHAT WE DO.” John Ruskin (1819 - 1900)
The IMPORTANT thing
was overthrowing McCain's Campaign Finance Reform, because
it raped the First Amendment 4 different ways.





David
Rickoshay75
 
  1  
Reply Sat 10 May, 2014 12:18 pm
@OmSigDAVID,
OmSigDAVID wrote:

Rickoshay75 wrote:
By declaring that political contributions were a way to express free speech they are favoring the Republicans who have more sources of big money than the Democrats.

“What we think, or what we know, or what we believe is, in the end, of little consequence. The only consequence is WHAT WE DO.” John Ruskin (1819 - 1900)
The IMPORTANT thing
was overthrowing McCain's Campaign Finance Reform, because
it raped the First Amendment 4 different ways. David


More than that the original intent of the First amendment has been bastardized.

Amendment I
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.

As you see it's all about religion and religious situations, freedom of speech refers to preaching, press refers to religious tracts.
OmSigDAVID
 
  1  
Reply Sat 10 May, 2014 12:23 pm
@Rickoshay75,
HOW ?
Rickoshay75
 
  1  
Reply Sat 10 May, 2014 12:41 pm
@OmSigDAVID,
OmSigDAVID wrote:

HOW ?


Amendment 1, is about religion, nothing else. Same about the 2nd amendment; it's all about a well regulated militia, nothing else, even a ten year old child can see that.

“What we think, or what we know, or what we believe is, in the end, of little consequence. The only consequence is WHAT WE DO.” John Ruskin (1819 - 1900)
OmSigDAVID
 
  1  
Reply Sat 10 May, 2014 01:21 pm
@Rickoshay75,
Rickoshay75 wrote:

OmSigDAVID wrote:

HOW ?


Amendment 1, is about religion, nothing else. [????]
Same about the 2nd amendment; it's all about a well regulated militia,
nothing else, even a ten year old child can see that.
Your CONFUSION is exceeded only by your demonstrated ignorance and your defective grammar.





David
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Sat 10 May, 2014 01:22 pm
@OmSigDAVID,
You had the chutzpah to write,
Quote:
Your CONFUSION is exceeded only by your ignorance and your defective grammar.


ROTFLMAO
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

Supreme Court Candidates - Discussion by Thomas
Supreme Court Justices Get More Liberal Over Time - Discussion by engineer
Looking for online collection of Supreme-Court briefs - Question by Thomas
President Obama Chooses Kagen For Supreme Court - Discussion by Miller
Obama names supreme judge - Discussion by dyslexia
Supreme Court Rehearing Affirmative Action Case from 2012 - Discussion by wandeljw
Did SCOTUS usurp their authority in 1935? - Question by Rickoshay75
Justice Scalia and Supreme Court's Ruling on DNA - Discussion by Miller
Affirmative action, drug-sniffing dogs, maybe gay marriage loom as Supreme Court term begins - Discussion by BumbleBeeBoogie
Should the Supreme Court oral arguments be televised? - Discussion by tsarstepan
So, um, could you apologize to my husband for something from 20 years ago? No reason. - Discussion by jespah
 
  1. Forums
  2. » Has the Supreme Court become a political tool
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.72 seconds on 12/21/2024 at 11:56:58
▲ ▼