Breaking! Biden signs executive order on abortion, declares Supreme Court 'out of control'

  • Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.

    If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!

    To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
G

Gojira

Guest
#61
#61
Dude653 said:
They already are and I feel like that's entirely too much authority to nine judges
Click to expand...
It's what the Left wants, but what the founders vehemently opposed. They also didn't think it would happen.

They are there to interpret laws against the constitution, not dictate policy. But, as classical Leftism would have it, they want them turned into a fascistic oligarchical body.

Again, we push back even if it means a civil war -- which I pray it does not.
 
ZNP

ZNP

Well-known member
#62
Sep 14, 2020
36,534
6,684
113
#62
Gojira said:
No, that's true. I meant that in a general sense. "Many" would be more accurate, but it included Left and Right alike.
Click to expand...
I agree with you. I questioned the narrative shortly after 911 because I knew it didn't make sense and I was attacked like I was trying to protect terrorists.
 
Billyd

Billyd

Senior Member
#63
May 8, 2014
5,219
1,621
113
#63
Dude653 said:
They already are and I feel like that's entirely too much authority to nine judges
Click to expand...
Judges are appointed for life to prevent a group that has gained a political majority from taking the rest of the country for granted.

The Senate are elected for six year terms to prevent one region from placing it's will on the rest of the country.

Representatives are elected for two year terms because the people change their minds more often than their underwear.

One thing is missing from the congress is term limits. Once they are elected to office, they think that they should hold their office for life. Unfortunately, their constituents don't have sense enough to vote the nesters out of office, making them de-facto supreme court justices (at least in their mind)
 
ZNP

ZNP

Well-known member
#64
Sep 14, 2020
36,534
6,684
113
#64
Billyd said:
Judges are appointed for life to prevent a group that has gained a political majority from taking the rest of the country for granted.

The Senate are elected for six year terms to prevent one region from placing it's will on the rest of the country.

Representatives are elected for two year terms because the people change their minds more often than their underwear.

One thing is missing from the congress is term limits. Once they are elected to office, they think that they should hold their office for life. Unfortunately, their constituents don't have sense enough to vote the nesters out of office, making them de-facto supreme court justices (at least in their mind)
Click to expand...
Yes it is like a pendulum. The house, the senate and the President are designed to prevent the whole thing from becoming unbalanced. But even so they know that every 100 years it will be unbalanced, hence the 9 justices are the keel that keeps us from tipping over.
 
Billyd

Billyd

Senior Member
#65
May 8, 2014
5,219
1,621
113
#65
ZNP said:
Yes it is like a pendulum. The house, the senate and the President are designed to prevent the whole thing from becoming unbalanced. But even so they know that every 100 years it will be unbalanced, hence the 9 justices are the keel that keeps us from tipping over.
Click to expand...
What most people forget is that if they don't like a SCOTUS ruling, they have the option of amending the constitution to change the basis of the opinion.
 
ZNP

ZNP

Well-known member
#66
Sep 14, 2020
36,534
6,684
113
#66
Billyd said:
What most people forget is that if they don't like a SCOTUS ruling, they have the option of amending the constitution to change the basis of the opinion.
Click to expand...
They didn't forget that. First they tell us that 65% of the country supports abortion. If that were true it would be easy to pass an amendment. The minute this is overturned they flip out because they know they were lying about the 65%.
 
Billyd

Billyd

Senior Member
#67
May 8, 2014
5,219
1,621
113
#67
IMHO, nothing has changed to prevent the congress or the president from passing an abortion law. The only thing that would have prevented that from happening would have been a ruling from SCOTUS that life begins at conception. That would make abortion murder. I pray for that day to come.
 
G

Gojira

Guest
#69
#69
ZNP said:
I agree with you. I questioned the narrative shortly after 911 because I knew it didn't make sense and I was attacked like I was trying to protect terrorists.
Click to expand...
Ya know, I was 100% behind the Afghanistan invasion, maybe 70% behind the Iraq invasion. I sort of / kind of felt that maybe we ought to wait until we're done in Afghanistan (thinking it would only be a few years at the time), and then start massing at Saddam's borders.

We are all attacked or mocked from time to time for our opinions. You're not alone brutha.
 
G

Gojira

Guest
#70
#70
Bluesproverb said:
Congress can codify abortion, i.e make it a federal law. This has been in the works for awhile now.

https://www.congress.gov/search?q={"congress":["117"],"source":"all","search":"women's health protection act"}

Congress can also override a SCOTUS ruling.
https://theintercept.com/2020/11/24/congress-override-supreme-court/
Click to expand...
Congress and the president can also decide on the constitutionality of a measure. But, I do believe a federal abortion law can be challenged. And, even if all three branches came down on the states to force them to legalize abortion, they can still civilly disobey. I mean, there comes a point where you ought not obey certain laws. Meschach (spelling??) and crew showed that. So did MLK. Rosa Parks. In our own Declaration of Independence it is stated that we have the right to push back on any government that becomes tyrannical.
 
Dude653

Dude653

Senior Member
#71
Mar 19, 2011
12,668
1,098
113
#71
In 1847 the supreme Court decided that black people were not citizens
It's almost as if that's too much authority to give 9 judges
 
G

Gojira

Guest
#72
#72
Dude653 said:
In 1847 the supreme Court decided that black people were not citizens
It's almost as if that's too much authority to give 9 judges
Click to expand...
Well, what it does show is that no system is perfect. As Federalist 51 says, if men were angels, they would not need government (I think my thought is right, but my paraphrase is wrong). Anyway, you get my point.

But, the SCOTUS were never meant to have dictatorial power.

I'm reading a book called "Original Intent" by David Barton. Folks, if you want an education on the founders' intent for the constitution in general, the 1st amendment in particular, and the founders' actual faith, I recommend this book. It is almost like a reference book, there are so many footnotes. But, they really back up what they say with fact after fact after fact. Actually, too many facts. I've had to glaze over some of it because of the sheer number of examples they provide for any given point.
 
Dude653

Dude653

Senior Member
#73
Mar 19, 2011
12,668
1,098
113
#73
Gojira said:
Well, what it does show is that no system is perfect. As Federalist 51 says, if men were angels, they would not need government (I think my thought is right, but my paraphrase is wrong). Anyway, you get my point.

But, the SCOTUS were never meant to have dictatorial power.

I'm reading a book called "Original Intent" by David Barton. Folks, if you want an education on the founders' intent for the constitution in general, the 1st amendment in particular, and the founders' actual faith, I recommend this book. It is almost like a reference book, there are so many footnotes. But, they really back up what they say with fact after fact after fact. Actually, too many facts. I've had to glaze over some of it because of the sheer number of examples they provide for any given point.
Click to expand...
Yeah when nine people get to decide what the Constitution means, isn't it a dictatorship?
 
ZNP

ZNP

Well-known member
#75
Sep 14, 2020
36,534
6,684
113
#75
Dude653 said:
Yeah when nine people get to decide what the Constitution means, isn't it a dictatorship?
Click to expand...
No, it means they are the highest court in the land. If you have trouble with judges making judgements then what is next? Are we going to arrest victims of crime and claim the perpetrators were the real victims? Or are we just going to stop prosecuting crimes? Empty the prisons because if some judge gets to decide who to lock up isn't that a dictatorship?
 
B

Bluesproverb

Banned
#76
Jun 28, 2022
1,258
383
83
#76
ZNP said:
No, it means they are the highest court in the land. If you have trouble with judges making judgements then what is next? Are we going to arrest victims of crime and claim the perpetrators were the real victims? Or are we just going to stop prosecuting crimes? Empty the prisons because if some judge gets to decide who to lock up isn't that a dictatorship?
Click to expand...
Non Sequitur.
 
Billyd

Billyd

Senior Member
#77
May 8, 2014
5,219
1,621
113
#77
Dude653 said:
Yeah when nine people get to decide what the Constitution means, isn't it a dictatorship?
Click to expand...
No. In a dictatorship, the president makes the law, interprets the law and enforces the law, Constitution be damned. In our country we have a set of checks and balances on each branch of the government.

Congress passes a law. The president signs or vetoes the law. Congress then either overrides the veto, or lets it stand.

SCOTUS is not involved in this process at all. It only becomes involved when an injured party brings suit. Their decision is (supposed to be) based on whether the constitution allows the law. If they say the law is unconstitutional, the congress can rewrite the law.

In the United States, any law must be able to pass all three branches, and if it is, the president must enforce it.
 
Dude653

Dude653

Senior Member
#78
Mar 19, 2011
12,668
1,098
113
#78
ZNP said:
No, it means they are the highest court in the land. If you have trouble with judges making judgements then what is next? Are we going to arrest victims of crime and claim the perpetrators were the real victims? Or are we just going to stop prosecuting crimes? Empty the prisons because if some judge gets to decide who to lock up isn't that a dictatorship?
Click to expand...
Supreme Court doesn't prosecute crimes so false equivalency much?
 
ZNP

ZNP

Well-known member
#79
Sep 14, 2020
36,534
6,684
113
#79
Dude653 said:
Supreme Court doesn't prosecute crimes so false equivalency much?
Click to expand...
All judges in all courtrooms regardless of whether it is criminal or civil or federal or appelate or appeal or whatever their jurisdiction, they all have one thing in common they make judgments.
 
Dude653

Dude653

Senior Member
#80
Mar 19, 2011
12,668
1,098
113
#80
ZNP said:
All judges in all courtrooms regardless of whether it is criminal or civil or federal or appelate or appeal or whatever their jurisdiction, they all have one thing in common they make judgments.
Click to expand...
And those judgments should represent the will of the people. Just one example, Clarence Thomas has already said he wants to come after same-sex marriage next when 70% of America support same-sex marriage
This lets us know that they do not represent the will of the people
 
You must log in or register to reply here.